>>> GOOD AFTERNOON, EVERYONE.
IT IS
THURSDAY, DECEMBER 11th. THE
GOVERNANCE, ACCOUNTABILITY
AND ECONOMIC COMMITTEE WILL
COME TO ORDER.
WILL THE CLERK PLEASE CALL THE
ROLL.
[ ROLL CALL ]
>> THREE PRESENT.
>> I WOULD LIKE TO -- COULD YOU
TAKE THE ROLL ONE MORE TIME.
[ ROLL CALL ]
>> FOUR PRESENT.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
WE WILL ANNOUNCE COUNCIL BER
RIVERA'S PRESENCE WHEN SHE
COMES.
WE WILL BEGIN
WITH PUBLIC COMMENT.
JUST A SECOND.
WE HAVE A CHANGE TO THE AGENDA.
I MOVE TO ADOPT THE AGENDA.
IS THERE A SECOND?
>> SEND.
>> IT'S MOVED
AND SECONDED TO ADOPT THE
AGENDA.
I HAVE BEEN ADVISED THE PROPOSED
DOMESTIC WORKERS STANDARDS
BOARD APPOINTEE ON AGAIN ITEM
ITEM
EIGHT HAS WITHDRAWN THEIR NAME
FROM THE APPOINTMENT FOR
CONSIDERATION.
IF THERE'S NO OBJECTION, THE
AGENDA WILL BE AMENDED TO
REMOVE ITEM EIGHT, APPOINTMENT
3438.
I MOVE THAT BE DONE.
HEARING NO OBJECTION,
THE AGENDA IS AMENDED.
IF THERE'S NO OBJECTION, THE
AGENDA WILL BE ADOPTED AS
AMENDED.
HEARING NO OBJECTION, THE
AGENDA IS ADOPTED AS AMEPDED.
ALL RIGHT.
LET'S MOVE
INTO THE PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD.
COULD YOU PLEASE TELL US
HOW MANY PEOPLE ARE SIGNED UP
FOR
PUBLIC COMMENT?
>> WE HAVE ONE IN - PERSON AND
TWO
ONLINE.
>> LET'S START WITH THE ONE IN
PERSON.
EVERYONE GETS TWO MINUTES. THANK
YOU.
>> I WILL CALL ON SPEAKERS
IN THE ORDER IN WHICH THEY
ARE SIGNED UP
TO SPEAK. STARTING WITH IN-
PERSON
COMMENTERS.
WHEN THE HEAR THE CRIME, YOU
HAVE TEN SECONDS LEFT.
IF YOU EXCEED THAT TIME, YOUR
MICROPHONE MAY BE CUT OFF.
IF YOU ARE OFFERING REMOTE
COMMENT, PRESS STAR 6 TO UNMUTE
YOURSELF.
OUR FIRST IN-
PUBLIC COMMENTER IS CAROLINE
MALONE.
>> I'M FROM 90 MARION STREET.
MY QUESTION FOR THE COUNCIL IS,
WHY IS THE CL OFFICE OF
CIVIL RIGHTS CLOSED
INDEFINITELY?
ON AUGUST 28, I FILED A
COMPLAINT, OF RACIAL
DECISION KRIM NATION IN MY
HOUSING AND
RETALIATION.
MY COMPLAINT WAS PROCEEDING
SMOOTHLY.
ABRUPTLY THE OFFICE IS CLOSED.
I DON'T HAVE ACCESS TO AN
INVESTIGATOR.
THIS PERSON IN MY HOUSING
IS BEHIND IT ALL.
I DON'T KNOW HIS NAME.
BUT HE IS CLOSELY AFFILIATED
WITH THE SEATTLE POLICE.
SEATTLE POLICE, SEATTLE
OFFICE OF CIVIL
RIGHTS ARE CITY ENTITIES.
I'M CONCERNED THAT MY CASE --
THE STATUTE OF LIMITATION WILL
EXPIRE.
MY CASE WILL BE
RENDERED INACTIVE OR CLOSED.
I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE THE CITY --
THE COUNCIL OR THE INCOMING
COUNCIL, I WILL COME BACK
AGAIN TO SEE WHY THIS OFFICE IS
CLOSED
INDEFINITELY
AS OF OCTOBER 30th OF THIS YEAR.
I DON'T HAVE ACCESS TO ANYONE.
I CALL, LEAVE MESSAGES.
NO ONE ANSWERS.
THIS IS QUITE OBVIOUS THAT
I'M BEING IMPEDED AND -- WILL
YOU
STOP MAKING MY STOMACH TREMBLE?
THIS GUY IS A PROBLEM FOR ME,
TOO.
WHENEVER I PROTEST IN FRONT OF
THE POLICE DEPARTMENT, I HAVE
PROBLEMS.
THE SEATTLE OFFICE OF CIVIL
RIGHTS IS CLOSED
INDEFINITELY. IT NEEDS TO BE
LOOKED INTO.
BECAUSE MY CASE NEEDS TO
PROCEED.
OTHERWISE,
I NEED TO GET AN ATTORNEY.
THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU.
WE WILL MOVE ON TO OUR REMOTE
SPEAKER.
OUR FIRST REMOTE SPEAKER IS
COLLEEN McHEELER.
GO AHEAD AND UNMUTE YOURSELF.
>> GOOD AFTERNOON, CITY COUNCIL.
WE APPLAUD THE LAST HURRA.
I'M HERE TO REPRESENT
LAWHURST COMMUNITY COUNCIL.
HE WOULD SUPPORT THE BILL WHICH
IS LONG OVERDUE TO CLARIFY THE
ETHICAL PROCESS OF PAID
CONSULTANTS.
THIS WILL PREVENT DOUBLE
DIPPING BY POLITICAL CONSULTANTS
WHO CAN
INFLUENCE CITY POLITICS AND
CAN CONDUCT SIDE BUSINESSES AND
ADVOCATE FOR GISLATION AND TAX
INITIATIVES. THIS AIMS TO
PREVENT BACKDOOR
POLITICS USING INSIDER
INFORMATION, WHICH IS FORBIDDEN
BY LAW BY THE SEC IN FINANCIAL
TRANSACTIONS, IN BOTH
THE PRIVATE AND PUBLIC SECTOR.
IT FILLS IN THE GAPS IN
OUR ETHICS CODE.
ACCESS TO INSIDER INFORMATION IS
AS VALUABLE AS MONEY IN
THE POLITICAL WORLD.
THIS PROMOTES RESPONSIBLE
STEWARD OF OUR CITY'S
RESOURCES AND PROCESSES BY
REQUIRING
ACCOUNTABILITY AND TRANSPARENCY.
THIS ENSURES PUBLIC FUNDS
ARE AVAILABLE FOR SCRUTINY.
THIS OVERSIGHT IS EXACTLY
WHAT PEOPLE EXPECT FROM
THEIR GOVERNMENT AND
PREVENTS CONFLICTS OF INTEREST.
PASSING THIS BILL WILL STRENGTH
SEATTLE'S REPUTATION FOR GOOD
GOVERNANCE.
COUNCIL MEMBERS HAVE
AN OPPORTUNITY TO SET AN
EXAMPLE.
WE ENCOURAGE YOU TO LISTEN TO
THE VOICES OF YOUR
CONSTITUENTS AND VOTE IN FAVOR
OF 121130.
THANK YOU
FOR YOUR SERVICE AND VOTING TO
PASS THIS BILL.
>> ONE MOMENT BEFORE YOU GO TO
THE NEXT SPEAKER.
I WOULD LIKE TO NOTE THAT
COUNCIL
MEMBER RIVERA IS PRESENT.
>> OUR NEXT
REMOTE SPEAKER IS DAVID HAINES.
>> THANK YOU.
DAVID HAINES.
GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY
WAS SUPPOSED TO BE ABOUT
IMPROVING SERVICES AND POLICIES
AND
PURGING THE PRIORITIES
THAT REIGN INTERFERENCE FOR DRUG
PUSHERS AND REPEAT
OFFENDERS THAT EXACERBATED THE
PUBLIC
SAFETY CRISIS.
IT WAS SUPPOSED TO ADDRESS THE
THE CITY
COUNCIL WHO ARE SELF- DEALING
WITH
CONFLICTS OF INTEREST THAT ARE
UNFORGIVABLE, THAT HAVE SOLD
OUT THE WORKING CLASS, A
MULTITUDE OF YOUNGER GENERATIONS
AND
BACK STABBED RENTERS MAKING
SURE NOTHING IS BUILT BACK
BETTER
BECAUSE YOU SABOTAGED THE
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND
PUT RESTRICTIONS ON THE
DEVELOPERS AND TOOK AWAY THE
INCENTIVES
AND CREATED A SLUSH FUND THAT
ONLY YOUR POLITICALLY CONNECTED
NON-PROFITS ARE GETTING ACCESS
TO AFTER YOU HELPED CHANGE
THE LAWS TO GUARANTEE THAT,
WHICH IS
ANOTHER ETHICS VIOLATION WHEN
YOU TAKE A LOOK AT SHARON LEE'S
$300,000 SALARY AND HOW MUCH
MONEY SHE SPENT BUYING OFF
THE ACTIVISTS AND ORGANIZERS
TO LOBBY CITY HALL
THAT THEY PAY OFF -- THAT SHE
PAYS OFF SO THEY
WILL WATER DOWN SERVICES
NOT BEING PROVIDED THAT ARE
BEING LIED ABOUT AND MANIPULATED
WITH STATISTICS AND DATA THAT
THEY
FILL IN THE BLANKS ON THAT
ARE BASED ON SOME RACIST
PRIORITY
WHERE YOU STILL HAVE A LENS
LEFTOVER FROM THE BULLY
BRUCE HERALD WHOSE NEXT YEAR'S
BUDGET IS STILL GOING TO BE
RUNNING INTERFERENCE
FOR THE BLACK AND BROWN
CRIMINALS.
THERE'S NEVER BEEN AN
ADDRESSING
OF THE POLICE CHIEF WHO IS
WILLING TO PUT FENCES AROUND
THE ALLY WAYS INSTEAD OF
ADDRESSING TRESPASSING AND
FORCING
PEOPLE INTO A BETTER PATH OF
PURGING THEIR CRIMINAL
BEHAVIOR AND THEIR DRUG
ADDICTION THAT GOT
PUSHED UP AND AROUND
THIS NEIGHBORHOOD AS IF THE
DOWNTOWN COUNCIL IS ON POLICIES
THAT ARE
BAD. THAT ENDANGER THE REST OF
US.
IT'S NOT SAFE TO GO
FROM ONE POINT TO THE NEXT
POINT,
BECAUSE IN BETWEEN THERE'S
ALL THESE EVIL PREDATORS.
>> THANK YOU.
THAT WAS
OUR LAST COMMENTER.
>> OKAY.
THAT WAS OUR LAST COMMENTER.
PUBLIC COMMENT IS NOW CLOSED.
I WANT TO SAY HELLO TO
EVERYBODY IN THE AUDIENCE WHO IS
HERE EITHER TO BE PART OF
THE PRESENTATION OR BECAUSE THEY
ARE
JUST AS I WOULD SAY LOCAL
PUBLIC POLICY JUNKIES.
THIS IS OUR LAST COMMITTEE
MEETING. WE HAVE GOT SEVERAL
THINGS ON
THE AGENDA.
WE HAVE THE CONSULTANT ETHICS
LEGISLATION FOR VOTE.
WE HAVE A PIECE OF LEGISLATION
REGARDING THE
BIA, HUMAN SERVICES -- NOT HUMAN
SERVICES.
HR PIECES OF LEGISLATION
AND I BELIEVE THREE
APPOINTMENTS.
OF COURSE, I AM GOING TO FIRST
PROVIDE SOME WORDS OF
RECALL
FROM WHERE WE STARTED TO WHERE
WE ARE NOW.
I'M GOING TO GO INTO THE WAY
WAY BACK MACHINE AND SAY THAT IN
2021, I RAN FOR OFFICE IN PART
BECAUSE I THOUGHT THE
PERSPECTIVE OF A SMALL
BUSINESSOWNER WOULD BE HELPFUL.
THIS WAS 2021.
THE WORLD WAS EMERGING FROM A
PANDEMIC. I THOUGHT THAT AS A
SMALL BUSINESSOWNER I WOULD HELP
SMALL BUSINESSES RECOVER AND AND
WHOLE CITY AS A RESULT.
IT WAS ABOUT SMALL BUSINESSES.
NOT SMALL BUSINESSES BUT THE
JOBS, THE INNOVATION, THE
TAX REVENUE AND THE SENSE OF
PLACE
THAT SMALL BUSINESSES CONTRIBUTE
TO THE CITY AND MAKE IT SO
UNIQUE,
SO VIBRANT AND THE PLACE THAT WE
CALL SEATTLE.
SO I THOUGHT -- THAT'S WHY
I WANTED TO BE
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CHAIR.
I WAS CHAIR OF
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT FOR MY
FIRST TWO
YEARS.
DO NOT WORRY, I'M NOT GOING TO
GO INTO EVERYTHING THAT WE DID
THAT THAT
COMMITTEE DID THE FIRST COUPLE
YEARS.
I JUST WANT TO NOTE THAT -- I
WANT YOU TO KEEP IN MIND
THAT FOR ME, IT'S ABOUT JOBS
PRIMARILY
BECAUSE JOBS ARE THE PEOPLE THAT
THE CITY IS MADE OF.
TOO MANY JOBS, SMALL BUSINESSES
AND PEOPLE, ARE LEAVING THIS
TOWN. THAT'S MOTIVATED A LOT OF
WHAT I
HAVE BEEN DOING IN MY WORK.
JUST GOING BACK TO WHAT WE HAVE
ACCOMPLISHED TOGETHER AS A
COMMITTEE.
LET'S REMEMBER -- SOME
HIGHLIGHTS.
LET'S
JUST GET THE DIFFICULT STUFF OUT
OF THE WAY FIRST.
THE PAY- UP REFORM WAS -- PAY-
UP
REFORM WAS A PIECE OF
LEGISLATION THAT WAS
INTRODUCED IN MARCH AFTER THE
PAY-
UP LEGISLATION THE PREVIOUS
COUNCIL HAD PASSED WENT INTO
AFFECT.
WE SAW THIS -- THESE
CHAMBERS FILLED WITH PEOPLE THAT
WERE EXPERIENCING NEGATIVE
IMPACTS FROM SOME OF THE
UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES OF THAT
BILL.
LONG STORY SHORT, I SAW AND I
BELIEVE THAT MEMBERS OF THIS
COMMITTEE AGREED IT WAS
OUR RESPONSIBILITY TO TRY TO FIX
AA THAT WAS HAVING NEGATIVE
IMPACTS.
SO THAT'S PRECISELY WHAT
WE
ENDEAVORED TO DO FOR A LONG
TIME.
THE BILL THAT WAS BEFORE
US, IT WAS -- LET ME GIVE THE
NUMBER.
120775, WOULD HAVE
REQUIRED WORKERS BE PAID THE
MINIMUM WAGE
BEFORE TIPS.
AT THAT TIME IT WAS $19. 97
PLUS 35 CENT PER MILE TRAVELED.
AGAIN, THAT WAS ALL BEFORE TIPS.
IN EXCHANGE, THE NETWORK
COMPANIES, THE
DELIVERY COMPANIES WOULD REMOVE
THE $5
SERVICE FEE THEY ATTACHED TO
THE BILL THAT WAS MAKING THESE
--
THE DELIVERIES SO EXPENSIVE THAT
CUSTOMERS STOPPED ORDERING.
THE PLAN WAS, RIGHT SIZE THE
MINIMUM PAY STANDARD SO
THAT WORKERS WERE STILL GETTING
MINIMUM WAGE PLUS AND ALSO
GET THAT $5 OFF.
THAT WOULD DRIVE UP
CONSUMER DEMAND AND, THUS, THE
WAGES OF THE DELIVERY DRIVERS
WHO
WERE
RESPONDING TO CALLS FOR
DELIVERY.
IT TURNED OUT TO BE A LONG AND
UNPLEASANT AND DRAWNOUT PROCESS.
THERE WAS AN ATTEMPT
AT NEGOTIATING A
COMPROMISE WITH THE SPONSORS OF
THE BILL.
THAT DIDN'T WORK OUT.
IT WAS TAKING TOO MUCH
TIME. I PUT A PAUSE ON IT.
I WILL SAY THAT IT WAS THE RIGHT
THING TO DO TO RESPOND TO
THE NEEDS OF OUR CONSTITUENTS,
THE
WORKERS, SMALL
BUSINESSES AND
CUSTOMERS. I STAND BY THAT.
WE HAVE SEEN WHAT HAS HAPPENED
TO DELIVERY COSTS AND
THE IMPACTS ON THE WORKERS'
WAGES
SINCE.
DON'T NEED TO GO INTO
THAT. SOMETIMES YOU HAVE TO DO
HARD
THINGS, REGARDLESS OF THE
ACTUAL
OUTCOME. YOU START WITH GOOD
INTENTIONS.
ANYWAY, MOVING ON TO SOME BETTER
NEWS.
RECRUITMENT AND RETENTION
ORDINANCE, 120766,
THAT WAS DESIGNED -- THAT
STARTED IN
ABOUT APRIL.
THAT WAS INTENDED TO GET AT
WHY AREN'T WE -- WHAT'S THE
PROBLEM?
WHY CAN'T WE HIRE MORE
OFFICERS EVEN THOUGH WE
IMPLEMENTED HIRING
BONUSES. WE WERE STILL BLEEDING
OFFICERS.
THIS BILL -- IT CREATED IN THE
SEATTLE POLICE DEPARTMENT A
NEW RECRUITMENT AND RETENTION
PROGRAM WHICH INCLUDED A
LOT OF -- IT INCLUDED MOVING
STAFF FROM THE HR DEPARTMENT TO
THE
POLICE DEPARTMENT, THE
RECRUITERS. MORE INTERACTION
BETWEEN
THEM AND NEW RECRUITS.
ENCOURAGED THE PUBLIC SAFETY
CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION TO
USE AN ENTRY- LEVEL POLICE
OFFICER EXAM USED BY ALL OTHER
JURISDICTIONS.
THAT DIDN'T REALLY TURN OUT TO
BE THE CASE.
MOST IMPORTANTLY, IT ADDED AN
SDHR PERSONNEL ANALYST SENIOR
TO
HELP WITH THE PROCESSING OF
EXAMS.
NOT OF EXAMS, BUT
OF APPLICATIONS SO THAT
PEOPLE COULD GET A PERSONALIZED
CONTACT WITHIN 48 HOURS OF
APPLYING TO
SPD.
THAT WAS INDUSTRY STANDARD.
THAT HADN'T BEEN HAPPENING.
LONG STORY SHORT, THANK
YOU VERY MUCH COMMITTEE MEMBERS
FOR
PASSING THAT. IT ED OUT OF IN
THE MAY 9th.
IT'S WORKING.
WE SAW THE FIRST SIGN OF
THAT LAST YEAR WHEN THE -- IN Q4
OF
2024 WE HAD A NET POSITIVE
FOR THE YEAR OF ONE OFFICER.
THAT WAS A REVERSAL OF THE TREND
SINCE 2019 OF LOSING MORE
OFFICERS THAN WE COULD GAIN.
IT HAS PICKED UP STEAM.
WE HAVE HAD ABOUT 150 --
WE HIRED ABOUT 150 OFFICERS THIS
YEAR.
WE ARE LOOKING AT A NET GAIN
OF ABOUT
94 OFFICERS AT THE END OF 2025.
NOT NEARLY ENOUGH TO MAKE UP
FOR THE DROP IN NUMBERS THAT WE
SAW
FROM 2020 THROUGH THE END OF
LAST YEAR.
BUT WE ARE MOVING
IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION.
SO THAT'S GOOD NEWS.
ANYWAY, LET'S REMEMBER THAT
COUNCIL'S JOB IS ALSO
OVERSIGHT.
WE RELY ON OUR AUDITOR FOR THAT.
ONE BIG AUDIT THAT WAS
PRESENTED IN OUR COMMITTEE WAS
THE AUDIT
THAT LOOKED AT THE OVERLAP OF --
IT'S THE TITLE IS ADDRESSING
PLACES
IN SEATTLE WHERE
OVERDOSES AND CRIMES ARE
CONCENTRATED, AN EVIDENCE- BASED
APPROACH.
THIS AUDIT DREW FROM A TWO
BLOCK AREA IN BELL TOWN TO MAP
THE
OVERLAP OF FATAL OVERDOSES AND
CRIME.
IT SAID, CRIME HOT SPOTS
OCCUR BECAUSE THE SPECIFIC LOCAL
CONDITIONS AT THAT PLACE ENABLE
CRIME TO CONCENTRATE THERE.
SO
ING AND DISRUPTING THE UNIQUE
CHARACTERISTICS
THAT CONTRIBUTE TO CRIME AT A
HOT SPOT IS IS BEST WAY TO
REDUCE.
WE ARE TALKING ABOUT PLACE-
BASED POLICING.
IT WAS DEPLOYED IN A PROJECT
CALLED REINEIR BEACH.
THIS PARTICULAR AUDIT CALLED FOR
INTERDEPARTMENTAL CLAP AL
COLLABORATION.
IT WAS SORT OF SPONTANEOUS
WHEN NATALIE WALTON
ANDERSON
VOLUNTEERED TO TAKE ON THAT
ROLE.
THE REST IS HISTORY.
WHAT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT IS
THE FACT THAT PLACE- BASED
POLICING GOT INTO OUR LOCAL
VERNACULAR.
YOU HAVE HEARD IT USED, COUNCIL
MEMBER KETTLE AND VICE CHAIR
OF MY COMMITTEE, CHAIR OF
PUBLIC SAFETY AND CHIEF BARNES
IN HIS
LEADERSHIP IS ALSO USING THAT
WORD.
IT MEANS BECAUSE WE DON'T
HAVE THAT MANY
RESOURCES, LET'S DEPLOY THEM IN
THE
MOST EFFICIENT WAY TO ADDRESS
THE
PROBLEMS ON THE GROUND.
THE LAST THING I WILL
MENTION, THIS IS NOT THE
END OF THE LIST. I WILL BREAK IT
IN HALF.
I WANT TO NOTE WHILE WE ARE
TALKING ABOUT 2024, REMEMBER THE
MUSIC ZONE PARKING -- THE
OFFICIAL NAME IS NOT WHAT I
CALL IT.
THE OFFICIAL NAME IS THE MUSIC
VENUE ZONE PROGRAM.
I THINK THEY DON'T WANT TO
PUT PARKING IN IT.
WHAT IT DID IS IT ALLOWED
FOR MUSIC VENUES TO HAVE
A PARKING -- ONE TO THREE
PARKING
SPACES IN FRONT OF THEIR
VENUE SO THAT ARTISTS COULD PARK
THERE FOR THEIR PERFORMANCES.
THERE'S NOTHING WORSE THAN --
NOTHING GETS YOU MORE
STRESSED OUT THAN TRYING TO FIND
A
PARKING PLACE IF YOU HAVE A
VAN FULL OF EQUIPMENT AND PEOPLE
AND THERE'S NOWHERE TO PARK AND
YOU
ARE WORRIED ABOUT YOUR
STUFF GETTING STOLEN OR FINDING
IT STOLEN AT THE END OF THE GIG.
THIS WAS A REQUEST BY THE MUSIC
COMMUNITY.
IT WAS
INFORMED BY THE WASHINGTON NIGHT
LIFE MUSIC
ASSOCIATION, THE SEATTLE
MUSIC COMMISSION AND VENUES
AND MUSICIANS ACROSS TOWN.
BASICALLY, IT IDENTIFIED 33
MUSIC VENUES IN TOWN THAT
MET THE CRITERIA OF HOSTING UP
TO --
AT LEAST
THREE LIVE PERFORMANCES A WEEK.
THEY COULD APPLY FOR THIS
PERMIT.
EASY
TO GET. OUR MUSICIANS HAVE A
PLACE TO
PARK IN FRONT OF THE VENUE.
THEY'RE NOT GOING TO
GET TICKETED AND HOPEFULLY
NOT RIPPED OFF.
THIS HAS PUT SEATTLE BACK ON
THE MUST
PLAY LIST OF THE NATION. GOOD
NEWS.
ANYWAY, I WILL PAUSE RIGHT
THERE.
PICK THIS UP LATER.
I WANTED TO SAY THAT THAT WAS
2024.
WE TOOK ON SOME BIG THINGS VERY
VARIED IN THE SUBJECT MATTER.
AGAIN, IT WAS ABOUT OUR ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT.
IT'S ABOUT THE PEOPLE
THAT OCCUPY THESE JOBS IN MAKING
OUR CITY A MORE VIBRANT AND
PROSPEROUS AND LIVABLE CITY.
WITH THAT, WE WILL MOVE INTO
THE FIRST ITEM ON OUR AGENDA.
WILL THE CLERK CALL THE ROLL
FOR ITEM -- NOT CALL THE ROLL,
READ
ITEM
ONE.
>> 121130, AN ORDINANCE RELATED
TO ETHICS CODE
PROHIBITING POLITICAL
CONSULTANTS, ADDING A
NEW SECTION TO THE SEATTLE
MUNICIPAL CODE AND NDING
41630.
FOR BRIEFING, DISCUSSION AND
POSSIBLE VOTE.
>> THIS IS -- WE DISCUSSED
THIS LAST WEEK.
THIS IS OUR SECOND DISCUSSION.
HOPEFULLY A VOTE.
FOR REMINDER, THIS
LEGISLATION IS REALLY ABOUT
GETTING AT THE
INSIDER TRADING THAT BLURS THE
LINE BETWEEN POLITICS AND POLICY
AT CITY HALL.
IT'S FUNDAMENTALLY ABOUT GOOD
GOVERNANCE. IT'S ABOUT
INCREASING
THE TRANSPARENCY AND
INTEGRITY OF THE PROCESSES BY
WHICH WE
MAKE DECISIONS AS POLICYMAKERS,
THAT
ARE SUPPOSED TO BE IN THE
PUBLIC'S BEST INTEREST.
THE SAME TIME, IT'S
ABOUT REDUCING THE POTENTIAL
FOR CONFLICTS OF INTEREST THAT
CAN
ARISE WHEN
CONSULTANTS, PROFESSIONALS THAT
WE LIE ON TO
GIVE US ADVICE, IT'S
ABOUT REDUCING CONFLICTS OF
INTEREST THAT CAN INFLUENCE THAT
ADVICE.
FUNDAMENTALLY, IT IS ABOUT
INCREASING PUBLIC TRUST IN LOCAL
GOVERNMENT.
THAT IS WHAT MOTIVATED ME TO
BRING THIS FORWARD.
IT'S SOMETHING THAT OUR
PUBLIC EXPECTS THAT WE ARE
MAKING
DECISIONS BASED ON SOUND POLICY
REASONS.
THIS SHOULD NOT BE
CONTROVERSIAL.
IF IT WEREN'T FOR THE FACT THAT
"THE TIMES"
DID A COUPLE STORIES ON A
POLITICAL CONSULTANT
DOING THE THINGS THIS BILL WOULD
PROHIBIT FROM BEING DONE,
I DON'T BELIEVE THERE WOULD BE
THE
BACK AND FORTH AND
CHATTERING CLASSES ABOUT WHAT IS
REALLY GOING ON.
MY POSITION IS THAT WE DON'T
REWARD BAD BEHAVIOR BY GIVING IT
A PASS.
ESPECIALLY CONSIDERING HOW MUCH
THIS TOWN
CLEARLY CARES ABOUT ETHICS.
WE CAN ALL REMEMBER
WHAT HAPPENED OVER THE SUMMER
WHEN IT WAS PERCEIVED THAT
COUNCIL WAS POISED TO ROLL BACK
ETHICS
RULES.
THAT'S NOT, IN
FACT, WHAT WE WERE GOING TO BE
DOING.
IF THIS LAW WERE IN PLACE RIGHT
NOW, WE COULD SEE PROBABLY
SIMILAR OUTCRY ON THAT.
SO THAT'S WHAT WE ARE
RESPONDING TO TO SHOW WE'RE
TRYING OUR BEST
TO PUT IN PLACE THE ETHICS RULES
THAT MAKE FOR SOUND
DECISION MAKING AND GOOD
GOVERNANCE.
IT'S MODELLED ON THE
PROVISIONS THAT ARE SIMILAR --
IN PORTLAND
AND SAN FRANCISCO'S CODE.
IT'S ALIGNED WITH THE RULES
THAT
WE HAVE FOR EMPLOYEES
WHEN THEY SEPARATE FROM CITY
EMPLOYMENT.
THAT'S JUST SORT OF AN
INTRODUCTION, REMINDER
ABOUT WHAT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT.
WE HAVE A COUPLE
PARLIAMENTARY STEPS TO GET
THROUGH BEFORE
WE
CAN DISCUSS THE ACTUAL
LEGISLATION BEFORE US.
FIRST, I MOVE THAT THE COMMITTEE
RECOMMEND PASSAGE OF THE BILL.
IS THERE A SECOND?
>> SECOND.
>> IT'S BEEN MOVE AND SECONDED
TO RECOMMEND PASSAGE OF THE
BILL.
ALL RIGHT.
NOW I MOVE TO AMEND COUNCIL BILL
121130 AS PRESENTED AS
THE RECENTLY DISTRIBUTED
SUBSTITUTE BILL VERSION D4.
IS
THERE A SECOND?
>> SECOND.
>> IT'S BEEN MOVED AND
SECONDED TO AMEND
THE BILL AS PRESENTED ON VERSION
D4.
ALL RIGHT.
I WOULD LIKE OUR
PRESENTERS TO COME UP TO THE
TABLE,
PLEASE. WE CAN DISCUSS WHAT
CHANGED
BETWEEN THE ORIGINAL,
THE
SUBSTITUTE AND WHAT WE WILL TALK
ABOUT TODAY.
THANK YOU.
GO AHEAD. JUST BEGIN.
>> THANK YOU, EVERYONE.
GOOD AFTERNOON.
LAUREN HENRY.
I WILL PULL UP THE RED
LINED VERSION OF THE LATEST
RELEASED SUBSTITUTE BILL TO WALK
THROUGH THE CHANGES FROM THE
INTRODUCED VERSION THAT WAS
BEFORE US
AT THE LAST COMMITTEE MEETING
AND
GIVE YOU ALL A LOOK AT WHAT IS
CURRENTLY PENDING FOR YOUR
CONSIDERATION AND VOTE.
GREAT.
PENDING BEFORE YOU IS VERSION
D4, THE SUBSTITUTE BILL
FOR COUNCIL BILL 121130.
I WILL WALK THROUGH
THE REFLECTED RED LINE
AMENDMENTS
IN ORDER.
THEN PROVIDE JUST AN OVERVIEW OF
ITS AFFECT.
FIRST AT THE TITLE, WE
SEE ONE CLAUSE RECOMMENDED FOR
REMOVAL. THIS YAUP DATES THE
TITLE
TO REFLECT THE
PROPOSED AMENDMENTS THAT ARE
LATER IN THE
SUBSTITUTE BILL THAT WOULD
REMOVE
VARIOUS REPORTING REQUIREMENTS
THAT WERE
IN THE INTRODUCED VERSION.
LIKE
LIKEWEIS
LIKEWEISS, WE SEE
THOSE REGISTRATION AND REPORTING
REQUIREMENTS THAT ARE
REMOVED WITHIN THE SUBSTANTIVE
PROVISION
LATER.
>> LAUREN, CAN I EXPLAIN
WHY WE DID THAT?
>> ABSOLUTELY.
>> THIS IS A CHANGE.
COLLEAGUES, THIS IS IN
RESPONSE TO COMMENTS MADE BY
COUNCIL MEMBER LYNN AND RIVERA.
CONCERNS ABOUT THE REPORTING.
THERE WERE CONCERNS ABOUT WHY
DO WE HAVE TO HAVE A LIST
OF ALL THE POLITICAL CONSULTANTS
IN
TOWN.
UPON REFLECTION, WHAT I
WAS TRYING TO DO WAS NOT
JUST DEVELOP A LIST OF POLITICAL
--
WHAT I WANTED WAS SO THAT
WHEN DEPARTMENT HEADS OR OTHER
PEOPLE
ARE THINKING ABOUT WHO --
THEY HAVE A PROJECT THEY NEED
A CONSULTANT TO PERFORM SERVICES
ON, AND THEY COULD GO
TO THE -- TO A LIFRLT ST OF
POLITICAL
CONSULTANTS AND SAY,
PROBABLY THAT WOULD NOT BE
APPROPRIATE
AT THIS POINT OR THE LAST TIME
THIS CONSULTANT HAD A POLITICAL
--
PERFORMED POLITICAL CONSULTING
SERVICES, LIKE FOR A BALLOT
MEASURE, THAT TIME PERIOD
HAS NOT
ELAPSED. THEREFORE, I WILL TAKE
SOMEBODY
ELSE.
HOWEVER, THAT LIST COULD ALSO
FEEL SORT OF LIKE AN
OPENING OF THE KAMO NO OF ALL OF
THEIR
CLIENTS. IT COULD BE SEEN AS
BRANDING A
CONSULTANT FOR WORKING WITH A
CERTAIN KIND OF CLIENT.
THAT WAS NOT MY INTENTION.
SO THAT'S WHY I DECIDED TO
REMOVE THE PUBLIC- FACING LIST.
HOWEVER, THAT INFORMATION IS
AVAILABLE.
PEOPLE HAVE TO -- AS LAUREN WILL
EXPLAIN LATER ON IN THE BILL,
WE STILL GET AT WHAT THAT LIST
WAS
GOING TO BE ABLE TO
AFFECTUATE, MAKE SURE THE
ACTIVITIES DESCRIBED
IN LATER SECTIONS WOULDN'T
HAPPEN.
GO AHEAD.
MORE BASED ON THE TRUST BASIS.
PLEASE CONTINUE.
>> NO PROBLEM.
MOVING FORWARD, WE HAVE
THE DEFINITION SECTIONS THAT ARE
LARGELY UNCHANGED EXCEPT FOR
CHANGES TO THE TWO OPERATIVE
DEFINITIONS.
THAT IS POLITICAL CONSULTANT
AND POLITICAL CONSULTING
SERVICES.
I DEALT WITH THIS IN OUR LAST
WEEK'S COMMITTEE IN THE
VERSION THAT WAS ON THE AGENDA,
THAT THIS WOULD BE A NARROWING
OFOF
REGULATED FIELD OF WHAT ARE
DEFINED AS POLITICAL
CONSULTANTS
AND POLITICAL CONSULTING
SERVICES.
THE BASE INTRODUCED
VERSION WOULD HAVE PULLED INTO
THE
SCOPE OF REGULATION BOTH
VOLUNTEER AND
COMPENSATED PEOPLE
PERFORMING
THOSE POLITICAL CONSULTING
SERVICES.
BY INCLUDING THE TERM
COMPENSATED, AS YOU WILL
SEE BOTH IN THE DEFINITION
OF POLITICAL CONSULTANT AND
LATER
IN THE DEFINITION OF POLITICAL
CONSULTING SERVICES,
THAT NARROWS THE REGULATORY
FIELD TO
ONLY THOSE COMPENSATED FOR
THOSE
THEIR WORK AS OPPOSED TO
VOLUNTEERS.
WE GET TO SECTION 3, WHICH IS
THE MEAT OF THE BILL.
IT CONTAINS THE REGULATIONS FOR
POLITICAL CONSULTANT, BOTH
REGISTRATION REQUIREMENTS AS
IN THE INTRODUCED BILL, AND THE
PROHIBITED CONDUCT SECTIONS.
AS YOU WILL NOTE IN THIS
SUBSTITUTE BILL THAT'S BEFORE
YOU FOR CONSIDERATION,
THE PROVISIONS REGARDING
REPORTING
REQUIREMENTS THAT BEGIN IN
SUBSECTION B WOULD BE REMOVED
IN THE SUBSTITUTE BILL.
THAT MEANS THAT THE
REQUIREMENT TO WITHIN 15 DAYS
AFTER CONTRACTING WITH THE CITY,
THAT A POLITICAL CONSULTANT
REGISTER.
THAT WOULD NO LONGER BE A
COMPONENT OF THE BILL.
FURTHER DOWN IN SUBSECTION
C, WHEN A POLITICAL CONSULTANT
WHO IS REQUIRED TO REGISTER
TERMINATES THE
POLITICAL CONSULTING
SERVICES THAT THEY WERE
SUPPLYING TO AN ELECTION
CAMPAIGN, THEY WERE SUPPOSED
TO FILE A TERMINATING
STATEMENT WITH THE SEEC.
THAT WOULD BE REMOVED.
WITHIN SUBSECTION D, THIS WAS A
REQUIREMENT FOR QUARTERLY
REPORTING BY AN ELECTED
OFFICIAL ON THE POLITICAL
CONSULTANTS AND
POLITICAL CONSULTING
SERVICES THEY WERE RECEIVING.
THAT COMPONENT AS WELL IS
RECOMMENDED FOR REMOVAL IN THIS
SUBSTITUTE BILL.
FINALLY, YOU WILL NOTE
SUBSECTION E, THIS PROVISION
SAID THAT ALL INFORMATION
THAT THE SEEC RECEIVED PURSUANT
TO THIS SECTION, THAT WOULD
BE QUARTERLY STATEMENTS,
THE INITIAL REPORTING STATEMENT
BY POLITICAL CONSULTANTS AND
THE TERMINATING STATEMENTS, THAT
ALL OF THOSE WERE TO BE
PUBLISHED
TO THE SEEC'S WEBSITE WITHIN
FIVE
DAYS.
THAT PROVISION IS ALSO REMOVED
HERE.
THERE'S AN UPDATING OF
THE SUBSECTIONS THEN TO MAKE
WHAT WAS SUBSECTION F THE
PROHIBITED CONDUCT
NOW SUBSECTION B FOR PROHIBITED
CONDUCT.
YOU WILL NOTE A CHANGE TO B1.
THIS IS LARGELY AWE TECH LY A
TECHNICAL
EDIT TO STANDARDIZE AND CREATE
CONSISTENCY BETWEEN
THE TERMINOLOGY USED IN B1, B3
AND
B4 TO TALK ABOUT WORK ON
A
CONSULTING CONTRACT WITH THE
CITY.
THEN THERE'S A NEW B4, A FOURTH
PROHIBITED ACT THAT
POLITICAL CONSULTANTS CANNOT
PERFORM OR
RISK VIOLATION OF THE CODE OF
ETHICS.
THIS PROHIBITED ACT STATES THAT
POLITICAL CONSULTANTS CANNOT
PERFORM WORK UNDER A
CONSULTING SERVICES CONTRACT
WITH THE CITY
WITHIN ONE YEAR AFTER
THE TERMINATION OF ANY
POLITICAL CONSULTING SERVICES
FOR A CITY
ELECTION CAMPAIGN.
THAT MEANS WHEN COUPLED WITH
NUMBER 3 THAT WE HAVE A
COOLING- OFF PERIOD THAT WORKS
IN
ONE YEAR THAT WORKS IN BOTH
DIRECTIONS. SOMEONE CONCLUDING A
CONSULTING CONTRACT WITH THE
CITY ISIS
PROHIBITED PERFORMING
POLITICAL CONSULTING
SERVICES FOR ONE YEAR ON A CITY
ELECTION CAMPAIGN AND CONVERSELY
THAT SOMEONE WHO IS DEPARTING
WORK FROM A POLITICAL
SERVICES CAMPAIGN ON A CITY
ELECTION
CAMPAIGN WOULD BE PROHIBITED FOR
ONE YEAR
FROM TAKING A CITY CONSULTING
CONTRACT.
>> BEFORE YOU GO ON, CAN
YOU PLEASE REMIND US WHAT
IS THE RULE FOR CITY EMPLOYEES
WHEN THEY
LEAVE THE CITY?
>> SURE.
THAT IS IN OUR EXISTING CODE.
I BELIEVE IT IS 4.16.100.
LET ME PULL THAT UP REAL QUICK.
I WAS INCORRECT BUT CLOSE.
4.16.075. IT'S PROHIBITED
CONDUCT
AFTER LEAVING THE CITY.
THIS IS APPLICABLE TO ALL CITY
EMPLOYEES.
I WANT TO CONTRAST THIS WITH
THE PEOPLE WITHIN THE SCOPE OF
IMPACT IN THE CURRENT
BILL, WHICH IS MORE GEARED
TOWARDS
CONSULTANTS, CONTRACT
CONSULTANTS. FOR ALL CITY
EMPLOYEES, 4.16.
075 IS APPLICABLE AND INVOLVES
THE
PROHIBITED CONDUCT AFTER LEAVING
CITY.
THERE ARE SIX
DIFFERENT PROHIBITED PIECES OF
CONDUCT.
ONE IS THAT THEY CAN'T
DISCLOSE OR USE CONFIDENTIAL
INFORMATION THAT'S GAINED BY
VIRTUE OF THEIR
CITY WORK.
THEY CAN'T FOR A PERIOD OF
TWO YEARS AFTER LEAVING THE CITY
ASSIST ANY PERSON ON A MATTER
IN WHICH THEY
PARTICIPATED WHILE WORKING WITH
THE CITY.
THAT THEY CAN'T FOR A PERIOD
OF ONE YEAR AFTER LEAVING THE
CITY COMMUNICATE ON BEHALF OF
ANY
PERSON ON A MATTER INVOLVING
THE CITY WITH AN EMPLOYEE OF
THE AGENCY WITH WHICH THEY
WERE PREVIOUSLY EMPLOYED.
THAT GETS AT AN ANTI-
LOBBYING
PROVISION FOR THAT ONE-YEAR
PERIOD OF TIME.
THEN AGAIN, FOR A PERIOD
OF ONE YEAR AFTER LEAVING CITY
OFFICE OR EMPLOYMENT,
PARTICIPATE AS A
COMPETITOR IN ANY
COMPETITIVE SELECTION PROCESS
FOR A
CONTRACT IN WHICH THEY WOULD
HAVE
BEEN INVOLVED IN DETERMINING
THE PROJECT OR THE SCOPE OF
WORK DURING THEIR CITY
EMPLOYMENT.
THERE'S TWO OTHERS
INVOLVING BEING AN EXPERT
ON SOMETHING THAT YOU WOULD HAVE
WORKED
ON DURING YOUR WORK WITHIN ONE
YEAR.
THEN THE FINAL IS JUST A
PROHIBITION THAT THE
PROHIBITIONS IN SUBSECTION B AND
C THAT I JUST READ OUT
WOULDN'T APPLY TO FORMER CITY
OFFICERS
OR EMPLOYEES THAT ARE
ACTING AS AGENTS OF A GOVERNMENT
AGENCY.
ESSENTIALLY, IF YOUR NEXT
WORK AFTER CITY WAS WORKING
WITHIN
A GOVERNMENT CONTEXT, THESE
TYPE OF INSIDER DEALING
PROVISIONS
ARE NOT APPLICABLE TO YOU.
THAT'S HOW THE RULES WORK
FOR CITY EMPLOYEES THAT
ARE DEPARTING THEIR CITY
EMPLOYMENT.
>> THAT'S ALSO, I BELIEVE, ONE
OF THE CITIES DOES DO -- WE ARE
MODELLING
ON, PORTLAND -- REMIND ME IF
IT'S PORTLAND OR SAN
FRANCISCO. WHAT WE ARE TALKING
ABOUT IS
LIMITING THE UNFAIR
ADVANTAGE THAT POLITICAL
CONSULTANTS
HAVE IF THEY'RE DOING A CITY
CONTRACT THAT THEY WILL THEN
CONFER UPON
A POLITICAL -- ON A CANDIDATE OR
A BALLOT MEASURE FOR WHICH
THEY ARE DOING POLITICAL
CONSULTING
SERVICES.
SO YOU USED THE WORD BACKGROUND
OR
BACKROOM DEALING. THAT'S
BASICALLY WHAT WE ARE
TALKING ABOUT.
THE ADVANTAGES YOU GET
FROM BEING AN INSIDER IN ONE
REALM
SHOULD NOT BE -- SHOULD NOT
TILT THE PLAYING FIELD AGAINST
THE OTHER PROFESSIONALS THAT
COULD
BE VYING FOR THE
SAME CONTRACT ON THE UTSIDE AND
VICE VERSA.
IT'S ABOUT FAIRNESS IS WHY
I THINK OTHER CITIES AND WHY WE
DO
THIS WITH EMPLOYEES AS WELL.
CONTINUE, PLEASE. I'M SORRY.
I DIDN'T MEAN TO INTERRUPT YOU.
>> A FEW MORE CHANGES I WANT
TO WALK THROUGH FOR COMMITTEE
MEMBERS.
IN SUBSECTION D, THIS IS A
NEW SECTION TO THE BILL.
IT INVOLVES WHEN A CONSULTANT IS
ACCEPTING A CITY CONSULTING
CONTRACT.
IT REQUIRES THAT THAT
CONTRACT HAVE A DECLARATION IN
IT THAT
THE CONSULTANT IS NOT
IN VIOLATIONS OF THE PROVISIONS
OF THIS SECTION, 4.16.072.
NAMELY, THEY ARE NOT A
POLITICAL CONSULTANT THAT'S
ENGAGING
IN
THE PROHIBITED CONDUCT UNDER
THIS BILL.
THAT'S A NEW PROVISION AND
APPLICABLE TO A
CONSULTANT CONTRACT THAT
THE CONSULTANT WOULD SIGN WITH
THE CITY.
WE SEE DELETED LANGUAGE IN
SUBSECTIONS H, I AND J1.
SIMILAR TO MY OPENINGITLE,
THESE WERE PREDICATED ON THE
REPORTING REQUIREMENTS.
SINCE THIS BILL IS REMOVING
THE REPORTING REQUIREMENTS, IT
WOULD
ALSO REMOVE THESE PERHAPS
INTERLINKED PROHIBITIONS AND
VIOLATIONS.
THEN FINALLY, IN SUBSECTION --
IT'S NOW SUBSECTION 2, SO
E2, YOU WILL SEE AN UPDATED
CROSS REFERENCE WITH NO OTHER
CHANGE, JUST NOTING THAT WHAT
WAS
PREVIOUSLY F2, THE IDEA
OF SERVING CONCURRENTLY AS A
POLITICAL CONSULTANT AND A
CITY CONTRACTING CONSULTANT,
THAT
UPDATED CROSS REFERENCE IS
GONE FROM F2 TO B2 WITH NO OTHER
CHANGE.
I'M HAPPY TO TAKE ANY QUESTIONS.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
I DID WANT TO -- COULD YOU MAKE
A PANELIST? HERE IS THE THING.
THE GETTING RID OF THE WHOLE
BIG LONG LIST OF POLITICAL
CONSULTANTS IS THEN
ACCOUNTED FOR IN THE REQUIREMENT
TO
JUST BASICALLY CHECK THIS BOX TO
SAY YOU ARE NOT DOING WHAT WE
ARE SAYING YOU SHOULDN'T BY
DOING AND YOU CAN'T BE DOING
POLITICAL
AND BASIC CONTRACTING
SERVICES AT THE SAME TIME.
THERE MUST BE A COOLING
OFF PERIOD BETWEEN WHEN YOU DO
ONE CONTRACT TO
A DIFFERENT CONTRACT AND VICE
VERSA.
THAT'S WHEN I WAS TALKING
ABOUT WE ARE TRUSTING THAT THE
CONSULTANT IS TRUTHFULLY
MARKING DOWN A BOX TO SAY THEY
AREARE
COMPLIANCE INSTEAD OF MAKING
THEM APPEAR ON A LIST THAT
THE DEPARTMENT HEADS OR WHOEVER
IS CONTRACTING WITH CONSULTANTS
WOULD NEED TO CONFER.
SO THAT'S THE MEANING AROUND
THAT.
JUST WANTED TO EXPLAIN. GO
AHEAD.
>> IF I MIGHT --
>> WELCOME IN COUNCIL MEMBER
RIVERA.
>> ONE ADDITIONAL PIECE
OF INFORMATION THAT I PROMISED
TO
COUNCIL MEMBER LYNN WAS
TO ANSWER QUESTIONS ABOUT
WHAT THE
DIFFERENCES ARE BETWEEN THE
ROBUST REPORTING AT THE
STATE AND LOCAL LEVEL AND THE
REPORTING HERE.
YOU WERE RIGHT, THERE'S SEVERAL
DIFFERENT RCWs THAT
CONTAIN SPECIFIC REPORTING
REQUIREMENTS
FOR ANYONE FROM ELECTED
OFFICIALS TO THOSE CAMPAIGNING
TO POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEES,
TO LOBBYISTS.
MOSTLY CONTAINED IN RCW 42.17A.
A 2025 AMENDMENT TO
THOSE SECTIONS ARE RELOCATING
THEM TO
RCW 29B.55.
FIND THEM THERE
STARTING JANUARY 1, 2026.
THE LOBBYING
REQUIREMENTS ARE RCW 29B ALSO.
WHILE IT'S TRUE THAT THE
MAJORITY OF THE
REPORTING REQUIREMENTS MIGHT BE
COBBLED TOGETHER FROM VARIOUS
SOURCES, THE TWO UNIQUE BENEFITS
I
MIGHT FIND TO A REPORT ARE THE
SPECIFICITY OF REPORTING
DOCUMENTS SPECIFIC TO
POLITICAL CONSULTANTS AND
THE CENTRALIZATION OF
THAT INFORMATION IF THEY WERE
POSTED
TO THE SEEC WEBSITE.
THOSE ARE THE ONLY TWO I THINK
TANGIBLE BENEFITS THAT YOU
MIGHT FIND WITH THIS BILL EVEN
THOUGH
THEY DUPLICATE IN SOME
MEASUREMEASURE
THE REPORTING REQUIREMENTS THAT
YOU CAN FIND ELSEWHERE.
>> I JUST -- THIS MAKES ME
ASK, I WAS UNDER THE IMPRESSION
THAT YOU WERE THINKING THE
NATURE
OF YOUR QUESTIONS LAST TIME LED
ME
TO BELIEVE THAT YOU THOUGHT THAT
THE REPORTING REQUIREMENTS
IN THE ORIGINAL BILL MIGHT
HAVE BEEN TOO RIGOROUS.
NOW I'M HEARING ABOUT
YOUR CURIOSITY ABOUT THE STATE
PROCESSES, I'M WONDERING, ARE
YOU INCLINED TO THINK THAT
THIS IS NOT RIGOROUSRIGOROUS
ENOUGH?
OR IF THAT WAS A CHANGE
YOU WOULD BE INTERESTED IN
SEEING
MADE?
>> THANK YOU, PRESIDENT NELSON.
MY CONCERN WAS THAT -- I
WAS CONCERNED IT MIGHT
BE DUPLICATIVE.
I SEE THE BENEFIT OF HAVING THE
CONVERSATION CONSOLIDATED IN ONE
SPOT.
I WAS CONCERNED ABOUT SINCE WE
ALREADY REQUIRE FILING,
THAT IT WAS UNNECESSARY.
I DON'T WANT TO REQUIRE MORE
FILING IF NOT NEEDED.
I AM GENERALLY INTERESTED.
I THINK ONE THING THAT I
WOULD BE INTERESTED IN
IS UNDERSTANDING HOW MANY
CONTRACTS
WE HAVE WITH CONSULTANTS AT THE
CITY.
HOW MANY DIFFERENT DEPARTMENTS.
I KNOW THERE'S OUTSIDE
THE PROPOSED SCOPE OF THIS
LEGISLATION.
FOR ME, I'M STILL JUST, IN
FULL TRANSPARENCY, TRYING
TO UNDERSTAND THE FULL SCOPE OF
CONTRACTING THAT WE DO
WITH CONSULTANTS AT THE CITY TO
MAKE SURE THAT I HAVE A
FULL
UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT WE ARE
REGULATING.
IN ANY CASE, GENERALLYGENERALLY
SUPPORTIVE OF REMOVING THE
REPORTING
REQUIREMENT, BECAUSE I DID THINK
IT WAS DUPLICATIVE.
>> RIGHT.
THANK YOU FOR THE HELPING TO
EXPLAIN YOUR THINKING ON THIS.
I WILL TELL YOU THAT I DID --
I REQUESTED A STATEMENT OF
LEGISLATIVE INTENT RESPONSE THAT
INCLUDED ALL THE
CONTRACTS THAT OUR DEPARTMENTS
HAVE THROUGH
THE END OR SEPTEMBER OF 2024,
THAT WAS WHEN WE WERE
DELIBERATING BUDGET ITEMS LAST
YEAR.
GUESS WHAT THEY SAID?
THEY SAID, THERE'S NO WAY WE
CAN GET YOU THAT INFORMATION
WITHIN SIX
MONTHS. SO THEY ASKED IF I COULD
TRIM IT
DOWN TO THE THREE DEPARTMENTS
THAT HAVE THE MOST
SERVICE PROVIDER CONTRACTS.
JUST HSD ALONE WAS THE
SECOND
WITH THE MOST. IT HAD 115.
IT WOULD BE GREAT TO KNOW
ALL THE CONTRACTS THE WHOLE CITY
HAS WITH EVERYBODY.
MAYBE THERE'S DUPLICATIVE
WORK GOING ON IN THOSE
CONTRACTS.
WHO KNOWS?
I THINK THAT'S LIVING LARGE
HERE IN THE FUTURE PERHAPS WE
COULD DEVELOP A SYSTEM WHERE
THAT
WOULD BE NOT TOO ONEROUS TO DO.
WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT
SOME OF THE PROHIBITIONS,
THEY APPLY TO THE PEOPLE THAT GO
IN BETWEEN
WHAT'S NORMAL SERVICE
PROVIDER CONTRACTS AND POLITICAL
CONTRACTING, WHICH IS
BASICALLY -- IT IS LIMITED
TO POLITICAL CONSULTANTS THAT
WORK ON BALLOT
INITIATIVES, INCUMBENTS
OF CITY OFFICE AND CANDIDATES
FOR CITY OFFICE.
NARROWS IT DOWN QUITE A BIT.
I THINK THE WHOLE THING
WOULD BE
GOOD TO KNOW. GO AHEAD.
ARE THERE ANY OTHER --
>> HAPPY TO TAKE ANY OTHER
QUESTIONS.
>> ANY QUESTIONS FROM MY
COLLEAGUES?
GO AHEAD.
>> THANK YOU.
COUNCIL PRESIDENT.
APOLOGIES.
I WAS IN CHAMBERS.
HAD ANOTHER MEETING.
I WAS ONLINE THE WHOLE TIME.
THANK YOU, LAUREN HENRY,
FOR BEING HERE.
THANK YOU, COUNCIL
PRESIDENT, FOR YOUR THOUGHTS
AROUND THIS.
I WOULD SAY, INSIDER INFORMATION
IS PROBABLY THE
BETTER TERM SINCE I THINK THE
TRADER --
R TRADER TERM IS USED IN
THE FINANCE INDUSTRY.
THAT'S AN ACTUAL LAW THAT IS
PROBABLY NOT EQUIVALENT.
BUT I SEE WHERE YOU WERE
GOING WITH IT IN THAT IT'S
INSIDERINSIDER YOU WOULD HAVE
IF YOU HAVE A CONTRACT -- BOTH
A CONTRACT WITH THE CITY AND
THEN EXTERNAL CONTRACT WITH AN
ELECTED OFFICIAL, A CAMPAIGN OR
A BALLOT MEASURE, ET CETERA.
I UNDERSTAND THAT TO BE YOUR
INTENT. FULL DISCLOSURE, MY
SPOUSE IS
A POLITICAL CONSULTANT IN
TOWN. HE DOES NOT, NOR HAS HE
EVER, HAD CONTRACTS WITH THE
CITY OF
SEATTLE, WHICH IS THE
INTENT OF THIS LEGISLATION.
I WOULD WANT TO CLARIFY THAT AND
WHY I'M ABLE TO SPEAK ABOUT
THAT
IS BECAUSE THIS LEGISLATION IS
PARTICULAR TO CONSULTANTS
WHO HAVE CONTRACTS WITH THE
CITY.
I BELIEVE OUR COLLEAGUE,
COUNCIL MEMBER LYNN AND I HAD
SIMILAR JUST CONCERNS IN GENERAL
ABOUT MAKING SURE THAT THE LAWS
THAT
WE PASS ARE NARROWLY TAILORED
TO ADDRESS THE THING THAT WE
ARE MOST CONCERNED ABOUT.
I THINK -- I BELIEVE THIS IS
WHY, ALTHOUGH THERE ARE MANY
CONSULTANTS THAT HAVE
CONTRACTS WITH THE CITY, YOU
REALLY
HONED IN ON THE POLITICAL
CONSULTANTS
WHO WOULD HAVE A CONTRACT
WITH THE CITY AND THEN AN
OUTSIDE
CONTRACT WITH A
POLITICAL CAMPAIGN WHEREBY THEN
HAVING
THAT INFORMATION THAT THEY
OBTAIN WITH THE CONTRACT --
FROM THE CONTRACT WITH THE CITY
MIGHT
BE ADVANTAGEOUS IN THEIR OTHER
WORK.
SO I UNDERSTAND THAT TO BE
VERY NARROWLY DEFINED.
SO YOU ARE NOT TRYING TO GO --
YOU ARE NOT TRYING TO HAVE THIS
LAW APPLY TO EVERY PERSON
OR ORGANIZATION THAT HAS A
CONTRACT
WITH THE CITY.
BECAUSE THOSE ARE DIFFERENT
LEVELS OF INVOLVEMENT.
JUST TRYING TO CLARIFY THAT I
AM
READING THIS LEGISLATION
ACCURATELY.
>> YES, THAT'S RIGHT.
THE SCOPE OF THE BILL IS
INTENGSZ
INTENTIONALLY NARROWED TO
CITY ELECTION CAMPAIGNS, BECAUSE
THAT'S THE SCOPE OF THE
CITY'S REGULATORY AUTHORITY
HERE.
>> AND ALSO CONTRACT WITH
THE
CITY. YOU HAVE TO HAVE BOTH, NOT
JUST ELECTION CAMPAIGN?
YOU HAVE TO HAVE BOTH,
RIGHT, FOR THAT -- THAT'S THE
PROHIBITION? YOU CAN'T DO BOTH
AT
THE SAME
TIME?
>> THAT'S RIGHT.
THAT'S IN SUBSECTION B2.
THERE'S THE ADDITIONAL B3
AND NEW B4, THE COOLING OFF
PERIODS.
STAY IN THE LANE AND HAVE A
ONE- YEAR BUFFER.
YOU MAY ENTER INTO A DIFFERENT
LANE.
CITY
CONSULTING VERSUS POLITICAL
CONSULTING.
>> THANK YOU FOR THAT
CLARIFICATION.
THEN JUST TO FURTHER CLARIFY,
BECAUSE I KNOW THE REPORTING
PIECES WERE EXTRICATED FROM THE
BILL.
BUT IT DOES HAVE WHERE YOU HAVE
TO ATTEST THAT YOU ARE NOT
DOING BOTH.
IF YOU HAVE A CONTRACT WITH
CITY, MY UNDERSTANDING IS YOU
HAVE TO FILL OUT A FORM WITH
FAS. THEN IN THAT FORM, YOU
WOULD CHECK THE BOX WHERE YOU
ARE
ATTESTING YOU DON'T HAVE AN
OUTSIDE -- IT'S ALMOST
LIKE ATTESTING YOU DON'T HAVE
A CONFLICT OF INTEREST, THAT YOU
ARE NOT HOLDING THE -- YOU
WON'T BE HOLDING THE CONTRACT
WITH
THE CITY ALONG WITH AN
EXTERNAL POLITICAL CONTRACT,
CORRECT?
>> YES.
THIS WOULD BE A NEW COMPONENT IN
THE SUBSTITUTE BILL, IT'S IN
SUBSECTION D.
IT WOULD COME WHEN A CONSULTANT
IS SIGNING A CITY CONSULTING
CONTRACT, THE OPERATIVE LONG
SAYS THE CONSULTANTS
MUST DECLARE IN THE CONTRACT
THAT THEY ARE NOT IN VIOLATION
OF
THE PROVISIONS.
NOT DOING CONCURRENT WORK, BUT
ALSO NOT VIOLATING THE
COOLING OFF PERIOD IN STEPPING
INTO
A CITY CONTRACT BEFORE THAT
ONE-YEAR PERIOD HAS EXPIRED.
>> THANK YOU.
SOUNDS LIKE IT'S ON THE
ENFORCEMENT SIDE, WE'RE GETTING
THAT ATTESTATION MAKES IT LEGAL.
THAT WAY, IF THEY VIOLATE YOU
ARE ABLE TO TELL BECAUSE
THEY CHECK THE BOX.
>> THAT'S RIGHT.
I'M SURMISING THAT HAVING THE
REQUIREMENT OF THAT IN
THE CONTRACT WOULD SERVE AS
EVIDENCE
FOR SEEC IN
THEIR INVESTIGATION OF ANY
ALLEGED VIOLATIONS.
>> THANK YOU.
THANK YOU, COUNCIL,
PRESIDENT.
>> BASICALLY IT WOULD BE IF
THERE WAS SOMEBODY WITHIN THE
CITY, OUTSIDE THE CITY
THAT RECOGNIZED THAT SOMEBODY
WAS
PERFORMING A CONSULTING SERVICE
FOR SOME DEPARTMENT
AND HAPPENED TO REMEMBER THAT
THAT PERSON HAD BEEN A
CONSULTANT ON A PREVIOUS
BALLOT MEASURE OR CAMPAIGN
MEASURE, THEN THEY COULDCOULD
UP WAYNE BARNETT OR SOMEBODY AT
THE SEEC AND SAY, I BELIEVE THIS
IS
HAPPENING.
COULD YOU -- THEN WAYNE WOULD
LOOK TO SEE IF THAT BOX WAS
CHECKED OR NOT.
THEN FOLLOW-UP.
IT'S BASICALLY, LIKE I
SAID, IT'S AN HONOR SYSTEM THAT
IS COMPLAINT -- WHOSE
ENFORCEMENT
IS COMPLAINT DRIVEN.
LIKE SO MANY OF OUR OTHER LAWS.
WE ARE GOOD FOR THE MOST PART
HONEST, COMPASSIONATE AND
SENSIBLE PEOPLE IN SEATTLE.
COUNCIL MEMBER
LYNN.
>> I DID WANT TO SAY
THAT I'M STILL DOING MY DUE
DILIGENCE
TO STILL TRY TO MAKE UP MY
MIND.TO
I WANT TO PUT ON THE RECORD THAT
I WILL BE ABSTAINING WHEN WE
GET TO THE VOTE.
IT'S NOT -- I HAVE NOT TAKEN A
POSITION YET.
JUST WANTED
TO EXPLAIN MY -- WHAT THAT MEANT
FOR ME.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH
FOR LETTING ME -- BEING
TRANSPARENT
ABOUT WHAT YOU ARE GOING TO DO
TODAY.
I HAVE ON NUMEROUS OCCASIONS
ASKED WHAT INFORMATION
YOU NEED OR IF I CAN HELP IN ANY
WAY, SHOW YOU -- UNCOVER THE
RESEARCH I HAVE DONE ON THIS AND
MAKE
IT AVAILABLE TO
SIMILAR CODE THAT EXISTS IN
OTHER CITIES.
AT YOUR DISPOSAL FOR THAT.
IF THERE ARE -- I'M NOT
SEEING ANY OTHER HANDS RAISED.
WE WILL BE DOING
SOME PARLIAMENTARY THINGS
PROBABLY
BEFORE WE VOTE.
RIGHT NOW WE ARE TRYING TO GET
AT THE MEAT OF THE DISCUSSION
THAT CONTINUES.
ARE THERE ANY OTHER --
LAUREN, ARE THERE ANY OTHER
STEPS
THAT WE HAVE TO TAKE TO
ENSUREENSURE THAT SUBSTITUTE
VERSION D4 IS
BEFORE US BEFORE WE GIVE
AN OPPORTUNITY FOR SPEECHIFYING
AT THE
END?
>> YOU HAVE MOVED AND SECONDED
TO PLACE IT BEFORE THE BODY.
DISCUSSIONS AND THEN VOTES WOULD
HAPPEN NOW.
>> ALL RIGHT.
NOW IS THE OPPORTUNITY TO --
I'M
LOOKING FOR HANDS RAISED.
WE ARE GOING TO THE VOTE NOW.
COUNCIL MEMBER KETTLE.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCIL PRESIDENT.
I JUST WANT TO TAKE
THE OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE A COUPLE
FEW
REMARK REMARKS.
I WILL NOTE -- FULL DISCLOSER,
I'M AWARE OF THE
DIFFERENT FACTORS TO INCLUDE
THOSE AREAS THAT WERE STRUCK
WITH THIS
OBVIOUSLY, ON A MORE LIGHTER
NOTE, FULL DISCLOSURE, YOU
DO NOT HAVE A JD.
I DID MARRY AN ATTORNEY.
I'M TRYING TO GET ONE THROUGH
OSMOSIS.
WE DO HAVE, AS YOU CAN
TELL, WE HAVE TWO LAW
SCHOOL GRADUATES HERE ON
COMMITTEE.
FROM MY PERSPECTIVE, I
THINK IT'S IMPORTANT, IN TERM
THIS
WAS TOPIC, IS TO KEEP IT
SIMPLE. TO KEEP IT NARROW.
TO KEEP IT TRANSPARENT.
IT IS MY UNDERSTANDING OF THE
BILL, IT'S IMPORTANT TO AVOID A
DUAL HEADED CIRCUMSTANCE OR
APPEARANCE.
I BELIEVE -- THIS IS A
TOPIC FOR FULL COUNCIL IN A LOT
OF WAYS, NOT JUST THE COMMITTEE.
AS I HAVE NOTED A LOT OF
TIMES, BECAUSE I BELIEVE WE
SHOULD BE WORKING ITEMS THROUGH
COMMITTEE
AHEAD OF ANYTHING THAT WE DO IN
TERMS OF VOTE OR BUDGET AND
THE LIKE, BECAUSE WE DO HAVE
THIS
BACK AND FORTH. WE HAVE HAD A
LOT OF
ITERATIONS, A LOT OF
CONVERSATIONS BETWEEN
COUNCIL MEMBERS, WITH
YOU, COUNCIL PRESIDENT, ALSO
WITH MISS HENRY.
THANK YOU, MISS HENRY, FOR YOUR
SUPPORT IN ALL OF THIS.
I THINK THAT'S VERY IMPORTANT.
TO FURTHER, IN TERMS OF MISS
HENRY'S POINT OF
VIEW, I WANT TO THANK THE
CITY'S ATTORNEY
OFFICE WHO GAVE AN EXCELLENT
PRESENTATION ON THIS TOPIC THAT
I CANNOT SPEAK TO IN DETAILS.
MY COUNCIL AT THE TABLE
IS WORRIED I
WAS GOING TO GO OVER
THE LINE. I DIDN'T.
I WAS EXPRESSING
MY APPRECIATION TO THE CITY
ATTORNEY'S OFFICE.
OSMOSIS.
I'M WORKING TOWARDS IT.
REFLECT UPON THIS.
WE'RE DOING A LOT OF WORK IN MY
COMMITTEE
PUBLIC SAFETY IN TERMS OF
REVAMPING OUR STRATEGY, OUR
PLAN.
MY OFFICE AND MYSELF,
WE'RE LOOKING -- WE'RE AT THE
BREAK
POINT.
THE TERM THE COUNCIL IS ENDING,
WE WILL START AGAIN.
I'M LOOKING AT MY
GOOD GOVERNANCE PLEDGE THAT I
RELEASE AT
THE BEGINNING OF THIS TERM OF
THE COUNCIL.
I LOOK AT NUMBER THREE
ON MY
LIST OF FIVE. IT SAYS, MY ROLE
IS AS A
COUNCIL
MEMBER IS TO SERVE THE PUBLIC
INTEREST.
THESE ARE THINGS THAT
I'M
THINKING ABOUT LOOKING AT THIS
BILL.
I DO BELIEVE ULL COUNCIL IS
THE
WAY TO MAKE THE FINAL
DETERMINATION.
THANK YOU, COUNCIL PRESIDENT.
>> ANY OTHER COMMENTS?
REST ASSURED, THIS WILL COME
BEFORE FULL COUNCIL BEFORE THE
END OF THE TERM.
I REPEAT AGAIN THAT IT CAME AT
THE END OF THE YEAR.
SIMPLY BECAUSE WE HAD
BUDGET THAT WAS -- THAT TOOK UP
A
LOT OF OUR TIME.
WE WEREN'T ALLOWED TO
DO ANYTHING THAT WASN'T BUDGET
RELATED IF
AT ALL POSSIBLE. THAT'S WHY IT
CAME AT THE
END OF THE YEAR AND BEFORE -- TO
GET OUT OF THE SENSITIVE TIME OF
THE
ELECTORAL PROCESS AS WELL.
WE HAD A NARROW TIME TO DO
THIS BEFORE THE COUNCIL RECESS.
I HAVE NO FURTHER
COMMENTS EXCEPT FOR TO SAY THAT
THIS IS
SCHEDULED TO COME NEXT WEEK FOR
FULL COUNCIL.
GETTING BACK TO MY WORDS BEFORE,
SOMETIMES WE JUST OTTA
DO WHAT WE HAVE TO DO WHEN THE
PUBLIC SENTIMENT IS PUSHING US
IN THAT
DIRECTION.
SOMETIMES WE HAVE IT TAKE ON
THINGS THAT ARE HARD BUT
THAT ARE ULTIMATELY GOING TO
BEAR FRUIT IN TERMS OF
PUBLIC TRUST AND TRUST
PROCESSES,
JUST CLEAR RULES SO PEOPLE KNOW
WHAT IS LEGAL AND WHAT ISN'T OR
WHAT IS ETHICAL AND WHAT
ISN'T AS IT IS WRITTEN IN OUR
CODE.
LET'S SEE, WILL THE CLERK
PLEASE
CALL THE ROLL ON
THE PASSAGE OF THE AMENDED BILL.
[ ROLL CALL ]
NO, NO,
NO. GIVE ME -- HELP ME OUT HERE.
>> SUBSTITUTE
VERSION D4.
>> HEARING NO
FURTHER COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS,
WILL
THE CLERK PLEASE CALL THE ROLL
ON
THE ADOPTION OF THE SUBSTITUTE
VERSION D4.
[ ROLL CALL ]
>> THREE IN FAVOR, ONE OPPOSED,
ONE
ABSTENTION.
>> THE MOTION CARRIES.
THE SUBSTITUTE IS ADOPTED.
ARE THERE FURTHER COMMENTS?
SEEING NONE, WILL THE CLERK CALL
THE
ROLL ON THE PASSAGE OF THE
AMENDED BILL.
[ ROLL CALL ]
>> THREE IN FAVOR, ONE
OPPOSED, ONE ABSTENTION.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
THE
MOTION CARRIES. THE COMMITTEE
REMEMBER MEN
DAGSRECOMMENDATION WILL BE SENT
TO CITY
COUNCIL. THANK YOU, EVERYBODY.
WE CAN MOVE ON TO --
WILL THE CLERK
READ ITEM GO INTO THE RECORD.
>> AGENDA ITEM ITEM, 121073,
CHANGING ASSESSMENT RATE,
AMENDING ORDINANCE 125678 --
>> LAUREN, PLEASE WAIT.
>> PREVIOUSLY AMENDED.
FOR
PUBLIC HEARING, BRIEFING,
DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE VOTE.
>> BEFORE YOU LEFT THE ROOM, I
WANTED TO SAY, YOU STEPPED
UP WHEN THERE WAS SO MUCH WORK
GOING ON AMONGST OTHER CENTRAL
STAFFERS WORKING ON FINISHING
THINGS UP AT THE END OF THE
YEAR.
I SO APPRECIATE NOT JUST
YOUR WORK ETHIC BUT THE FACT
THAT
YOU BRING EXPERT KNOWLEDGE TO
THIS SUBJECT MATTER.
SO THANK YOU SO MUCH
FOR STEPPING UP AND HELPING OUT.
I APPRECIATE IT.
HI, EVERYONE. GOOD TO SEE YOU
AGAIN.
ALL RIGHT. LET'S SEE.
IT'S BEEN A WHILE SINCE WE
HAVE HAD
THIS PIECE OF LEGISLATION BEFORE
US.
BEFORE REMINDING MY COLLEAGUES
AND THE PUBLIC WHAT THIS
LEGISLATION HAS DONE, FIRST A
WORD ABOUT BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT
AREAS IN GENERAL, OF WHICH THE
SOTO BUSINESS AND PARKING
IMPROVEMENT AREA IS ONE OF 11 IN
THE CITY OF SEATTLE.
I SAY THIS EVERY TIMETIME
LEGISLATION REGARDING A
BIA COMES UP, WHETHER RENEWAL OR
MODIFICATION.
I WILL SAY IT AGAIN, BECAUSE I
FEEL IT'S IMPORTANT.
BIAs, BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT
AREAS, ARE PUBLIC
NEIGHBORHOOD BUSINESS DISTRICTS
IN WHICH AT
LEAST 60% OF THE PROPERTY
OWNERS OR BUSINESSOWNERS HAVE
AGREED TO
ASSESS THEMSELVES A FEE THAT
GOES INTO A POT OF MONEY TO FUND
A RANGE OF
SERVICES. THOSE SERVICES CAN
INCLUDE
TRASH PICKUP, GRAFFITI REMOVAL,
ADDITIONAL SECURITY, EVENTS,
PARADES, BEAUTIFICATION,
LIGHTS THAT MAKE IT PRETTY AND
STRUNG
UP TREES FOR HOLIDAY SEASON.
MY POINT IS THAT THE BUSINESSES
AND PROPERTY OWNERS ARE TAXING
THEMSELVES FOR THE
BENEFIT OF THE COMMON GOOD.
THAT'S PRETTY UNIQUE.
THAT BEARS REPEATING EVERY
SINGLE TIME.
THEY DON'T EXIST -- THE WORD
ITSELF, BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT
AREA, THESE ENTITIES DO
NOT EXIST TO IMPROVE INDIVIDUAL
BUSINESS PERFORMANCE OR
PROFIT, BECAUSE THEY ARE REALLY
ABOUTABOUT OF THE AREA IN WHICH
THEY ARE LOCATED.
INDEED, NOT JUST THE
NEIGHBORHOOD BUT THE WHOLE CITY.
THEY BENEFIT WHETHER THEY
ARE GOVERNMENT BUILDING, NON-
PROFIT
OR BUSINESSES, RESIDENTS,
ANYTHING.
WE ARE TALKINGTALKING THE ROLE
OF BIAs IN IMPROVING THE CITY
AND
MAKING SEATTLE SUCH A GREAT
PLACE TO LIVE.
I THINK BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT
AREA IS A REALLY DRY AND
OUTDATED NOTION OR
NOMENCLATURE TO DESCRIBE WHAT
BUSINESS
IMPROVEMENT AREAS ACTUALLY DO.
I THINK THEY SHOULD BE
CALLED SOMETHING LIKE -- I
DON'T KNOW -- ENHANCED SERVICES
DISTRICT OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
I KNOW THERE HAS
BEEN CONVERSATION ABOUT CHANGING
IT.
JUST ALL REMEMBER, IT'S ABOUT
THE SERVICE AND ABOUT WHAT THEY
PROVIDE FOR THE CITY.
WE
CAN'T IMAGINE THE CITY WITHOUT
BIAs
AND WHAT THEY DO. THANK YOU TO
OED FOR
MANAGING
THIS PROGRAM. IT'S A PUBLIC
PROGRAM.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR COMING
HERE REPRESENTING THE MEMBERS OF
THE SOTO BIA.
YOU MAY INTRODUCE
YOURSELVES AND BEGIN.
THANKS.
>> CASEY
RODGERS. THANK YOU FOR THE
OVERVIEW OF
THE BIA PROGRAM.
>> JASMINE MARWAHA.
>> ERIN GOODMAN.
>> I
CAN START. I WAS CURIOUS ABOUT
WHETHER
THE PUBLIC HEARING COMMENTERS
WOULD BE BEFORE OR PRESENTATION
OR SHOULD WE DO
OUR PRESENTATION FIRST AND GET
INTO THE PUBLIC
>> IT'S IN MY SCRIPT THAT WE --
AS CHAIR OF THE COMMITTEE,
I WILL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING
ON
COUNCIL BILL 121073.
THE HEARING IS AN OPPORTUNITY
TO HEAR FROM RATE PAYERS ON
THE CHANGES TO THE
SOTO PARKING AND BUSINESS
IMPROVEMENT AREA.
DO WE HAVE ANYBODY SIGNED UP TO
SPEAK TODAY?
>> WE HAVE SIX
IN-PERSON AND ONE REMOTE.
>> THEY ARE
PROBABLY PEOPLE THAT ALREADY
KNOW ENOUGH
ABOUTABOUT THIS
LEGISLATION THEY PROBABLY
DON'T NEED TO HEAR THE
OVERVIEW,
I WOULD IMAGINE.
LET'S GO AHEAD AND OPEN THE
PUBLIC HEARING.
THEN WE WILL PROCEED WITH
THE MORE -- WITH THE NUTS AND
BOLTS OF WHAT WE'RE DOING
HERE, A REMIND ER WHAT WE DID
LAST TIME.
EACH SPEAKER WILL BE
PROVIDED
TWO MINUTES. I WILL HAND THIS
OVER TO
YOU TO
PRESENT THE INSTRUCTIONS. WE
WILL START THE PUBLIC
HEARING.
>> SPEAKERS WILL BE CALLED
IN THE ORDER IN WHICH THEY
SIGNED
UP.
SPEAKERS WILL BE GIVEN TWO
MINUTES. THERE WILL BE A CHIME
AT
TEN SECONDS REMAINING.
AFTER THE ELAPSE OF
YOUR TIME, YOUR MICROPHONE MAY
BE CUT
OFF SO WE CAN GET TO OTHER
SPEAKERS.
WE WILL START WITH OUR IN-PERSON
AND MOVE ONLINE.
FIRST IN- PERSON
COMMENTER IS TERRY HOUSER.
>> I'M SEEING BACK AND
FORTH HERE AT THE TABLE.
ARE YOU CONSIDERING -- WHAT
ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT?
YOU MAY YIELD YOUR TIME, YES.
WE HAVE GO IN LINE OF THE
PEOPLE -- CALL THE NEXT PERSON.
>> TO JODY.
JODY IS LISTED.
I WILL GO TO JEFF NEXT.
JEFF SHOLAND.
>> WE DON'T -- IF YOU ARE
WANTING -- WE CAN'T JUST SORT
OF MULTIPLY THE AMOUNT OF TIME
THAT JODY WOULD GET BASED ON THE
NUMBER THE PEOPLE THAT ARE
YIELDING THEIR TIME.
IF YOU WOULD RATHER THAT
SHE SPEAK INSTEAD OF YOU TWO,
THAT'S PERFECTLY
FINE.
WE CAN'T MOVE THE MINUTES
AROUND.
IS THAT ALL RIGHT WITH YOU?
GO AHEAD AND -- WHAT ARE THE
RULES OF -- WHY DON'T WE HAVE
--
WHY DON'T YOU SAY TO
MINUTES. IF IT'S POSSIBLE TO
GIVE YOUR
COMMENTS TO -- WHAT?
WHY DON'T
YOU COME UP. YOU CAN SPEAK,
PLEASE.
COME UP. GO AHEAD.
GO AHEAD AND TAKE THREE
MINUTES FOR EVERYBODY.
THAT WOULD BE
GOOD.
>> I HAVE SIX MINUTES OF
MATERIAL.
>> IS -- DO MY COMMITTEE
MATES HAVE ANY -- WOULD YOU
OBJECT
TO HAVING SIX MINUTES OF PUBLIC
COMMENT?
>> IT'S ALL THEIR TIME
HOWEVER
THEY WANT TO USE IT.
>> GO AHEAD.
>> MY NAME IS JODY.
I STARTED MY BUSINESS 35
YEARS AGO IN THE INDUSTRIAL
ZONE. I NOW OWN FIVE COMPANIES.
ONE OF THOSE IS AN LLC
THAT SIMPLY HOLDS
COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE AND
IS CONSIDERED A PASSIVE INCOME
CLASSIFICATION.
ALL MY OTHER COMPANIES ARE
THE SOURCE OF ALL INCOME AND DO
THE HEAVY LIFTING OF DAY TO
DAY WORK.
THEY ARE CLASSIFIED DIFFERENTLY.
I BEGIN WITH THAT
DISTINCTION BECAUSE MY
COMMERCIAL LEASES,
AKA TRIPLE NET LEASES WITH
THE MECHANISM THAT MAKES
MY OPERATING COMPANIES INSIDE
THE BUILDING RESPONSIBLE FOR
PAYING
ALL THE TAXES TIED TO THE
PROPERTY.
THIS IS THE NUANCE THAT
THE PREVIOUS COUNCIL MEMBERS DID
NOT GRASP, WHEN THE
ORIGINAL BIA WAS ORIGINALLY
FORMED.
THIS IS WHY THE
INDUSTRIAL COMMUNITY IS ASKING
THIS
COUNCIL TO TAKE STEPS
NECESSARY TO DISBAND THE SOTO
BIA ENTIRELY.
A BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT AREA IS
MEANT TO BE INITIATED BY
THE SAME CLASS OF ENTITIES WHO
BENEFIT FROM THE BIA AND PAY THE
TAX.
THAT DID NOT HAPPEN IN
THE INDUSTRIAL ZONE.
NOT ONE PETITION WAS SIGNED BY A
NON- DEVELOPER OR AN
OWNER/OPERATOR LIKE MYSELF.
THE PETITIONS THAT FORMED THE
DISTRICT WERE SIGNED BY PROPERTY
HOLDING LLCs OWNED BY
DEVELOPERS. ONE INDIVIDUAL,
HENRY
LEE, SIGNED ROUGHLY 25% OF ALL
PETITIONS.
THIS WAS THE FIRST DRIFT
FROM THE RCW INTENT.
SURE, I WRITE THE CHECK FROM
OPUS PROPERTIES LLC TO
THE BIA. THE SOURCE OF THOSE
FUNDS COME FROM MY OPERATIONAL
BUSINESSES.
DO NOT BE FOOLED BY THETHE
RATE PAYER.
THIS IS A NUANCE.
FOLLOW THE MONEY.
THE SOURCE OF FUNDING FOR THE
BIA COMES FROM THE HARD
WORKING BLUE COLLAR JOB
CREATING INDUSTRIAL TENANTS.
THIS IS THE SECOND DRIFT.
INDUSTRIAL TENANTS ARE
ALREADY RESPONSIBLE FOR
MAINTAINING THEIR PROPERTIES.
ANY OF THE BIAs CLEANING EFFORTS
ARE THE EQUIVALENT OF OFFERING
A
PENNY OF SERVICE FOR EVERY
DOLLAR COLLECTED.
IT'S IMPORTANT NOT TO
CONFUSE
VISIBILITY WITH VALUE. DO NOT BE
FOOLED.
THIS IS THE THIRD DRIFT.
THE SOTO BIA RENTS ITS
OFFICE SPACE IN A BUILDING OWNED
BY BY
AMERICAN LIFE. SAME OWNERSHIP
GROUP
THAT SIGNED 25% OF THE FORMATION
PETITION.
THIS IS A TROUBLING FACT.
THE OPTICS ARE UNDENIABLE.
CONFLICT OF INTEREST AND
SELF-DEALING.
THIS IS THE FOURTH DRIFT I FOUND
USING THE KING
COUNTY TAX ASSESSOR WEBSITE ON
TUESDAY.
ON
WEDNESDAY, YESTERDAY, I READ THE
SOTO
BIA WEBSITE. THE SOTO BIA STAFF
IS
DIFFERENT FROM NEIGHBORING BIAs.
EMPLOYEES COME FROM
BACKGROUNDS IN PUBLIC POLICY,
REAL ESTATE,
URBAN PLANNING, GOVERNANCE
AND EVEN CITY COUNCIL
INTERNSHIPS.
THESE ARE PEDIGREES ALIGN WITH
RESHAPING
DEVELOPMENT, INFLUENCING ZONING
AND SUPPORTING LARGE- SCALE
PROPERTY
INTERESTS. THIS IS A STRIKING
DEPARTURE FROM THE BIA MODEL
ENVISIONED
IN THE
RCW. THIS IS A FIFTH DRIFT.
REPORTING ON BIA'S NATIONWIDE
IS NOW EMERGING.
ONCE FORMED, THEY
OFTEN BECOME MORE ALIGNED WITH
CITY DEPARTMENTS AND MAJOR
PROPERTY
OWNERS.
I AM NOT ASSIGNING MOTIVE.
I'M IDENTIFYING GOVERNANCE
PATTERN.
A BIA CANNOT REPRESENT TWO
MASTERS.
I KNOW THIS DRIFT FIRSTHAND.
FOR THE PAST SEVEN YEARS, I HAVE
BEEN INVESTIGATING
LONGSTANDING ISSUES IN THE
INDUSTRIAL ZONE.
THESE ISSUES ARE COMPLEX AND
HISTORICALLY ROOTED.
WHEN I BROUGHT THESE FINDINGS
FORWARD TO DEVELOPED
OWN PROPERTY HOLDERS AND THE
BIA, I WAS MET WITH VIRTUAL
SILENCE.
WHAT I UNCOVERED IS
EXTREMELY SERIOUS AND AFFECTS A
SPECIFIC GROUP OF INDUSTRIAL
STAKEHOLDERS WHO HAVE BEEN LEFT
OUT IN
THE COLD WITHOUT ADVOCACY.
THIS IS THE SIXTH DRIFT.
THE
INDUSTRIAL COMMUNITY IS UNITED
ON THIS FRONT.
THE SOTO BIA DOES NOT NEED TO
BE FIXED OR
AMENDED. IT NEEDS TO BE
DISBANDED.
THE ISSUES RAISED HERE FALLS
UNDER -- FALLS INTO
AREAS TYPICALLY REVIEWED BY
OVERSIGHT BODIES SUCH AS THE
STATE
AUDITOR AND THE ATTORNEY
GENERAL.
I'M NOT HERE TO ESCALATE THIS.
I'M HERE TO ASK THIS COUNCIL TO
ADDRESS IT FIRST.
THIS ESTABLISHMENT IS
THE CLEANEST AND MOST
APPROPRIATE REMEDY UNDER OUR RCW
35.87A.180.
I WANT TO LEAVE EACH COUNCIL
MEMBER WITH A PACKET.
INDUSTRIAL LAND IS ONE OF
SEATTLE'S MOST FRAGILE AND
ABLE ASSETS.
REPORTING SHOCKED EVERYONE
WHEN IT REVEALED THE INDUSTRIAL
ZONEZONE FINANCIALLY
OUTPERFORMED
ALL OTHER DISTRICTS
IN SEATTLE. THIS MAY HAVE PUT A
TARGET
ON OUR BACKS.
MY INVESTIGATION REVEALED NEARLY
20% HAVE LEFT THE AREA PRE-
COVID DUE TO WHAT CAN NOW BE
ASSERTED AS A POLICY THAT
CONTRADICTED
LEGISLATION PASSED BY
ORDINANCE FROM THIS BODY IN 1910
AND 1979.
A POLICY THAT WAS IMPLEMENTED
AND ENFORCED BY CITY OFFICIALS
BEGINNING IN 2008.
THIS IS WHAT HAS KNEECAPPED
US FOR NEARLY TWO DECADES AND
LEFT
US VULNERABLE.
THE INDUSTRIAL ZONE
COMMUNITY NEEDS YOUR HELP SO IT
CAN
BEGIN TO RECOVER.
WE MAY HAVE BEEN PULLED
TO THE
BLINK. LEFT ALEAN ONE WE WILL
RESPOND IN TURN.
IN÷÷ TIME TO GET THE INDUSTRIAL
ZONE BACK ON TRACK.
THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU.
>> OUR NEXT PERSON IS LEEANN.
>> HI.
I'M A TENANT AND BUSINESSOWNER
IN
SOTO. WE HAVE BEEN HERE SINCE
2010.
I DO NOT BELIEVE I HAVE
ANY DIRECT BENEFIT FROM THE SOTO
BIA. WE REACHED OUT TO THEM
FOR DIFFERENT PROBLEMS GOING ON.
WE HANDLED THEM ON OUR OWN.
BY IGNORING IT AND LET THE
CHAOS BUILD BEHIND OUR BUSINESS
FOR THE PAST TEN YEARS.
I THINK THAT'S IT.
ANY OTHER TIME I WILL GIVE TO
JODY.
>> OUR NEXT SPEAKER IS RYANRYAN
WASOWICZ.
>> THANK YOU FOR COMING IN.
>> COUNCIL MEMBERS, SEATTLE IS
IN A MOMENT OF POLITICAL AND
CIVIC REALIGNMENT.
A MOMENT WHEN PEOPLE ACROSS
THE CITY ARE ASKING
FOR TRANSPARENCY.
ACCOUNTABILITY AND
PUBLIC PROCESSES THAT SERVE
COMMUNITIES, RATHER THAN SPECIAL
INTERESTS.
WHEN IT'S GOVERNED
BY STRUCTURES THAT DRIFT AWAY
FROM THEIR
INTENDED PURPOSE OR KNEECAPPED
BY BAD POLICY, PEOPLE NOTICE.
THEY CARE, AND THEY EXPECT
THEIR ELECTED LEADERS TO PROTECT
WHAT
MAKES
THIS CITY WORK. I'M ASKING YOU
TO RESTORE
THE
INDUSTRIAL ZONE TO ITS INTENDED
ROLE, TO ENSURE ITS VERNANCE
REFLECTS WHO OPERATES HERE AND
SEATTLE SPORTS THE INTEGRITY
OF
THE LAND USE SYSTEM.
DISESTABLISHING THE SOTO
BIA IS THE FIRST STEP.
WE CAN REBUILD THE
INDUSTRIAL ZONE FROM THE GROUND
UP BY
HARD WORKING INDIVIDUAL, BY
REMOVING GOVERNMENT INTERFERE
ANSWER
GOVERNMENT
INTERFERENCE. THANK YOU.
>> THAT'S ALL OF OUR IN- PERSON
SPEAKS. WE WILL MOVE TO REMOTE
SPEAKERS.
TWO REGISTERED.
BUT ONLY ONE PRESENT.
THE CURRENT PRESENT SPEAKER IS
DAVID HAINES.
>> THANK YOU. DAVID INES.
PART OF THE PROBLEM WE ARE
DEALING WITH IS FROM THE ABUSE
OF THE KING COUNTY PROPERTY
ASSESSOR.
JOHN WILSON AND HIS
UNRELENTING STALKING AND
OPPRESSIVE ABUSE OF
THE WORKING CLASS AND
THE PROPERTY VALUES THAT HAVE
BEEN
DEVALUED ON THE WORKING CLASS
SIDE OF IT.
IT'S CHEATED THIS WHOLE
COMMUNITY. NOBODY ON CITY
COUNCIL MADE
AN EFFORT TO KICK OUT JOHN
WILSON.
HE IS PART OF THE PROBLEM
I THINK FROM
2022 AND 2024 THAT BROUGHT US
HERE TODAY.
I'M SERIOUS, THERE'S A
JUSTIFIED REASON TO RENEGOTIATE
A LOT OF
THE DOUBLE, TRIPLE, QUADRUPLE
REMORTGAGE DEBT THAT WON'T LET
A SMALL BUSINESS THRIVE
BECAUSE THEY HAVE THE DEBT
SERVICE PROPERTY VALUE TO GET
KICKED
OUT OF WORKING CLASS VALUE.
WE'RE SUPPOSED TO HAVE A TRUE
DEMOCRACY THAT DISCIPLINES GREED
SO IT BENEFITS.
PARSING OUT FAVORS THAT
ORIGINATE FROM SOMEBODY LIKE
JOHN WILSON WAS REVOLTING.
I WISH THE COUNCIL WOULD REALIZE
BECAUSE WE HAVE AN END
ROUND FINANCIAL SYSTEM AND A
TRUE
DEMOCRACY, YOU CAN USE
LEGISLATION TO RENEGOTIATE
THE PROPERTY VALUES AND HELP
PEOPLE THAT THE BANK SHOULD BE
WILLING TO SO WE CAN STIMULATE
AND BEGIN
THE 21st CENTURY HOUSING
BUILDOUT.
JOHN WILSON AND HIS
PERSONAL LIFE THAT'S BEEN
ALLOWED
TO CONTINUE TO ABUSE THE WHOLE
OF
KING COUNTY WITH HIS RED
PREDATORY
OF PROPERTY VALUE, SHAKING
PEOPLE DOWN. YOU LOOK AT THE
REAL
ESTATE THAT ARE UNSUSTAINABLE
FOR A SMALL
BUSINESS, SHORT CHANGE
COMPANIES, WE HAVE TO
RENEGOTIATE THE RATES ON THE
PROPERTY ASSESSOR.
GET RID OF PEOPLE LIKE
JOHN WILSON
THAT YOU NEVER SHOULD HAVE
ALLOWED TO CONTINUE --
>> DAVID HAINES, I WANT TO SAY I
APPRECIATE YOU KEYING INTO
IMPORTANT ISSUES.
THE BREADTH OF YOUR COMMENT IS
EXTRAORDINARY.
I WILL NOTE THAT OFTEN WHEN
WE HAVE BALLOT MEASURES TO THROW
ON
THE BALLOT, I DO OFTEN -- I
REMARK ON -- I CAUTION
COUNCIL TO BE AWARE OF THE FACT
THAT
WE ARE PUTTING BEFORE
THE VOTERS
MEASURE THAT WILL INCREASE
TAXES.
THE ASSESSOR, HE OFTEN PRESENTS
A PIE CHART THAT
SHOWS EVERYTHING THAT WE ARE
APPROVING OR THAT VOTERS
APPROVE.
SO, THEREFORE, I THINK THAT
MAYBE THIS CALLS FOR PERHAPS
BETTER EDUCATION TO THE VOTING
PUBLIC ABOUT NOT JUST
THE INCREMENTAL INCREASE WHEN WE
ARE INCREASING OR -- USUALLY
DOUBLING OR TRIPLING A
BALLOT MEASURE -- LEVEE LIFT
INSTEAD
OF TALKING ABOUT INCREMENT,
TALK ABOUT THE TOTAL PRICE OF
THAT
MEASURE FOR HOMEOWNERS.
THEY CAN SEE THE BIG PICTURE A
LITTLE BIT MORE CLEARLY.
IS THAT THE LAST SPEAKER?
>> THAT'S OUR LAST SPEAKER.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
[ INAUDIBLE ]
YOU ARE WELCOME TO GIVE COMMENT.
>> OUR NEXT IN- PERSON SPEAKER
IS
KELSEY LEAVING.
>> HI.
I OWN AND OPERATE A BUSINESS
CALLED LAWLESS FORGE IN SOTO.
THE LETTER MY NEIGHBORS AND
I RECEIVED FROM THIS SOTO BIA
SHOWS THE CITY IS
PROPOSING MASSIVE ASSESSED VALUE
INCREASES, OFTEN 50% TO 100% ON
A HANDFUL OF
INSTITUTIONAL INVESTOR
TRANSACTIONS THAT DO NOT
REFLECT THE MARKET FOR LOCALLY
OWNED INDUSTRIAL BUILDINGS.
THESE ARE
NOT SPECULATIVE INVIFTMENT
SALES.
THESE ARE WORKING
WAREHOUSES, MANUFACTURING SPACES
AND SMALL
BUSINESSES, FACILITIES
THAT GENERATE FAMILY WAGE JOBS
AND
SALES TAX REVENUE FOR CITY.
A SUDDEN TAX INCREASE OF THIS
MAGNITUDE WILL FORCE RENT
HIKES, LAYOFFS OR CLOSURES, THE
OPPOSITE OF WHAT THE CITY SAYS
IT WANTS IN SOTO.
THE ASSESSOR'S GUIDELINES
SAY IT SHOULD REFLECT THE
HIGHEST AND
BEST USE ONLY IF IT'S
REASONABLY
PROBABLE, NOT SPECULATIVE.
TURNING WORKING
INDUSTRIAL BUILDING NOODZ
THEORETICAL FUTURE APARTMENTS OR
TECH CAM
PULSES IS NOT REASONABLY
PROBABLE IN THE NEAR-TERM. I
URGE THE COUNCIL TO DIRECT
THE ASSESSOR TO SEPARATE LOCALLY
OWNED÷÷ OCCUPIED
INDUSTRIAL PROPERTIES FROM
INSTITUTIONAL INVESTMENT SALES
WHEN SETTING
2025 VALUES.
SUPPORT LEGISLATION THAT PHASES
INCREASES OVER
SEVERAL YEARS SO SMALL
BUSINESSES ARE NOT CRUSHED
OVERNIGHT.
WE ARE
NOT ASKING FOR SPECIAL
TREATMENT, JUST FAIR TREATMENT.
TIME TO ADJUST.
THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
>> THAT'S OUR LAST IN-PERSON OR
REMOTE SPEAKER.
>> ALL RIGHT.
PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD IS NOW
CLOSED.
PERHAPS WE WILL
RECEIVE INFORMATION THAT PUTS
OUR --
PUTS THE COMMENTS IN CONTEXT.
SINCE THIS BILL HAD A PUBLIC
HEARING TODAY, WE MUST
SUSPEND THE RULES IN ORDER TO
VOTE
IT OUT OF COMMITTEE ON THE SAME
DAY.
IF THERE'S NO OBJECTION,
THE RULES WILL BE SUSPENDED TO
ALLOW
FOR A VOTE
ON THE SAME DAY AS THE PUBLIC
HEARING.
SEEING NO OBJECTION, RULES ARE
SUSPENDED.
I MOVE THE COMMITTEE
RECOMMEND PASSAGE OF 121073.
IS THERE A
SECOND.
>> SECOND.
>> IT'S BEEN MOVED AND
SECONDED TO RECOMMEND PASSAGE
OF COUNCIL BILL 121073.
ALL RIGHT.
I MOVE TO AMEND COUNCIL BILL
121073 AS PRESENTED ON AMENDMENT
ONE. IS THERE A SECOND?
>> SECOND.
>>
IT'S BEEN MOVE AND SECONDED TO
AMEND THE BILL AS PRESENTED
ON AMENDMENT 1.
JASMINE, WOULD YOU PROVIDE AN
OVERVIEW OF THE AMENDMENT
THEN AS SPONSOR I WILL ADDRESS
IT.
>> SPEAK TO THE
AMENDMENT ONLY, NOT THE BILL
OVERALL?
>>
WHATEVER YOU THINK WOULD BE
EASIEST.
>> WHY DON'T I GIVE
CONTEXT ABOUT THE BILL.
THEN I WILL END WITH THE
AMENDMENT.
>> TO PUT SOME CONTEXT
HERE TO THE DISCUSSION, THE
COUNCIL BILL
121073
WAS DEVELOPED AT THE REQUEST OF
THE SOTO BIA BASED
ON THEIR EXPERIENCE OVER THE
LAST FEW YEARS ADMINISTERING THE
BIA. IT'S INTENDED TO STREAMLINE
SOTO BIA OPERATIONS AND
MAINTAIN CONSISTENT SERVICES IN
THE
FACE
OF POTENTIALLY CHANGING
OWNERSHIP OF PROPERTIES.
THE CURRENT RATES AREARE ON
A PROPERTY'S TAXABLE VALUE,
WHICH
MEANS TAX EXEMPT PROPERTIES
ARE
EXEMPTED FROM THE ASSESSMENT
RATE.
NON- PROFIT
PROPERTIES AND CERTAIN
GOVERNMENT PROPERTIES ARE
ASSESSED DIFFERENTLY.
THE BILL WOULD CHANGE THE
BASIS OF ASSESSMENTS FROM
TOTAL TAXABLE VALUE TO TOTAL
APPRAISED VALUE SO THAT THOSE
TAX-
EXEMPT PROMPTS COULD BE BROUGHT
IN, PARTICULARLY PROPERTIES
OWNED
BY
NON-PROFITS AND CERTAIN
GOVERNMENT-OWNED PROPERTIES.
IT'S POSSIBLE -- NOT
ALL GOVERNMENT PROPERTIES WILL
BE TAXED OR WILL BE ASSESSED.
THE BILL PROVIDES FOR AN
ADDITIONAL PROCESS -- STAKE
HOLDER PROCESS OVER THE NEXT
FEW MONTHS TO HAVE
MORE CONVERSATIONS WITH
DIFFERENT GOVERNMENTAL ENTITIES
TO
ASSESS WHETHER THERE NEEDS TO BE
AN
ASSESSMENT OF THOSE PROPERTIES
AND WHETHER --
WHAT THE APPROPRIATE ASSESSMENT
WOULD
BE BASED ON
THE BENEFITS THAT THOSE
PROPERTIES WOULD RECEIVE.
STAKEHOLDER PROCESS
IS EXPECTED TO BE COMPLETED BY
JULY
1st.
COUNCIL IS EXPECTED TO RECEIVE A
PROPOSAL FOR
POTENTIALLY ADDITIONAL
ASSESSMENTS
FOR
GOVERNMENT-OWNED PROPERTIES AT
THAT TIME.
FINALLY, THE BILL WOULD ALSO
ESTABLISH A FIXED
CUTOFF DATE FOR PULLING
ASSESSMENT DATA
BY
WHICH THE ASSESSMENT IS BASED
ON.
THAT CHANGE IS REQUESTED BY THE
SOTO BIA BECAUSE THERE HAVE
BEEN DELAYS IN THE KING COUNTY
ASSESSOR'S ASSESSMENTS. THE
DATA RELEASE.
IT CREATED ADMINISTRATION
BURDEN FOR THE BIA.
BY ESTABLISHING A FIXED DATE
BY WHICH ASSESSMENT DATA IS
PULLED, THERE WOULD
MITIGATE THE NEED FOR BACK
BILLING OR GOING BACK
TO THE PROPERTY OWNERS.
THAT BRINGS US TO THE TECHNICAL
AMENDMENT, WHICH IS
BECAUSE THIS BILL WOULD GO INTO
AFFECT AFTER
THE BEGINNING OF THE YEAR AND
FAS IS BILLING NOW SOTO
PROPERTY OWNERS, THE TECHNICAL
AMENDMENT WOULD HAVE THE BILL GO
INTO
AFFECT IN THE MIDDLE OF 2026 SO
THAT THE FIRST
BILLING INSTALLMENT OF 2026 IS
NOT
IMPACTED.
IT WOULDN'T
NECESSARILY CONFUSE RATE PAYERS.
THE TECHNICAL AMENDMENT
ALLOWS FOR FAS AS WELL TO ADJUST
ITS
BILLING PROCESSES AND
TO IMPLEMENT THE NEW
ASSESSMENT
FORMULA FOR THE SECOND BILLING
INSTALLMENT.
THAT'S IN A
NUTSHELL THE BILL AS WELL AS THE
AMENDMENT BEFORE
YOU.
>> THANK YOU FOR EXPLAINING
THAT. YOU ALLUDED TO THIS, BUT I
WANT
TO MAKE CLEAR.
ERIN, YOU WILL PROBABLY SPELL
IT OUT IN A WAY THAT MAKES
SENSE EVEN MORE.
WHAT'S HAPPENING IN SOTO --
THERE'S A LOT OF CHANGE GOING
ON IN SOTO.
FOR ONE EXAMPLE, WE HAVE
TRANSIT AND LIGHT RAIL.
PURCHASING THE PROPERTY BY
A GOVERNMENT AGENCY, SOUND
TRANSIT, MEANS IT IS --
THEY MIGHT HAVE BEEN USING A
PROPERTY FOR OPERATIONS, THAT
THEN BECAUSE IT'S UNDER THE
PURE
VIEW OF A GOVERNMENT AGENCY,
THAT
PIECE OF PROPERTY STILL
RECEIVES THE BENEFITS, THE
CLEANING,
SECURITY, EVERYTHING ELSE,
BUT THEY ARE NOT PAYING INTO THE
POT
TO IMPLEMENT THOSE SERVICE
PROVISIONS.
THAT'S MY BASIC UNDERSTANDING
OF
WHY THIS IS VERY NEEDED
BECAUSE THE CHANGE FROM PRIVATE
TO PUBLIC USE OF A PROPERTY
AND ULTIMATELY EVENTUALLY
OWNERSHIP.
COULD
YOU PLEASE THEN -- THAT'S WHAT
I THINK IS HAPPENING.
WHAT THAT HAS DONE IS IT
DEPRIVED THE BIA OF
ESSENTIAL FUNDS TO CONTINUE ITS
WORK TO BENEFIT THE
NEIGHBORHOOD.
ERIN, AS THE -- I SHOULD
NOTE THAT THIS LEGISLATION WAS
-- IS
THE PRODUCT OF
COLLABORATION BETWEEN THE
DIRECTOR OF THE SOTO
BIA AND CENTRAL STAFF, FAS
AND INFORMED
BY THE OFFICE OF ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT.
>> CORRECT.
GOOD AFTERNOON.
SOME OF THIS WILL BE A
REPEAT OF THE PRESENTATION I
GAVE IN
SEPTEMBER.
WE DO HAVE A NEW COUNCIL
MEMBER. I DID HAVE THE
OPPORTUNITY
TO BRIEF COUNCIL MEMBER
LYNN
YESTERDAY. I WILL ADDRESS SOME
OF THE
COMMENTS
MADE, BECAUSE I THINK IT'S
REALLY IMPORTANTIMPORTANT
UNDERSTAND THAT THIS
AMENDMENT IMPACTS SEVEN
PROPERTIES.
ACTUALLY, DUE TO THE DECREASE
IN PROPERTY VALUES FROM 2025 TO
2026, MOST PROPERTY OWNERS WILL
ACTUALLY SEE A DECREASE DECREASE
THEIR OVERALL ASSESSMENT IN
THEIR
JULY
BILLING FROM THEIR JANUARY
BILLING.
WE ARE TALKING SLIGHT, BUT
THEY WILL SEE A DECREASE.
WE HAD SEVERAL CALLS TO OUR
OFFICE, PEOPLE WANTING TO
UNDERSTAND. WHEN WE EXPLAINED IT
TO
THEM, MOST PEOPLE WERE VERY
SUPPORTIVE.
I KNOW SEVERAL OF YOU GOT
LETTERS.
I WILL FOLLOW UP WITH JODY.
I HAVE KNOWN HER FOR MANY YEARS.
I WILL START. SOTO BIA, I'M
ERIN GOODMAN,
I'M THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR.
I'VE BEEN THE DIRECTOR SINCE
2014. AS YOU MENTIONED, COUNCIL
PRESIDENT, THE BIA IS
A COLLABORATIVE MECHANISM
THAT ALLOWED PROPERTY OWNERS
TO INVEST IN PROJECTS AND
SERVICES THAT ENHANCE THE SOTO
DISTRICT, CREATE A BETTER
ENVIRONMENT FOR
EMPLOYEES, TENANTS,
CUSTOMERS AND VISITORS.
BASICALLY, THIS IS A WAY TO
EQUITABLE BRING MONEY BACK INTO
A NEIGHBORHOOD THAT
THROUGH THIS VEHICLE TO ENHANCE
THE
NEIGHBORHOOD FOR THE BENEFIT OF
ALL.
I'M GOING TO GO OFF MY
SCRIPT FOR A SECOND TO ADDRESS
ONE OF THE TOPICS.
FOR THE PAST TEN YEARS, WE HAVE
BEEN A STRONG ADVOCATE FOR
THE INDUSTRIAL BUSINESSES IN OUR
NEIGHBORHOOD, FOR FREIGHT, FOR
FREIGHT MOVEMENT.
AS MANY OF YOU WILL KNOW, THERE
WAS A TOPICAL IN
SOTO IN THESE CHAMBERS EARLIER
THIS YEAR.
WE WERE NOT HERE.
WE WERE NEUTRAL.
THAT WAS SUCH AN IMPORTANT ISSUE
THAT WE KNEW THAT WE COULD NOT
TAKE A SIDE FOR EITHER SIDE.
WE ARE -- OUR ORIGINAL
AUTHORIZING
ORDINANCE REQUIRE WE REPRESENT
THE BUSINESSES IN SOTO
TODAY.
SO THAT IS WHAT WE DO.
IT'S REALLY OUR NORTH STAR.
SO AS MOST OF THOSE
BUSINESSES CONTINUE TO
BE INDUSTRIAL, THAT IS WHAT WE
ADVOCATE FOR.
SO I
THINK THAT'S A REALLY IMPORTANT
STATEMENT TO MAKE.
AS WE GO THROUGH AND TALK ABOUT
THINGS, THAT IS A LOT OF WHAT
WE ARE ADVOCATING FOR.
WHAT DO WE DO?
WE FOCUS ON IMPROVING
TRANSPORTATION, PUBLIC
SAFETY, MAINTAINING A CLEAN
AND WELCOMING ENVIRONMENT,
ENHANCE -- IN THE ENHANCED
SERVICES, IT GOES BEYOND
WHAT SEATTLE PROVIDES AND
PROVIDE
A BENEFIT TO THE GOVERNMENT
ENTITIES, PROPERTY
OWNERS, TENANTS AND EMPLOYEES IN
THE DISTRICT AS WELL AS OF
THE HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS
OF VISITORS TO ITS COMMERCIAL ,
INDUSTRIAL,
SPORTS AND ENTERTAINMENT VENUES.
OUR CLEAN TEAM REMOVED OVER 600
TONS OF DEBRIS FROM CITY
STREETS.
WE HAVE PROVIDED OVER
3,500 SUPPLEMENTAL PATROL HOURS.
THEY HAVE DONE 295 BLOCKS
OF PRESSURE WASHING.
WE OPENED THE PARK, WHICH IS
A SMALL PART OF OUR GREEN SPACE
PLAN, WHICH WAS SPECIFICALLY
A GREEN SPACE PLAN DESIGNED FOR
AN
INDUSTRIAL AREA.
THE CONCEPT THAT SOTO
IS INDUSTRIAL AND HOW CAN YOU
HAVE GREEN SPACE IN AN
INDUSTRIAL
AREA?
WE CONSISTENTLY DO OUTREACH TO
OUR BUSINESSES.
WE SEE BUSINESSES
CONTINUALLY COME AND GO.
SO ONE OF THE THINGS
THAT IS IMPORTANT TO US IS TO DO
LITERAL BOOTS ON THE GROUND
OUTREACH.
WE DO EVENTS WHERE WE --
WE DON'T DO EVENTS FOR EXTERNAL
PARTNERS.
IT'S NOT COME
TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
IT'S EVENTS FOR OUR PEOPLE.
WE HAVE HAD OVER 400 PEOPLE
COME TO OUR EVENTS.
WE REALLY TRY TO MAKE SURE
THAT WE DO DIFFERENT TYPES OF
EVENTS.
WE HAVE LEARNED OVER THE
YEARS THAT DIFFERENT TYPES OF
EVENTS ATTRACT DIFFERENT PEOPLE.
WE HAVE NETWORKING
EVENTS, SAFETY FOCUSED VENTS.
EARLY IN MY TENURE, WE DID
OSHA
CERTIFICATE IF I
CERTIFICATION ON TO SAFELY PICK
UP NEEDLES. WE HAVE PARTNERED
WITH PUBLIC --
KING COUNTY PUBLIC HEALTH TO
HOST RAD
ACADEMY. WE HAVE DONE A SERIES
OF
DEESCALATION TRAININGS.
WE WORKED WITH A COMPANY
CALLED
RESTORE THAT HELPS
PROPERTY OWNERS RESEARCH OLD
INSURANCE POLICIES THAT MIGHT
HAVE
BEEN IN EFFECT ON A PROPERTY TO
HELP
FUND ENVIRONMENTAL CLEANUP ON
THAT PROPERTY.
WE TRY TO FIND DIFFERENT WAYS
TO ENGAGE.
WE DO STILL SEE DIFFERENT
BUSINESSES AND DIFFERENT
FOLKS
COMING TO DIFFERENT KINDS OF
EVENTS.
HOWEVER, AS YOU ALLUDED TO,
SEVERAL FACTORS ARE PUTTING
OUR ABILITY
TO SUSTAIN THESE SERVICES AT
RISK.
WE ARE SEEK THIS AMENDMENT
TO STREAMLINE OPERATIONS,
RESOLVE THE ONGOING BILLING
CHALLENGES AND ALIGN OUR
ASSESSMENT PRACTICES WITH THOSE
OF OTHER
BIAs IN SEATTLE.
REALLY TO PROMOTE GREATER
EQUITY AMONG ALL OF OUR RATE
PAYERS.
AS YOU MENTIONED, THE AMENDMENT
IS IN TWO PARTS.
THE FIRST WOULD TRANSITION
OUR ASSESSMENT FROM TAXABLE
VALUE
TO TOTAL APPRAISED VALUE.
THIS WOULD ADDRESS THE LACK
OF AN ESCALATION CAUSE FOR
THOSE PROPERTIES THAT ARE
GOVERNMENT OWNED BY COMMERCIALLY
TENANTED. THERE ARE FOUR
PROPERTIES IN
SOTO.
COMMERCIALLY OWNED, WITH A
COMMERCIAL BUSINESS IN IT.
THERE'S COMMERCIALLY OWNED
WITH A GOVERNMENT TENANT IN IT.
THERE'S GOVERNMENT OWNED WITH
A COMMERCIAL BUSINESS IN IT.
GOVERNMENT OWNED WITH SOME
VERSION OF GOVERNMENT IN IT.
ALL THREE OF THESE PAY INTO THE
BIA.
IT IS ONLY THIS ONE THAT
DOESN'T.
WHEN WE WENT -- WE DID
NOT ORIGINALLY ASSESS GOVERNMENT
OWNED WITH A COMMERCIAL
BUSINESS.
WHEN WE WENT INTO THE RENEWAL
IN 2018, OFFICE OF
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT FELT VERY
STRONGLY THAT GOVERNMENT OWNED
PROPERTIES WITH A COMMERCIAL
TENANT WERE
RECEIVING BENEFIT AND THAT THEY
SHOULD PAY.
SO WE WORKED WITH THEM TO
COME UP WITH A LOT SQUARE FOOT
RATE THAT WAS COMPARABLE TO A
VERY
SIMILAR COMMERCIALLY OWNED
PROPERTY.
HOWEVER, WHEN WE GOT TO
THE FIRST RENEWAL RATE, WE
REALIZED
THAT THERE WAS NO ESCALATION
CLAUSE. THERE WAS NOTHING THAT
MOVED THAT UP OVER TIME.
A CPI INDEX OR COST.
WHAT HAS HAPPENED IS YEAR OVER
YEAR, THIS HAS CREATED A
WIDENING DISPARITY BETWEEN
THESE TWO COMPARABLE PROPERTIES.
THIS AMENDMENT WOULD ENSURE THAT
PROPERTIES ARE
ASSESSED CONSISTENTLY AND
EQUITABLE.
AGAIN, WHETHER WE N WE RENEWED
IN
2018, WE DIDN'T HAVE TAX EMPT
NON- PROFIT PROPERTIES.
THERE WAS NO NEED TO ADDRESS
THEM. SINCE THEN, TWO NON-
PROFITS ORGANIZATIONS HAVE
EITHER
OPENED OR ACQUIRED PROPERTY THAT
THEY
PREVIOUSLY LEASED.
IN 2025, BOTH PROPERTIES
WERE RETROACTIVELY DESIGNATED AS
TAX EXEMPT BY THE ASSESSOR'S
OFFICE
WHICH REQUIRED FAS TO ISSUE
REFUNDS FOR SEVERAL YEARS OF
ASSESSMENTS, PREVIOUSLY
COLLECTED UNDER THEIR TAXABLE
STATUS.
BOTH NON- PROFITS
ARE ACTIVELY ENGAGED WITH THE
SOTO BIA.
WE ACTIVELY PARTNER WITH
THEM TO SUPPORT THEIR
OPERATIONS.
ONE OF THE ORGANIZATIONS HAS HAD
A SEAT ON OUR BOARD FOR THE PAST
SEVEN YEARS.
ADOPTING THE TOTAL APPRAISED
VALUE ASSESSMENT FORMULA
WOULD PROVIDE A FAIR AND
CONSISTENT METHOD FOR INCLUDING
THESE
NON- PROFIT PROPERTIES IN THE
ASSESSMENT FRAMEWORK.
IT WOULD ALLOW THE BIA
TO RECOGNIZE THE VALUE THAT
THESE ORGANIZATIONS RECEIVE FROM
BIA
SERVICES WHILE ENSURING ALL
RATE PAYERS CONTRIBUTE EQUITABLE
TO
THE HEALTH AND VITALITY OF THE
DISTRICT.
OUR AUTHORIZING
ORDINANCE REQUIRES THE BIA TO
UPDATE ITS
ASSESSMENT LIST EVERY TWO
YEARS USING THE DATA FROM KING
COUNTY.
HOWEVER, IN BOTH 2022 AND
2024, SIGNIFICANT DELAYS IN THE
ASSESSOR'S DATA RELEASE
FORCED THE BIA TO BILL BASED ON
INCOMPLETE INFORMATION.
RESULTING IN -- TO BE
CLEAR, IT'S A CONVOLUTED
PROCESS.
WE COMPILE THE LIST FROM
KING COUNTY DATA.
THEN WE GIVE IT TO FAS.
FAS IS THE ONE THAT
ACTUALLY SENDS OUT THE BILLS.
RESULTING IN THE NEED FOR FAS TO
BACK BILL OR ISSUE
REFUNDS TO CORRECT
UNDERASSESSMENT.
THEY OBSERVE FLUCTUATION IN
THE PROPERTY VALUE IN A GIVEN
TAX
YEAR, AFTER ASSESSMENT
INVOICING HAS BEEN SENT, WHICH
IS ALSO RESULTED IN THE NEED
TO BACK BILL OR ISSUE REFUNDS.
TO ADDRESS THIS, ANOTHER PART OF
THIS AMENDMENT IS PROPOSING
ADDING LANGUAGE TO ESTABLISH A
FIXED CAPTURE DATE FOR EACH OF
UPDATE YEAR.
THAT WE WOULD PULL
THE ASSESSMENT DATA
ON THAT DATE AND THEN THE VALUES
RECORDED ON
THAT DATE WOULD SERVE AS THE
BASIS FOR THE FOLLOWING BILLING
YEAR, REGARDLESS OF ANY
SUBSEQUENT
CHANGES.
THEREFORE, WE WOULD PICK UP
ANY NEW VALUATION CHANGE ON THAT
DATE THE NEXT YEAR INSTEAD
OF HAVING
TO MAKE ADJUSTMENTS THROUGHOUT
THE YEAR.
THIS WOULD REDUCE ADMINISTRATIVE
COMPLEXITY, PREVENT
UNEXPECTED CHARGES TO PROPERTY
OWNERS,
AND CREATE GREATER
PREDICTABILITY
AND FAIRNESS IN THE
ASSESSMENT PROCESS FOR BOTH THE
BIA AND ITS RATE PAYERS.
THESE CHANGES ARE THE NECESSARY
FIRST STEP.
MORE STILL NEEDS TO BE
DONE TO ENSURE THE SOTO BIA
WILL CONTINUE TO SERVE THE
SOTO COMMUNITY FOR YEARS TO
COME.
THE SECOND PART OF THE
AMENDMENT DIRECTS THE CITY'S
OFFICE
OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT TO STUDY
--
TO CONDUCT
A STUDY OF THE REMAINING ISSUES
AND
DETERMINE THE APPROPRIATE
NEXT STEPS. THOSE ISSUES ARE AS
FOLLOWS.
EXCEPT FOR THE FEW THAT ARE
COMMERCIALLY TENANT, WHEN
A PROPERTY IS SOLD TO A
GOVERNMENT ENTITY, WHETHER IT'S
INTENDED USE IS FOR ACTUAL
GOVERNMENT SERVICES OR
NOT, IT IS NO LONGER ASSESSABLE.
SINCE 2019, GOVERNMENT PURCHASES
OF PREVIOUSLY COMMERCIALLY OWNED
PROPERTIES HAVE
REMOVED ROUGHLY $15,000 FROM THE
SOTO BIA'S
BUDGET. THE PACE OF THESE
PURCHASES HAS
INCREASED.
IN JUST THE PAST COUPLE OF
MONTHS, TWO FORMERLY RATE
PAYING PROPERTIES WERE PURCHASED
BY GOVERNMENT ENTITIES,
RESULTING
IN AN ADDITIONAL LOSS OF
$9,000 TO OUR ANNUAL ASSESSMENT.
WHILE THIS IS NOT A MASSIVE
SUM, IT IS SIGNIFICANT TO OUR
BUDGET.
FURTHER PLANNED MEGA
PROJECTS OVER THE NEXT TEN YEARS
WILL
EXPONENTIALLY INCREASE THE
RATE OF GOVERNMENT PURCHASE
IN PROPERTIES IN SOTO.
ADDITIONALLY, WHILE GOVERNMENT
OWNED, GOVERNMENT
TENANT PROPERTIES WILL REMAIN
EXEMPT UNDER THE AMENDMENT
BEFORE YOU,
MANY OF THESE PROPERTIES STILL
RECEIVE THE BENEFIT OF
BIA SERVICES LIKE PRESSURE
WASHING, GARBAGE REMOVAL, ET
CETERA, WHICH UNDERMINES BOTH
FAIRNESS
TO THEIR NEIGHBORS AND THE
SOTO COMMUNITY AND OUR
SUSTAINABILITY.
THE STUDY WILL LOOK AT THE
PROPERTIES AND BEEN FITS
THEY RECEIVE TOTO
SOLUTIONS TO ADDRESS THIS
INEQUITY,
CREATING A MORE
CONSISTENT FRAMEWORK WOULD
ENSURE
ALL PROPERTIES THAT BENEFIT FROM
BIA SERVICES CONTRIBUTE FAIRLY
REGARD LESS OF OWNERSHIP STATUS.
I LOOK FORWARD TO WORKING
WITH THEM AND RETURNING TO
THIS CHAMBER IN JULY WITH
ADDITIONAL
REFINEMENTS THAT FURTHER
PROMOTE EQUITY AMONG ALL SOTO
PROPERTIES, MAINTAIN
ESSENTIAL SERVICES AND SUPPORT
THE SUSTAINABILITY OF THE
SOTO BIA. THANK YOU.
I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY
QUESTIONS.
>> DO MY COLLEAGUES HAVE ANY
QUESTIONS?
GO AHEAD.
>> I WAS CURIOUS, WE HAVE OED
REPRESENTED.
MR. RODGERS.
IS THERE ANYTHING YOU WANT TO
ADD?
I NOTICED IN READING THE
CENTRAL STAFF MEMO AND OTHERS,
OED
FEATURES IN THIS.
I THOUGHT I WOULD GIVE TO SPEAK.
>> THANK YOU.
>> TAKING MY VICE CHAIR
PREROGATIVE THERE.
>> I APPRECIATE THAT.
I THINK EVERYTHING HAS BEEN
COVERED.
THIS WAS MORE LED
BY JASMINE. WE COLLABORATED
WITHLER ON THIS.
I THINK EVERYTHING WAS COVERED
FROM MY PERSPECTIVE.
I APPRECIATE
THAT.
>> DOES YOUR WORK -- TO GO TO --
DOES YOUR WORK THEN, THE
OUTREACH AND SO FORTH IN
TERMS OF THE QUESTIONS OR THE
ISSUES PRESENTED
TO WORK THROUGH THOSE?
>> YEAH.
SPECIFICALLY, THERE'S A PIECE
IN THIS
LEGISLATION THAT WILL DIRECT US
AS OED TO CONVENE
A GROUP AND RESEARCH THE
GOVERNMENT ASSESSMENTS, CONTINUE
RESEARCHING THE
GOVERNMENT ASSESSMENTS ISSUE, IF
YOU
WILL AND THEN COME BACK
HERE NEXT -- I BELIEVE IT'S JULY
1st.
AS PART OF THIS LEGISLATION,
THAT IS WHAT WE ARE TASKED WITH.
>> I WILL FURTHER -- I
THINK IT'S IMPORTANT -- THE
QUESTION OF HOW DIFFERENT BIAs
ARE --
THE DIFFERENCES AND UNIFORMITY
OF
BIAs THAT SEEMED TO COME UP AS A
POINT OR A QUESTION, READING
THE MEMO AGAIN AND/OR THE
PRESENTATION AND POINTED S
RAISED IN TERMS OF UNIFORMITY
ACROSS THE CITY.
CAN YOU SPEAK TO THAT?
>> ARE YOU REFERRING TO -- I
THINK WITH THIS
SPECIFICALLY, IT'S ALIGNING THE
TOTAL TAXABLE
VALUE VERSUS THE TOTAL
ASSESSED VALUE WITH OUR STANDARD
PRACTICE WITH THE OTHER BIA
ASSESSMENTS.
THAT'S WHAT THIS --
>> WE'RE THE ONLY ONE THAT
USES TOTAL TAXABLE VALUE.
THE OTHERS USE TOTAL APPRAISED,
IF THEY USE VALUE.
SOME USE
BNO. SOME USE NIGHT ROOMS.
THAT
DECISION WAS MADE BEFORE I WAS
AT THE BIA.
>> THE BIAs
ACROSS THE CITY, THERE'S
VARIATION BETWEEN THE
TTV AND --
>> THE OTHERS ASSESS ON VALUE
ALL USE TAV.
IF THEY USE VALUE.
SOME USE BNO.
SOME USE TOTAL NIGHT STAYS.
IF THEY USE VALUE --
>> IT'S A MIXED BAG?
THERE'S NO UNIFORMITY ON THAT
FRONT?
OKAY.
>> EACH BIA HAS A UNIQUE
ASSESSMENT FORMULA.
THE REFERENCE TO THE
VALUE, WE'RE CHANGING TO ALIGN
WITH THE OTHER BIAs
THAT ASSESS BASED ON THE VALUE
OF THE PROPERTY.
>> THE LAST THING I WOULD
SAY, JUST TO SUM UP IS, I HAVE
LOT OF
INTERACTION WITH A LOT OF
BIAs, A LOT OF TIMES THROUGH
PUBLIC
SAFETY CONSIDERATIONS.
SOTO WITH
MISS GOODMAN BUT IN THE OTHER
DISTRICTS.
I'M THINKING ABOUT MR.
BLANKNEY.
ACROSS THE BOARD, THERE'S
THE DSA.
I RECOGNIZE THE WORK.
I ALSO RECOGNIZE
GARBAGE PICKUP OR THE PUBLIC
SAFETY PIECES.
THESE ARE
REALLY FUNCTIONS OF CITY HALL.
I THINK WE SHOULD APPRECIATE
THE FACT THAT WE DO HAVE THIS
AUGMENTATION, IF YOU WILL,
OF ESSENTIALLY GOVERNMENT
SERVICES. THESE ARE BEING DONE
BY THE
BIA, WHICH IS TO THE BETTERMENT
OF THE AREAS.
I KNOW THIS FROM
THE PUBLIC SAFETY PERSPECTIVE.
I THINK THAT'S SOMETHING THAT
SHOULD BE ACKNOWLEDGED.
IT'S
HINTED AT OR JUST WALKED PAST
SOMETIMES.
ESSENTIALLY, GOVERNMENT
SERVICES OR TRADITIONALLY
GOVERNMENT
SERVICE
SERVICES ARE NOT GETTING THE
COMPLETE JOB DONE.
THIS IS WHERE THE BIAs --
IT'S NOT JUST BIAs.
IT'S OTHER GROUPS, TOO.
THE COMMUNITY COUNCILS
IN DISTRICT 7, WE HAVE A STRONG
COMMUNITY
COUNCIL SYSTEM. THE WORK THAT
THEY DO.
UPTOWN ALLIANCE WITH THE TIDY
UPTOWN GROUP, A SUBSET, THAT
DOES SIMILAR WORK.
IT'S NOT A BIA BUT
IT DOES A SIMILAR FUNCTION.
A FUNCTION ONE WOULD CONSIDER A
GOVERNMENT --
ESSENTIAL
GOVERNMENT, IF YOU WILL,
SERVICE.
I JUST WANTED TO ACKNOWLEDGE
THAT.
I THINK THAT'S SOMETHING --
THIS IS MY WAY -- I DID THIS IN
OUR PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE WHEN
WE
UPDATED THE PROCESS OF
UPDATING OUR MISSION VISION,
STRATEGIC
FRAMEWORK PLAN.
IN THERE AS PART OF THE
VISION IS TO GET TO A POINT
WHERE BUSINESSES
DON'T HAVE TO HAVE PRIVATE
SECURITY.
I SAID THEN AND I SAY EVERY
TIME I MEET A BUSINESS THAT DOES
HAVE PRIVATE SECURITY, THANK YOU
FOR THE SERVICE THAT YOU
ARE
PROVIDING. IT HELPS WITH THAT
COMMUNITY, THAT NEIGHBORHOOD.
ALONG SIMILAR LINES, I
WANT TO THANK NOT JUST THE SOTO
BIA FOR
ALL THE WORK WHEN IT
IMPROVES THE COMMUNITY AND
NEIGHBORHOODS
IN WHICH
THEY OPERATE. THANK YOU, COUNCIL
PRESIDENT.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
TO THAT POINT, BIAs
ARE DESCRIBED AS
PROVIDING
SUPPLEMENTAL SERVICES. BUT OFTEN
I SAY THEY
ARE ESSENTIAL WHEN YOU THINK
ABOUT WHAT THEY DO AND WHAT
WOULD
HAPPEN IF THEY WEREN'T THERE.
WE DO HAVE FIVE MORE ITEMS
ON THE AGENDA.
IT SEEMED LIKE YOU WERE ABOUT TO
SAY SOMETHING.
COULD YOU CLARIFY?
>> YES.
I WOULD SAY, THERE ARE 11 BIAs.
THERE ARE 11 DIFFERENT WAYS
IN WHICH PROPERTIES ARE
ASSESSED.
I THINK MORE THAN THE TAXABLE
VALUE VERSUS APPRAISED
VALUE, ONE OF THE MOST RELEVANT
ISSUESISSUES CONSIDERATION WITH
SOTO
AND THIS BILL IS HOW
OUROUR PROPERTIES ASSESS.
EACH OF THE GOVERNMENT --
DIFFERENT BIAs HAVE
DIFFERENT WAYS OF ASSESSING
GOVERNMENT
PROPERTIES.
IT'S A CASE -- ALMOST A CASE
BY CASE ANALYSIS OF HOW MUCH
THEY
BENEFIT FROM THE BIA SERVICES.
NEEDING TO BE CAREFUL
ABOUT ASSESSING BASED ON THE
BENEFIT
THAT THEY RECEIVE.
THAT'S WHY THAT SIX- MONTH
PERIOD
WHERE OED CAN DO A DEEP DIVE IS
VERY IMPORTANT TO
ASSESS GOVERNMENT
PROPERTIES APPROPRIATELY LIKE
THEY ARE
IN DIFFERENT BIAs.
EACH IS DIFFERENT IN TERMS
OF
HOW THEY TREAT GOVERNMENT
PROPERTIES.
>> UNDERSTOOD.
ANYTHING ELSE YOU WANT TO ADD TO
THAT?
OKAY.
YOU CAN IDENTIFY FOR THE
VIEWING PUBLIC, WHERE IS
THE AMENDMENT
THAT WE ARE SPEAKING TO RIGHT
NOW?
GO AHEAD.
>> I BELIEVE YOU MOVED
FOR AMENDMENT ONE TO BE
CONSIDERED.
>> YES.
>> SO THAT IS A TECHNICAL
AMENDMENT THAT ALLOWS FOR THE
EFFECTIVE DATE OF THE CHANGES TO
BE IN MID 2026 TO ALLOW FOR
FAS TO ADJUST ITS BILLING CYCLE
AND
TO SORT OF MAKE THINGS EASIER.
>> ORIGINALLY, WE WERE
DOING THIS IN ONE FELL SWOOP.
THEN IT WAS DECIDED IT WAS
TOO MUCH IN ONE PIECE OF
LEGISLATION. WE HAVE TO MAKE
SURE THAT WE
ARE ADDRESSING THE FIRST SIX
MONTHS OR SO OF THE NEW YEAR AND
MAKING
SURE THAT THEY -- THERE IS AN
OPERATING BUDGET.
THE STUDY WILL PROCEED
HOPEFULLY SOONER RATHER THAN
LATER T.
WOULD BE GREAT IF IT COULD
GET UP AND GOING THIS YEAR.
WE DON'T WANT TO SHOCK THE
GOVERNMENT GOVERNMENT AGENCIES
THAT ARE
ON THE HOOK FOR THE NEW
ASSESSMENT.
WE DON'T WANT TO CONTINUE
TO DEPRIVE THE BIA WITH
FUNDS THAT
EVERYBODY IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD
DEPENDS ON.
DID YOU HAVE A FURTHER QUESTION?
>> I DON'T HAVE A
QUESTION, COUNCIL PRESIDENT.
SINCE WE ARE ABOUT TO TAKE THIS
VOTE, I THINK, THAT I WANT
TO THANK ERIN GOODMAN AND OED
AND JASMINE FROM OUR SIN CENTRAL
STAFF FOR PRESENTING
THIS. IN GENERAL, I HAVE
BEEN SUPPORTIVE OF THE BIA IN
PART BECAUSE OF WHAT OUR
COLLEAGUE COUNCIL MEMBER KETTLE
JUST SAID.
THEY ARE TAKING UP WORK THAT
THE CITY WOULD OTHERWISE BE
DOING REALLY IN TRUTH.
THIS IS NOT -- THE BENEFIT IS
BACK TO COMMUNITY.
IT'S JUST THAT, YOU KNOW,
THERE ARE MORE NEEDS OF THE --
ALL THAT THEY CLEAN UP AND
EVEN FOLKS THAT FIND THEMSELVES
IN THE AREA AND -- YOU KNOW,
DON AND HIS TEAM DOES A GREAT
JOB
CONNECTING OUR
UNHOUSED POPULATIONS WITH
SERVICES.
IT SPANS THE GAMUT ON PROVIDING
ASSISTANCE TO THE
BUSINESSES THERE AND AT THE SAME
TIME
PROVIDING A COMMUNITY- WIDE
ASSISTANCE.
THAT'S WHAT THE MONEY IS USED
FOR.
IT GOES
BACK TO COMMUNITY IN THAT WAY.
I AM SUPPORTIVE OF BIAs IN
GENERAL. IT SOUNDS LIKE IN THIS
CASE,
WE ARE TREATING BIAs THAT
ARE SIMILARLY SITUATED
DIFFERENTLY, IF YOU WILL, IN ITS
ASSESSMENT.
IT SOUNDS LIKE USES OF PROPERTY
HAVE CHANGED THAT
WOULD NECESSITATE US UPDATING
THIS LEGISLATION IN ESSENCE,
WHICH
IS WHAT WE ARE DOING.
THAT ALL MAKES SENSE TO ME.
THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU.
IF THERE AREN'T ANY
FURTHER COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS, I
WILL
GO AHEAD AND CALL FOR THETHE
VOTE ON
THIS. I MOVED EVERYTHING THAT I
WAS SUPPOSED TO MOVE, I BELIEVE.
THERE ARE NO MORE QUESTIONS
OR COMMENTS BEFORE
I DO TAKE THE
VOTE. THANK YOU SO MUCH CASEY
AND
YOUR WHOLE OED TEAM.
THANK YOU FOR JASMINE
FOR RESPONDING TO THIS VERY
UNIQUE
NEED AND ALSO
THANK YOU VERY MUCH, ERIN, FOR
REALLY
ADVOCATING, CHAMPIONING
AND MOBILIZING FOR
YOUR MEMBERS. YOU DIDN'T HAVE TO
DO THIS.
THEY WERE ABOUT TO SUFFER
REALLY HIGH, HIGH, HIGH RATES
BECAUSE
THERE WERE PROPERTIES TAKEN
OFF THE REVENUE MARKET, LET'S
JUST
SAY.
SO THANKS FOR PUSHING IT. I
APPRECIATE IT.
IS THERE
ANY FURTHER BUSINESS? GO AHEAD.
WE ARE GOING TO CALL THE VOTE ON
THE AMENDMENT, PLEASE.
[ ROLL CALL ]
>> FIVE IN FAVOR, NONE OPPOSED.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THE
MOTION CARRIES.
AMENDMENT IS ADOPTED.
ARE THERE FURTHER QUESTIONS ON
THE AMENDED BILL?
SEEING NONE, WILL THE
CLERK PLEASE CALL THE ROLL ON
THE PASSAGE OF
THE AMENDED BILL. [ ROLL CALL ]
>> FIVE IN FAVOR, NONE
OPPOSED.
>> THE MOTION CARRIES.
THE COMMITTEE
RECOMMENDATION THAT THE BILL
PASS AS
AMENDED WILL BE SENT TO CITY
COUNCIL.
THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR TIME.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
SEE YOU NEXT WEEK MAYBE, MAYBE
NOT.
WILL THE CLERK READ ITEMS
THREE AND FOUR INTO THE RECORD.
>> 121141, RELATING TO
CITY EMPLOYMENT
EXEMPTION POSITIONS FROM THE
CIVIL SERVICE
POSITIONS, RETURNING POSITIONS,
AND COUNCIL BILL 121142,
RELATED TO CITY EMPLOYMENT
IN ESTABLISHING
DEFERRED COMPENSATION ANALYST
TITLE SERIES AND CORRESPONDING
RATES OF PAY FOR CITY OF
SEATTLE RETIREMENT SYSTEM.
BOTH ARE FOR BRIEFING,
DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE VOTE.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
I WANT TO THANK YOU
FOR ENTERTAINING THESE IN
COMMITTEE.
HISTORICALLY WE HAVE HR BILLS
SKIP COMMITTEE.
MANY WARRANT DISCUSSION
AND CONSIDERATION FOR THE
PUBLIC.
SOMETHING ONLY A
COMMITTEE MEETING CAN PROVIDE.
THAT SAID, BECAUSE OUR NEXT
FULL COUNCIL MEETING IS PACKED,
THIS HELPS EVERYONE SO YOU
DON'T
HAVE TO DO THE HOMEWORK AND THEN
ASK QUESTIONS WHETHER IT'S
BEFORE US
AT FULL COUNCIL.
THAT'S WHY WE'RE DOING IT
TODAY.
THESE ARE FAIRLY PRO
FORMA, PROCEDURAL.
PLEASE INTRODUCE YOURSELF. YOU
MAY PROCEED.
>> AMANDA ALL EN WITH CENTRAL
STAFF.
I WILL WHACK ALK YOU THROUGH
DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES
PIECES OF LEGISLATION.
THERE ARE TWO PIECES OF
LEGISLATION FOR YOUR
CONSIDERATION.
THE FIRST CREATES A
NEW CLASSIFICATION SERIES.
THE OTHER CHANGES THE
CIVIL SERVICE STATUS OF A
HANDFUL OF POSITIONS.
WE WILL START OUT WITHWITH
DEFERRED COMPENSATION PIECEPIECE
LEGISLATION.
I'M TRYING TO
FIGURE OUT HOW TO SHARE THIS A
LITTLE MORE TO THE
REST OF YOU.
PERFECT.
THE REASON WHY
SDHR IS SENDING OVER THIS
LEGISLATION IS
BECAUSE THEY ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR
MANAGING OVERALL
CLASSIFICATION AND COMPENSATION
STRUCTURES FOR
THE CITY. ANY CHANGES HAVE TO BE
ADOPTED
BY COUNCIL.
IN 2025, THE
DEFERRED COMPENSATION
UNIT THAT WAS WITHIN SDHR WAS
MOVED OVER TO
THE SEATTLE CITY EMPLOYEES
RETIREMENT SYSTEM DEPARTMENT.
THE CLASSIFICATION OF TWO OF
THOSE POSITIONS THAT WERE
MOVED OVER IS A CLASSIFICATION
THAT MAY ONLY BE USED WITHIN
SDHR.
AS A RESULT OF THESE
POSITIONS BEING MOVED OVER
OUTSIDE OF
SDLR, A NEW CLASSIFICATION IS
NEEDED.
THE NEW CLASSIFICATION, MORE
TIGHTLY IS DEFINED TO
DEFERRED COMPENSATION, HUMAN
SERVICES.
HUMAN RESOURCE SERVICES.
THAT BEING SAID, THE NEW PAY
STRUCTURE IS A MIRROR OF WHAT --
OF THE CLASSIFICATION THAT
THEY HAD HAD WITHIN SDHR.
THEY USED TO BE PERSONNEL
ANALYST.
THE IDEA IS THAT THEY
WILL BECOME DEFERRED
COMPENSATION
ANALYSTS AND RECEIVE THE SAME
PAY.
UNLESS THERE ARE ANY QUESTIONS
ON THAT, THAT'S ALL I HAVE TO
SAY ABOUT
THAT CREATION OF THE NEW
CLASSIFICATION SERIES.
>> COLLEAGUES, IS THERE ANY
QUESTIONS AS VICE CHAIR?
NOW CHAIR COMES BACK.
>> IT WAS MY IMPRESSION YOU
WERE GOING TO DISCUSS BOTH
TOGETHER
AND THEN WE WERE GOING TO VOTE.
>> I CAN DO THAT.
>> SEPARATELY
BUT AT THE END.
>> PERFECT.
>> THANK YOU.
>> YES, LET'S HAVE BOTH BRIEFED.
WITH OUR CLERK, WE CAN HAVE THEM
VOTED SEPARATELY, OF COURSE.
>> THE SECOND ORDINANCE IS AN
ORDINANCE TO ADJUST THE CIVIL
SERVICE STATUS
OF FIVE POSITIONS WITHIN THE
CITY.
INCLUDING OVERSIGHT OF
CLASSIFICATION AND
COMPENSATION, THERE'S ALSO
CIVIL SERVICE
STATUS POSITIONS IN THE
CITY HOLD EXEMPT, EXEMPT FROM
THE CIVIL
SERVICE RULES OR NON-EXEMPT
STATUS.
ANY TIME A POSITION BECOMES
EXEMPT, IT MUST BE DECIDED OR
APPROVED BY CITY COUNCIL.
THE CIVIL SERVICE RULES
DICTATE THAT THERE MUST BE A
COMPETITIVE PROCESS FOR HIRING
RATHER THAN
BEING APPOINTED. THEY ALSO
DICTATE HOW
EMPLOYEES ARE
DISCIPLINED AND THE PROCESS FOR
PERSONNEL ACTIONS.
EXEMPTIONS MAKE IT SO THAT
THE APPOINTING AUTHORITY HAS
MORE
DISCRETION.
THERE ARE CERTAIN CRITERIA FOR
WHEN A POSITION MAY BECOME
EXEMPT.
USUALLY, IT HAS TO DO IN
LARGE PART ABOUT HAVING A
CONFIDENTIAL RELATIONSHIP WITH
APPOINTING
AUTHORITY, HAVING A
LARGE DEGREE OF FIDUCIARY
RESPONSIBILITY,
ALSO BEING
INVOLVED IN POLITICAL
CONSIDERATIONS.
WE WOULDN'T HAVE A
PAINTER, FOR EXAMPLE, WHO WOULD
BE EXEMPT.
BUT YOU WOULD --
YOU MIGHT HAVE A MANAGER OR
SOMEONE WHO REPORTS
TO A DIRECTOR BEING EXEMPT.
THE VERY FIRST
CHANGES ARE WITHIN SDHR.
THEY HAD A STRATEGIC ADVISOR
3 GENERAL GOVERNMENT, MOVE OVER
TO EXEMPT STATUS AS A MANAGER 3.
THOSE PAY ZONES ARE IDENTICAL.
THERE'S NO FISCAL IMPACT.
IT DOES CHANGE THE TYPES
OF RESPONSIBILITIES FOR WHICH
THIS
POSITION CAN BE RESPONSIBLE.
FOUR POSITIONS
THAT ARE RETURNING TO CIVIL
SERVICE.
THIS SPAN THE CITY ATTORNEY'S
OFFICE, ANOTHER POSITION WITH
SDHR AND TWO POSITIONS WITHIN
CITY LIGHT.
DUE TO RECLASSIFICATION AND JOB
CHANGES, AGAIN, POSITIONS
THAT HAD
BEEN EXEMPT WILL GO BACK TO
CIVIL SERVICE.
WHEN THINKING ABOUT THESE
CHANGES, THERE IS AN
UNDERLYING FINANCIAL
IMPLICATION.
MORE DUE TO THE
RECLASSIFICATION AND
LESS TO DO WITH THE CIVIL
SERVICE STATUS.
THE OVERALL -- IF YOU LOOK
AT THE MIDPOINTS OF THE
CLASSIFICATIONS, AND
COMPARING THE OLD CLASSIFICATION
TO
THE NEW ONE, THE CITY ON THE
WHOLE
PROBABLY WILL HAVE ABOUT A
$50,000 SAVINGS.
ANY SAVINGS THAT DEPARTMENTS
ACHIEVED, THEY ARE EXPECTED
TO RETAIN THOSE AND REDEPLOY
THEM
TO HIRE
USES. THIS
DOESN'T COME WITH ANY FINANCIAL
IMPACT DIRECTLY.
I THINK THAT'S IT.
QUESTIONS?
>> ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS?
BACK IN THE DAY, WE USED TO DO
THIS KIND OF LEGISLATION.
EARLY ON, I INSISTED THAT WE
WORK IT THROUGH
COMMITTEE BECAUSE SOMETIMES THE
VERY MINOR
FINANCIAL CHANGES THAT THESE
RECLASSIFICATIONS WOULD AFFECT
EFFECTUATE WOULD ADD UP.
IT'S OUR DUTY TO MAKE SURE WE
ARE OVERSEEING HOW OUR MONEY IS
SPENT.
THAT'S WHY IT'S IN COMMITTEE.
IF THERE ARE NO FURTHER
QUESTIONS, LET'S CALL THE ROLL
ON ITEMS 5 AND 6 SEPARATELY.
GO AHEAD.
PARDON ME?
LET'S SEE HERE.
ITEMS -- NO.
WE ARE GOING AHEAD --
EXCUSE ME, CLERK.
121141.
NO FINAL QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS.
WILL THE CLERK CALL THE ROLL.
[ ROLL CALL ]
>> FIVE IN FAVOR, NONE OPPOSED.
>> THANK
YOU. THE MOTION CARRIES.
THE BILL WITH THE
COMMITTEE'S
RECOMMENDATION WILL BE SENT TO
THE CITY COUNCIL.
WE WILL VOTE ON ITEM FOUR,
I MOVE THE COMMITTEE
RECOMMEND BILL
121142.
>> SECOND.
>> THANK YOU. IT'S BEEN MOVED
AND SECONDED.
FURTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS?
SEEING NONE, CLERK, WOULD
YOU PLEASE CALL THE ROLL.
>> [ ROLL CALL ]
>> FIVE IN FAVOR, NONE OPPOSED.
>> THE BILL PASSES.
THE CHAIR WILL SIGN IT.
THE FINAL VOTE WILL COME
BEFORE FULL COUNCIL NEXT
WEEK. I WANT TO SAY, AMANDA,
THANK
YOU FOR WORKING THIS SO QUICKLY
AND
EFFICIENTLY.
USUALLY, HR WOULD BE HERE TO DO
THE PRESENTATION BY THEMSELVES.
THEY ARE BUSY
WITH TRANSITION. I APPRECIATE
YOU STEPPING UP.
IT'S GREAT TO HAVE YOU AS PART
OF THE DEPARTMENT.
THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU.
>> ALL RIGHT.
FINALLY, LET'S MOVE ON TO
THE LAST COUPLE ITEMS, WHICH ARE
APPOINTMENTS, FIVE AND SIX.
PLEASE
READ INTO THE RECORD.
>> FIVE AND SIX, APPOINTMENT
3107 AND 3108 APPOINTMENT
OF THOMAS J. KELLY AND LISA
REIGER AS MEMBERS OF THE JOINT
APPRENTICESHIP PROGRAM.
>> WE DO NOT HAVE
THE APPOINTMENT LIAISON WITH US
TODAY. THEY SENT ME NOTES TO
READ
ABOUT MR. KELLY AND MS.
REIGER ABOUT THEIR
QUALIFICATIONS.
TOM HAS WORKED AT THE
CITY FOR 28 YEARS ASAS MECHANIC.
HE HAS ON THE JATC FOR TEN
YEARS.
A YOUTH VOLUNTEER FOR 25 YEARS.
USAA SOFTBALL UMPIRE
FOR 15 YEARS.
LISA HAS WORKED FOR THE CITY OF
SEATTLE FOR 4. 5 YEARS AS THE
FLEET MANAGEMENT DEPUTY
DIRECTOR.
COMING TO THE CITY AFTER A
30- YEAR CAREER.
IN ADDITION TO THE JATC,
SHE IS AN SORY COMMITTEE
MEMBER FOR
SEATTLE SKILLS. SHE'S A RESS
RESIDENT OF SEATTLE.
WE RECEIVED THEIR PACKETS.
IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, I
WOULD REALLY IT IF YOU
COULD MAYBE ASK THEM TO BE
ANSWERED
OFFLINE TO
THE STAFF THAT OVERSEE THIS
COMMITTEE.
I DON'T HEAR ANY --
I DON'T HEAR
ANY QUESTIONS. WE
WILL VOTE ON BOTH OF THE
APPOINTMENTS TOGETHER.
I MOVE THE COMMITTEE RECOMMEND
CONFIRMATION OF APPOINTMENTS
3107 AND 3108.
IS THERE A SECOND?
>> SECOND.
>> IT'S BEEN MOVED AND
SECONDED.
ANY FINAL COMMENTS?
HEARING NONE, WILL THE CLERK
PLEASE CALL THE ROLL.
[ ROLL CALL ]
>> FIVE IN FAVOR, NONE OPPOSED.
>> THE APPOINTMENTS WITH THE
COMMITTEE'S RECOMMENDATION WILL
BE SENT TO THE CITY COUNCIL.
FINALLY, ITEM SEVEN.
>> APPOINTMENT 3437,
REAPPOINTMENT OF
JONATHAN SKIMMER AS A MEMBER OF
THE SEATTLE ETHICS AND
ELECTIONS COMMITTEE FOR A TERM
TO
DECEMBER 31st, 2028 FOR
BRIEFING, DISCUSSION AND
POSSIBLE VOTE.
>> OKAY.
THIS IS AN APPOINTMENT TO THE
SEATTLE ETHICS AND ELECTIONS
COMMISSION. THIS IS AN EXTREMELY
IMPORTANT
COMMISSION. THE SEEC MAKE
DECISIONS
ON ANY -- THEY OVERSEE ALL
ELECTIONS. THEY ARE THE ONES
THAT DECIDE
WHETHER OR NOT THERE WAS A
VIOLATION OF
S REGULATIONS BY A CAMPAIGN.
THEY ENFORCE THE WHISTLE-BLOWER
LAW AND THE LOBBY LAW.
THEY HAVE A LOT OF POWER.
THEY ALSO RECOMMEND THE
DIRECTOR OF THE -- THEY
RECOMMEND --
THEY ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR
CHOOSING THEIR
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, WHO IS NOW
WAYNE BARNETT.
THIS IS A VERY IMPORTANT
POSITION. HAS EVERYTHING TO DO
WITH
ENSURING THAT
WE ABIDE BY OUR CODE OF ETHICS.
BY WAY OF DESCRIPTION, JONATHAN
IS A CONSTRUCTION LAWYER WITH
LANE POWELL IN SEATTLE.
A GRADUATE OF SEATTLE
UNIVERSITY LAW SCHOOL AND A
GRADUATE
FROM MONTANA
STATE UNIVERSITY WITH A DEGREE
IN POLITICAL SCIENCE.
HE HAS EXPERIENCE IN
FEDERAL CONTRACTING ISSUES AT
THE U.S.
COURT OF FEDERAL CLAIMS AND
HIGH STAKES BID PROTEST ACTIONS
AT
THE GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY
OFFICE. HE ADVISES BIDDERS AND
PUBLIC OWNERS ON PROCUREMENT
ISSUES.
HE IS THE VICE CHAIR OF THE
SEEC AND HAS BEEN A MEMBER OF
THE
COMMISSION SINCE 2024.
I DID THE RESEARCH AND
ASKED AROUND AND I WAS ONE OF
THE ONES -- I RECOMMENDED HIM --
I NOMINATED HIM AND THEN
OVERSAW HIS CONFIRMATION LAST
YEAR.
CLEARLY, I AM IN SUPPORT OF HIS
CONTINUED PARTICIPATION ON THE
SEEC.
I INVITE ANY QUESTIONS OR
CONCERNS.
ALL RIGHT.
HEARING NONE, I MOVE THAT
THE COMMITTEE RECOMMEND
CONFIRMATION OF APPOINTMENT
3437. IS THERE A SECOND?
>> SECOND.
>> IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED
TO RECOMMEND CONFIRMATION
OF APPOINTMENT 3437.
ANY FURTHER COMMENTS?
SEEING NONE, CLERK, PLEASE
CALL
THE ROLL. [ ROLL CALLED ]
>> FIVE IN FAVOR, NONE OPPOSED.
>> THE MOTION CARRIES.
THE APPOINTMENT WITH THE
COMMITTEE'S RECOMMENDATION WILL
BE SENT TO CITY COUNCIL.
DUE TO THE TIMING OF TODAY'S
MEETING, I AM GOING TO
REQUEST THE RULES BE SUSPENDED
TO
SEND THE AGENDA ITEMS ONE
THROUGH SEVEN ON TO THE DECEMBER
16th
CITY COUNCIL MEETING BECAUSE
IT'S OUR LAST OF THE YEAR.
IF THERE'S NO OBJECTION, THE
COUNCIL RULES WILL BE SUSPENDED
TO SEND AGENDA ITEMS 1 THROUGH
7
TO THE DECEMBER 16 CITY COUNCIL
MEETING.
HEARING NO OBJECTION,
THE RULES ARE SUSPENDED.
THE AGENDA ITEMS WILL BE SENT TO
THE DECEMBER 16th CITY COUNCIL
MEETING.
I WILL FINALLY SAY THAT,
REMINDER THAT ITEM
8 WAS REMOVED FROM THE AGENDA.
THAT CONCLUDES OUR BUSINESS.
I HAVE SOME OTHER BUSINESS.
I JUST WANTED TO REMIND
PEOPLE, FINISH MY LIST OF
THE EXTRAORDINARY THINGS
THAT WE WERE ABLE
TO ACCOMPLISH. EVERY NOW AND
THEN WE HAVE TO
CONGRATULATE OURSELVES FOR THE
WORK WE DO.
SOMETIMES WE TAKE A LOT OF HEAT.
SOMETIMES WE DON'T GET A LOT OF
APPRECIATION. IT'S TO YOU THAT
I EXPRESS
MY APPRECIATION FOR GETTING
THESE
THINGS DONE.
I'M SCROLLING BACK UP TO THE TOP
OF MY SCREEN HERE.
I LEFT OFF WITH TALKING
ABOUT THE TOP OF 2025.
WE DON'T HAVE TO RE- VISIT HOW
FUN THE STADIUM FUNDING WAS.
THAT WAS ADDRESSING WHAT
HAS BECOME OVER THE COURSE OF
THE PAST YEAR I WOULD SAY THE
ISSUE OF THE YEAR IF "TIME" DID
A
VERSION ON THAT.
I WOULD SAY AFFORDABILITY IS
AT THE TOP.
THIS WAS -- THAT LEGISLATION WAS
BACKED BY LABOR.
THE STADIUM AUTHORITIES,
THE NEIGHBORHOOD, THE CID AND
THE HOUSING -- AFFORDABLE
HOUSING COMMUNITY TO ADDRESS THE
SHRINKING AMOUNT OF HOUSING
AND ALSO COMMERCIAL SPACES
AVAILABLE FOR LOW- INCOME PEOPLE
IN
SEATTLESEATTLE AND SMALL
BUSINESSES.
IT
ALLOWS FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF
HOUSING IN THE
STADIUM DISTRICT AND IT WOULD
PROVIDE FOR SMALLER WORKER
SPACES.
LEGISLATION PASSED ON MARCH 16.
CHALLENGE PLAYING
OUT ON APPEAL.
I WANT TO THANK
MY COLLEAGUES FOR GOING THROUGH
THAT KIND OF
HELLISH PROCESS THAT WENT ON
FOR A LONG TIME WITH STRONG
FEELINGS. I WANTED TO ALSO NOTE
THATTHAT --
I TALKED ABOUT THE MUSIC
VENUE PARKING PROGRAM.
THEN WE LAUNCHED, EVERYBODY,
WE LAUNCHED PERMITTING REFORM
PROCESS ON FEBRUARY 13th WHEN
WE HAD A ROUNDTABLE DISCUSSION
WITH ARCHITECTS WHO POINTED OUT
HOW CERTAIN PROBLEMS IN OUR
PERMITTING NIGHTMARE SITUATION
WERE HURTING SMALL BUSINESSES
AND A MAJOR
HASSLE. THAT ENDED UP RESULTING
IN
A COUPLE OF BILLS THAT
REALLY DID -- THAT WILL AND ARE
MAKING A DIFFERENCE.
I HOPE THAT WORK CONTINUES.
KIOSK GOT A MINOR HONORABLE
MENTION. THAT HAPPENED IN MAY
AND JUNE.
THAT WAS A MULTI-
YEAR PROCESS. I THINK IT WILL BE
AN ASSESS FOR
DOWNTOWN, WE WILL HAVE CROWDS OF
PEOPLE THAT NEED TO KNOW WHERE
THEY ARE GOING.
IT PROVIDES INFORMATION THAT
WILL HELP OUR SMALL BUSINESSES.
FINALLY, THE
LAST THING I WILL MENTION IS WE
PUT RECOVERY AT
THE CENTER OF THE CITY'S
AGENDA WHEN WE
UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED REVOLUTION
32174 WHICH STAKED
A CLAIM OF 25% OF WHAT
WE ANTICIPATED TO BE AN INCREASE
TO THE SALES TAX THAT
WAS AUTHORIZED BY THE
LEGISLATURE
THIS PAST SESSION.
IN FACT, THE MAYOR SENT IT DOWN
WITH THE BUDGET
LEGISLATION. THERE IS $2.85
MILLION IN
THE BUDGET FOR RECOVERY
SERVICES, RECOVERY HOUSING AND
REALLY
THIS IS -- I WON'T SAY IT
AGAIN.
THIS IS AN IMPORTANT POLICY
AREA THAT NEEDS EVEN MORE WORK
ON IT.
I HOPE THAT THE PEOPLE THAT
ARE -- THE STEWARDS OF
HUMAN SERVICE DEPARTMENT WILL
RECOGNIZE THIS IS AN IMPORTANT
RESOURCE FOR THEM TO SPEND
TO HELP THE PEOPLE THAT WE
SEE STRUGGLING ON OUR STREETS.
WITH THAT, THANK YOU,
COLLEAGUES, VERY MUCH.
YOU STUCK
WITH ME. WE DID SOME HARD
THINGS.
THERE WAS A WIDE VARIETY OF
POLICY AREAS WE TOOK ON.
IT TAKES A COMMITTEE OF DEVOTED
PUBLIC SERVANTS.
I WANT TO SAY THANK YOU SO
MUCH FOR YOUR SUPPORT AND HARD
WORK
ALL YEAR. THANK YOU, ERIK, FOR
MANNING THE
DESK. IT CAN GET HAIRY THERE
SOMETIMES.
I RECOGNIZE AND YOUR DIM GENS
DILIGENCE MAKING SURE EVERYTHING
WAS READY.
SHOUT OUT TO STEVEN WHO HAD TO
DO THAT JOB AND ALSO JEREMY, MY
CHIEF OF STAFF, WHO KEEPS THE
WHOLE THING RUNNING BEHIND THE
SCENES.
COULDN'T DO IT WITHOUT YOU
GUYS.
I WILL HAVE MORE THANK YOUS
LATER.
IF THERE'S NO FURTHER BUSINESS
TO COME BEFORE US, IT IS 4:18.
THIS MEETING IS ADJOURNED. THANK
YOU.