GOOD AFTERNOON. IT HAS MAY 29,
2025 . SPECIAL LAND-USE
COMMITTEE WILL COME TO ORDER. IT
IS TO:07 P.M. I AM MARK SOLOMON,
CHAIR OF THE LAND USE COMMITTEE.
WILL THE CLERK PLEASE CALL THE
ROLL?
>> COMMISSIONER STRAUSS,
COUNCILMEMBER MOORE ,
COUNCILMEMBER RINCK,
COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA . CHAIR
SOLOMON. FOUR MEMBERS PRESENT.
>> THANK YOU. IF THERE IS NO
OBJECTION, THE AGENDA WILL BE
ADOPTED. HEARING NO OBJECTION,
THE AGENDA IS ADOPTED. THANK YOU
VERY MUCH, EVERYONE, FOR COMING
TO THIS THURSDAY AFTERNOON
MEETING TO DISCUSS LAND USE. AS
ALWAYS, THANK YOU TO CITY STAFF,
CITY CLERKS, SDCI AND SDOT FOR
HELPING US TO PREPARE FOR THIS
MEETING. WE WILL NOW OPEN THE
PUBLIC COMMENT , HYBRID PUBLIC
COMMENT PERIOD. PUBLIC COMMENTS
SHOULD RELATE TO ITEMS ON
TODAY'S AGENDA AND WITHIN THE
PURVIEW OF THIS COMMITTEE. FOR
THOSE REGISTERED TO SPEAK TO
ITEM TO CHECK ON THE AGENDA, WE
WILL ACCEPT COMMENTS ON THIS
ITEM ONCE WE REACH IT AND OPEN
IT FOR PUBLIC HEARING. HOW MANY
SPEAKERS DO WE HAVE WINDUP
TODAY? BECAUSE CURRENTLY, ONE IN
PERSON AND ONE REMOTE.
>> OKAY. IS THE PERSON SIGNED UP
TO SPEAK FOR ITEM 1 OR 2?
>> THE SPEAKER -- GENERALLY, FOR
LAND USE.
>> OKAY. SHOULD WE HOLD OFF?
>> HEAR IT NOW.
>> OKAY. WE WILL HAVE TWO
MINUTES AND START WITH IN PERSON
SPEAKERS FIRST. CLERK, PLEASE
READ THE PUBLIC COMMENT
INSTRUCTIONS.
>> PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD WILL BE
MODERATED. IT IS UP TO 20
MINUTES, SPEAKERS CALLED IN THE
ORDER IN WHICH THEY REGISTERED,
IN PERSON WILL BE CALLED FIRST,
AFTER WHICH WE MOVED TO REMOTE
SPEAKERS UNTIL THE PERIOD HAS
ENDED. SPEAKERS HERE A TIME WHEN
10 SECONDS ARE LEFT. SPEAKERS
WILL BE MUTED IF THEY DO NOT END
COMMENTS WITHIN ALLOWED A TIME.
THE PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD IS NOW
OPEN. WE WILL BEGIN WITH THE
FIRST SPEAKER ON THE LIST. THAT
IS ALEX ZIMMERMAN.
>> YOU REMEMBER MY NAME .
>> PLEASE GO AHEAD. PLEASE
REFRAIN FROM DOING THE SALUTE.
THAT WOULD BE MUCH APPRECIATED.
>> A LITTLE BIT JEWISH NAMES. I
AM READY.
>> PLEASE. THANK YOU.
>> MY JOURNEY GESTAPO FASCIST.
MY NAME ALEX REIMER MET. I AM
SUPER TRUMP. I SPEAK IN COUNCIL
CHAMBERS 5000 TIMES. I HAVE 6000
DAYS OF TRESPASS DEMOCRAT MAFIA
PROSECUTE ME FIVE TIMES. I WANT
TO SPEAK ABOUT AGENDA NUMBER
ONE. YOU APPOINT ANOTHER IDIOT
FOR COMMISSIONER. I NEVER SEE
THIS IDIOT HERE FOR 30 YEARS.
WHAT ARE THEY -- EMPTY.
THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT I WANT
SPEAK RIGHT NOW. FOR PEOPLE
LOSE, THEY DON'T LIKE YOU MORE.
BYE PIG. I PROPOSE DOING THIS
FOR 10 LAST YEAR'S ABOUT
OPENING FIRST-FLOOR . ONE DAY
PER WEEK CONVERSATION FOR THREE
OR FIVE MINUTES. YOU, COUNCIL,
RINCK, YOU TALK ABOUT HELP
PEOPLE . YOU CAN DO THIS ALONE .
ABSOLUTELY LEGAL. YOU CAN DO
THIS EVERY WEEK. WE CAN GO.
PEOPLE WILL BE GO. I GUARANTEE
YOU HUNDRED WILL COME, THOUSAND
WILL COME. UNDER CAMERA AND
MICROPHONE, THESE PEOPLE CAN
EXPLAIN SOMETHING, BECAUSE THEY
DON'T BELIEVE THESE CROOKS IN
THIS CHAMBER. LOOK, NOBODY HERE.
NOBODY. KNOW ONE PERSON. ONLY MY
FRIEND. [ LAUGHTER ] COUNCIL
RINCK, DOING THIS PLEASE. I
SPOKE BEFORE. YOU DON'T LISTEN.
YOU WILL BE OUT. I GUARANTEE
YOU. VIVA TRUMP, VIVA NEW
AMERICAN REVOLUTION. VIVA
STOPPING THIS PIG .
>> TO WE HAVE ADDITIONAL
SPEAKERS?
>> WE DO. WE WILL NOW MOVE ON TO
REMOTE SPEAKERS. NEXT UP WE HAVE
DAVID.
>> DAVID, GO AHEAD. PRESS STAR
SIX.
>> I GUESS COUNCIL WILL BE ON
TIME FOR A MEETING EVER AGAIN
UNDER THIS LEADERSHIP. IS A REAL
WAY TO CONVINCE COUNCIL BUT
SPENDING $12 MILLION TO GO FROM
WEST SEATTLE ON A DIFFERENT
TRACK TO DOWNTOWN SEATTLE, AND
THEN OUT TO BALLARD , IS A BAD
IDEA, CONSIDERING HOW MANY
MILLIONS OF DOLLARS WERE SPENT
ON RAPID RIDE C AND D BUSES THAT
ALREADY GO OUT TO THE SAME AREA.
THE COUNCIL THANKS A-TRAIN NEEDS
TO COMPETE WITH . YOU CAN TELL
CITY HALL IS TAINTED WITH
IMPAIRED JUDGMENTS THAT PERMEATE
DECISION-MAKING FOR SELF DEALING
CONFLICTS OF INTEREST THAT ARE
CONTINUING TO SPELL INTO
EVERYTHING YOU DO, SUCH AS
FORCING A BUS TO COMPETE WITH A
TRAY. BUSES CAN SIMPLY IMPROVE
AND SELL $12 BILLION NEEDED TO
FIX ALL THE FAILURES. IF YOU
TAKE A LOOK AT HOW UNSAFE IT IS
TO TRY TO GET TO A LIGHT RAIL
AND KING COUNTY METRO BUSES, YOU
REALIZE THAT ALL THESE SO-CALLED
ENVIRONMENTAL DESIGN EXPERTS ARE
FRAUDS LOOKING FOR AN EASIER
PAYDAY, ACTUALLY TENDING WITH
CONTENDING WITH CRIMINALS IN THE
NEIGHBORHOOD WELFORD TO SIGNALLY
TREE TRANSPLANTING WITH A BAD
TAX DOLLARS WATERING DOWN THE
INTEGRITY OF ETHICS. THE CHAIR
ISN'T EVEN ELECTED BY THE
PEOPLE AND WAS A CHOSEN FOR
PUBLIC SAFETY, DESPITE THE
MISLEADING LIES FROM COUNCIL,
WHO CHOSE A REPLACEMENT COUNCIL
BASED ON A LANDLORD CONFLICT OF
INTEREST STACKING THE DECK
AGAINST RENTERS AND RESTRICTING
A ROBUST HOUSING BUILDOUT BETTER
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND PROPER
POLICY. LANDLORDS DON'T HAVE
THE BEST INTERESTS OF THE
COMMUNITY. SHAME ON CITY HALL,
THE REAL STALLING PROGRESS IN A
RACIST WOKE PLEASE
RECONSIDER THE $12 BILLION. YOU
HAVE ENOUGH BUSES THAT CAN BE
IMPROVED AND TO PUT A TRAIN ON
THE WATERFRONT AND GO RIGHT UP
GOLDEN GARDEN AND MAKE THE
NUMBER 44 BUS THAT USED TO GO UP
AND TAKE IT TO BALLARD. YOU ALL
ARE WASTING A WHOLE BUNCH OF
MONEY, JUST LIKE YOU WASTE A LOT
OF TIME DOING NOTHING GOOD FOR
THE PEOPLE.
>>
THAT'S ALL THE SPEAKERS.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. WITH NO
ADDITIONAL SPEAKERS, THE PUBLIC
COMMENT PERIOD IS NOW CLOSED. WE
WILL NOW MOVE ON TO THE FIRST
ITEM ON THE AGENDA. WILL THE
CLERK PLEASE READ ITEM 1 INTO
THE RECORD?
>> AGENDA ITEM 1, APPOINTMENT
3172, REAPPOINTMENT OF MOLLY
SPETALNICK AS MEMBER, SEATTLE
DESIGN COMMISSION, FOR A TERM TO
FEBRUARY 28, 2027.
>> THANK YOU. FOR THE RECORD,
STATE YOUR NAME AND BEGIN YOUR
COMMENTS .
>> THANK YOU, COUNCIL MEMBERS.
MICHAEL JENKINS , DIRECTOR OF
THE DESIGN COMMISSION. WE ARE
HERE TODAY TO SEEK REAPPOINTMENT
OF MOLLY SPETALNICK INTO THE
SECOND TERM OF URBAN DESIGNER
FOR THE COMMISSION. YOU HAVE HER
REAPPOINTMENT MATERIAL, HER CV
AND OTHER MATERIALS IN YOUR
POCKET. SHE IS CURRENTLY AN
URBAN DESIGNER FROM HERE IN
SEATTLE AND SPECIALIZES IN
TRANSIT , TOD, MULTIFAMILY AND
SITE PLANNING AS AN URBAN
DESIGNER. SHE IS ALSO -- SHE HAS
BEEN RECENTLY APPOINTED AS VICE
CHAIR BEFORE THE COMMISSION, AND
WE ARE PLEASED SHE CAN FILL THAT
ROLE AS WELL.
>> ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS FROM
THE COMMITTEE? REGARDING THE
REAPPOINTMENT? OKAY. HEARING
NONE, I MOVE THE COMMITTEE
RECOMMEND CONFIRMATION OF
APPOINTMENT 3172. IS THERE A
SECOND?
>> SECOND.
>> MOVED AND SECONDED TO
RECOMMEND CONFIRMATION OF THE
APPOINTMENT. ANY FURTHER
COMMENTS? OKAY. HEARING NONE,
WILL THE CLERK PLEASE CALL THE
ROLL ON THE CONFIRMATION OF THE
APPOINTMENT?
>> [ ROLL CALL ]
>> -- FOUR VOTES IN FAVOR AND
ZERO OPPOSED.
>> MOTION CARRIES THAT THE
COUNCIL CONFIRMED THE
APPOINTMENT WILL BE SENT TO THE
DIRECTOR 2025 COUNCIL MEETING.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH .
>> THANK YOU .
>> CLERK, PLEASE READ ITEM TO
CHECK INTO THE AGENDA.
>> COUNCIL BILL 120975, AN
ORDINANCE RELATING TO LAND USE
AND ZONING; ADDRESSING SIGNAGE;
CLARIFYING REQUIREMENTS AND
SUPPORTING EFFICIENT PERMITTING
PROCESSES FOR LIGHT REAL TRANSIT
FACILITIES.
>> THANK YOU. THIS LEGISLATION
TO SUPPORT EFFICIENT PERMITTING
PROCESS FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF
LIGHT RAIL TRANSIT FACILITIES
AND WOULD HELP FULFILL THE
PERMIT PROCESS IMPROVEMENT GOALS
IDENTIFIED BY THE CITY AND SOUND
TRANSIT IN 2019. BYPASSING THIS
ORDINANCE, THE AMENDED CODE
WOULD SUPPORT TIMELY
CONSTRUCTION OF THE WEST SEATTLE
LINK EXTENSION AND THE BALLARD
LINK EXTENSION PROJECTS. AFTER
THE PUBLIC HEARING,
REPRESENTATIVES FROM SDCI, SDOT
AND CENTRAL STAFF WILL BE
AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS THE
COUNCIL MAY HAVE. WE HAVE HAD
PUBLIC HEARING, PUBLIC
COMMENTARY. OKAY. THIS IS PUBLIC
HEARING. AS PRESENTING OFFICER,
I NOW OPENING THE PUBLIC HEARING
ON COUNCIL BILL 120975 RELATED
TO LAND USE AND ZONING CODE
AMENDMENTS FACILITATING SOUND
TRANSIT'S WEST SEATTLE AND
BALLARD LIGHT RAIL EXTENSIONS.
CLERK, HOW MANY SPEAKERS ARE
LINED UP FOR THIS PUBLIC
HEARING?
>> CHAIR, WE REMOTE.
>> OKAY. ALL RIGHT. EACH SPEAKER
WILL HAVE TWO MINUTES. CLERK, I
WILL NOW HANDED OVER TO YOU TO
PRESENT THE INSTRUCTIONS .
>> SPEAKERS WILL BE CALLED IN
THE ORDER OF REGISTRATION. THET
RULES APPLY TO THIS PUBLIC YEAR.
THE 10 SECOND CHIME IS YOUR
NOTICE IT IS TIME TO WRAP UP
COMMENTS. SPEAKERS MICROPHONES
WILL BE MUTED AT THE END OF THE
ALLOTTED TIME. PUBLIC COMMENT
RELATED TO COUNCIL BILL 120975
IS ONLY BEING ACCEPTED AT THIS
PUBLIC HEARING. SPEAKERS ARE
ASKED TO BEGIN COMMENTS BY
STATING THEIR NAME.
>> OKAY.
>> FIRST --
>> OKAY.
>> THE FIRST SPEAKER IS ALEX
ZIMMERMAN. PLEASE SPEAK TO
COUNCIL BILL 120975.
>>
MY DIRTY GESTAPO MAFIA. LIGHT
RAIL, WHAT HAS COME TO
TRANSPORTATION? IT'S A
NIGHTMARE WHAT HAS HAPPENED
RIGHT NOW. YOU SPEND $100
BILLION FOR NOTHING IN SEATTLE,
AND KING COUNTY, EVERYTHING.
SOUND TRANSIT RAISES 200 BILLION
BUCKS. NOBODY USE. BELLEVUE AND
REDMAN , OPEN LIGHT RAIL SIX
MILES. NOBODY INSIDE. RIGHT NOW,
MOST HERE IT IS OPEN.
ABSOLUTELY. $200 BILLION.
SEATTLE IS A NIGHTMARE. LOOK,
NOBODY HERE. WHY? BECAUSE THEY
KNOW YOU CROAK. -- I APPEAL
AGAIN TO COUNCIL RINCK, SPEAK
FOR THE PEOPLE, YOU LIKE PEOPLE,
OKAY, IT'S GOOD. GOPHER OPEN
CITY HALL ONE DAY PER WEEK SO
EVERYBODY CAN COME AND SPEAK FOR
3 TO 5 MINUTES. I GUARANTEE YOU
THOUSAND PEOPLE WILL COME.
BECAUSE NOBODY HERE. THE CRUX IS
STILL BILLIONS FROM US WITH
PEOPLE DYING. SENIOR CITIZEN,
LOW INCOME. I DON'T CAN FIND A
CHEAPER APARTMENT. IT'S A
NIGHTMARE WHAT'S HAPPENING
RIGHT NOW. WE HAVE BILLION OF
DOLLARS YOU SPEND FOR NOTHING,
FOR YOUR PERSONAL INTEREST AND
CORPORATION THAT SUPPORT YOU FOR
ELECTION. THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT
HAS HAPPENED. MY RECOMMENDATION
TO YOU, COUNCIL RINCK, YOU CAN
DO THIS ALONE. YOU DON'T NEED
HER PERMISSION LIKE LAST WEEK .
COUNCIL REFUSED TO GO AGAINST
YOU. V VIRTUAL. I SUPPORT
TROUBLED. VIVA TRUMP, VIVA NEW
AMERICAN REVOLUTION.
>> THANK YOU.
NEXT UP , WE HAVE DAVID.
>> THANK YOU . IS HER ANYWAY
COUNCIL CAN JUST REJECT THIS
COUNCIL BILL AND ST3? I KNOW
THERE ARE A LOT OF LAND DOORDASH
LANDLORDS ON THE LAND USE
COMMITTEE THAT THEY'LL
ACKNOWLEDGE THEIR CONFLICTS.
YOUR IMPAIRED JUDGMENT ARE
CONTINUING TO PUSH FORWARD BAD
POLICIES THAT ARE COSTING
BILLIONS OF DOLLARS, FORCING A
TRAIN TO COMPETE WITH A BUS THAT
COULD BE IMPROVED. IT'S JUST
REALLY , LIKE, REVOLTING TO SEE
HOW SELFISH POLITICIANS ARE WHO
ARE BLINDED WITH THEIR OWN GREED
THAT THEY ARE JUST WILLING TO GO
THROUGH THE MOTIONS TO
ACCOMMODATE THE AGENDA PUBLIC
TRANSPORTATION DOLLARS GETTING A
KICKBACK OR BENEFITING THE FULL
DASHBOARD, BUT YET, YOU DON'T
APPROVE THE PUBLIC SAFETY. YOU
DON'T IMPROVE THE SAFETY OF THE
BUS OR EFFICIENCIES. YOU JUST
KEEP SPENDING MORE MONEY AND
DOUBLING DOWN. ANOTHER TELLTALE
SIGN YOU ALL HAVE IMPAIRED
JUDGMENT. AND THE TOP THREE ON
THE LAND USE THAT HER LANDLORDS
SHOULD BE KICKED OUT AND RECUSED
THEMSELVES FOR THE MAJORITY OF
YOUR DECISION-MAKING, BECAUSE
YOU ARE PERMEATING INTEGRITY OF
ETHICS. THANK YOU.
>>
THERE ARE NO MORE SPEAKERS FOR
THE PUBLIC HEARING.
>> OKAY. AS THERE ARE NO MORE
SPEAKERS FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING,
WE WILL CALL THAT PORTION OF THE
MEETING CLOSED. I SEE OUR
PRESENTERS HAVE JOINED US AT THE
TABLE. PLEASE INTRODUCE
YOURSELVES FOR THE RECORD AND
PROCEED WHEN READY.
>> COUNCIL CENTRAL STAFF.
>> SOUND TRANSIT PROGRAM OFFICE
PROJECTS .
>> SDCI.
>> GREAT.
>> THIS IS THE THIRD BRIEFING
PUBLIC HEARING TODAY , THE THIRD
TIME THIS BILL HAS BEEN IN
COMMITTEE. YOU HAVE BEEN BRIEFED
ON THIS CONTENT PREVIOUSLY. I
WILL SAY A FEW REMARKS BECAUSE
THERE HAVE BEEN A FEW CHANGES IN
CIRCUMSTANCES SINCE THE INITIAL
BRIEFING BACK IN APRIL. AS YOU
KNOW, THIS IS A BILL THAT WOULD
AMEND BOTH SUBSTANTIVE
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS AND
PROCEDURAL STANDARDS FOR
PERMITTING TRANSIT FACILITIES,
WHICH IS AN ESSENTIAL PUBLIC
FACILITY AND A TYPE OF
REGULATORY STATUS UNDER STATE
LAW AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTS ARE
PRECLUDED FROM HAVING DEVELOPED
THE STANDARDS THAT WOULD
PRECLUDE AN ESSENTIAL PUBLIC
FACILITY. SINCE THE BILL WAS
INITIALLY BRIEFED BACK IN APRIL,
THERE HAVE BEEN A COUPLE OF
DEVELOPMENTS . ONE IS THAT SOUND
TRANSIT, THE FEDERAL TRANSIT
ADMINISTRATION, HAS ISSUED A
RECORD OF DECISION FOR THE WEST
SEATTLE LINK EXTENSION. THAT
RECORD OF DECISION CONTAINS
LITIGATION REQUIRED PURSUANT TO
THE NATIONAL POLICY ACT. ALSO,
THERE HAS BEEN A CHANGE IN STATE
LAW. IT DOES ACTUALLY AFFECT THE
CONTENT OF THE BILL, BUT
REINFORCES THE STATUS OF LIGHT
RAIL TRANSIT FACILITIES AS
ESSENTIAL PUBLIC FACILITIES FOR
THE PURPOSES OF THE STATE
TRANSPORTATION BILL AND THE
GROWTH MANAGEMENT ACT. TO
TELEGRAPH A FEW THINGS THAT WILL
BE COMING TO THE COUNCIL HERE .
AS YOU KNOW, THIS IS NOT
SUFFICIENT FOR SOUND TRANSIT TO
BEGIN THEIR PERMITTING PROCESS .
THERE ARE A COUPLE OF PIECES --
THERE IS A PIECE OF LEGISLATION,
TWO PIECES THAT WILL BE COMING
TO THE COMMITTEE SHORTLY . I
DON'T KNOW WHEN THEY WILL BE
HERE. MAYBE YOU CAN FILL THAT
IN. THOSE ARE THE TRANSIT
AGREEMENTS THAT WILL INCLUDE THE
WEST SEATTLE LINK.
>> HAPPY TO ADD ONTO THAT. YES,
IN ORDER FOR CITY DEPARTMENTS TO
BE ABLE TO ISSUE PERMITS FOR
SOUND TRANSIT PROJECTS, THE
PROJECT HAS TO BE FORMALLY
ADOPTED BY THE CITY. THAT
HAPPENS THROUGH TWO PIECES OF
LEGISLATION, AN ORDINANCE THAT
AMEND THE TRANSIT WAY AGREEMENT,
WHICH IS A LONG-STANDING 25 YEAR
AGREEMENT BETWEEN SOUND TRANSIT
IN THE CITY, AND EVERY TIME A
NEW ALIGNMENT IS ADDED TO THE
REGIONAL TRANSIT SYSTEM,
EXHIBITS FOR THAT ALIGNMENT ARE
APPENDED INTO THE TRANSIT
AGREEMENT SO THE AGREEMENT NOW
INCLUDES THOSE NEW SYSTEMS.
THERE WILL BE AN ORDINANCE THAT
WILL AMEND THE TRANSIT WAY
AGREEMENT TO INCLUDE THE WEST
SEATTLE LINK EXTENSION. THERE IS
ALSO A COMPANION RESOLUTION THAT
ADOPTS THE ALIGNMENT ITSELF. IT
MENTIONS WHERE THE STATIONS AND
GUIDEWAYS ARE GOING TO BE. AS
ALSO MENTIONED, THAT ACTION
FOLLOWS TWO PREVIOUS ACTIONS.
THERE IS THE ACTION BY THE SOUND
TRANSIT BOARD TO ADOPT THE
PROJECT TO BE BUILT THAT
HAPPENED LAST FALL, IN OCTOBER,
I BELIEVE. THERE IS THE ACTION
BY PUBLISHING THE RECORD OF
DECISION. THOSE OF THE FIRST TWO
ACTIONS. THE FINAL ONE IS THE
CITY OF SEATTLE. ONCE THAT
HAPPENS, THE CITY DEPARTMENTS
ARE ABLE TO PROCESS PERMITS FOR
THE PROJECT.
>> OKAY.
>> WE ANTICIPATE SENDING OUT
LEGISLATION IN JUNE .
>> OKAY. IF COUNCIL MEMBERS HAVE
QUESTIONS ABOUT THIS BILL,
POSSIBLY ABOUT THE UPCOMING
TRANSIT WAY AGREEMENT
LEGISLATION, COUNCIL MEMBER
RIVERA HAS A PROPOSED AMENDMENT
WITH PUBLIC OUTREACH. I'M HAPPY
TO WALK THROUGH THE AMENDMENT.
YOU ALL SHOULD HAVE --
>> IF I CAN PAUSE . I WANT TO
REFLECT FOR THE RECORD THAT
COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS HAS JOINED
US REMOTE. PLEASE CONTINUE.
>> YOU ALL SHOULD HAVE AMENDMENT
1 TREACH REQUIREMENTS
RELATED TO LIGHT RAIL TRANSIT
PERMITTING. THERE ARE FOUR
SUBSTANTIVE CHANGES, MOST
RELATED TO PRIMARY CHANGE, WHICH
IS A REQUIREMENT THAT AN
APPLICANT, IN THIS CASE, SOUND
TRANSIT, SUBMIT A PRIEST THE
MIDDLE FOR
TEMPORARY USES FOR LIGHT RAIL
TRANSIT FACILITY CONSTRUCTION.
LARGER ASPECTS OF TRANSIT
PERMITTING. THE COMMUNITY
OUTREACH PLAN WOULD BE A PRIEST
THE MIDDLE REQUIREMENT. AS PART
OF THE -- IT WOULD IT WOULD BE
DONE PRIOR TO AN ACTUAL PERMIT
APPLICATION, AND AS PART OF THE
SDCI PERMIT REVIEW, IT WOULD
TAKE A LOOK AT HOW WELL THE
COMMUNITY OUTREACH PLAN HAD BEEN
ACCOMPLISHED AND INCLUDE
INFORMATION ABOUT THE CONTENT OF
PUBLIC COMMENT AND HOW THAT WAS
REFLECTED IN THE SDCI DECISION.
IF YOU OTHER COMPONENTS, A FEW
OTHER CHANGES. SDCI WOULD BE
REQUIRED TO DOCUMENT HOW THE
COMMUNITY OUTREACH PLAN WAS
IMPLEMENTED AND INCORPORATE THAT
IN ITS DECISION. ANOTHER
AMENDMENT WOULD BE THE TEMPORARY
USES FOR LIGHT RAIL FACILITIES
THAT INCLUDE CONSTRUCTION
MANAGEMENT PLAN INFORMED BY THE
COP, AND FINALLY, THE NOTICE OF
DECISION BY SDCI WOULD INCLUDE
INFORMATION ABOUT THE
POSSIBILITY FOR ADDITIONAL
APPEAL, WHICH EXISTS ,
OPPORTUNITY FOR APPEAL PRIMARY
THROUGH SUPERIOR COURT.
>> THANK YOU. COUNCILMEMBER
RIVERA IS A PERSON BRINGING THE
MMA, WOULD YOU LIKE TO SPEAK TO
THAT?
>> PLEASE, THANK YOU, CHAIR.
THANK YOU FOR REVIEWING THAT.
COLLEAGUES, I VIEW THIS AS A
FRIENDLY MMA. I HAD A REALLY
GREAT CONVERSATION WITH THE
SOUND TRANSIT FOLKS THIS WEEK. I
KNOW THEY ARE DOING OUTREACH AT
ALL OF THE STAGES . I THINK THIS
IS, SINCE WE ARE THE ONES THAT
ACTUALLY HAVE TO PERMIT THESE
PROJECTS, IT IS REALLY A WAY TO
SHOW OUR WORK ACCOUNTABILITY IS
IMPORTANT. THIS IS A WAY WE CAN
HAVE INFORMATION BY WHICH WE ARE
ISSUING A PERMIT . THIS WAY, IF
THERE ANY ISSUES ON THE BACKEND
ABOUT PUBLIC OUTREACH THAT WAS
DONE, WE HAVE WORK TO SHOW THAT
THINGS WERE SUBMITTED. LIKE I
SAID, THE SOUND TRANSIT IS
ALREADY DOING THIS WORK. I
DON'T VIEW THIS AS A HEAVY LIFT
ON SOUND TRANSIT'S PART SINCE
YOU ARE ALREADY DOING IT, BUT
THEY WOULD HAVE TO PROFFER IT SO
WE SEE IT. THEY ARE SHOWING
THEIR WORK, AND WE CAN SHOW OUR
WORK. WHEN WE DO THOSE PERMIT
DECISIONS, THEN WE HAVE THAT
OFFER TO THE PUBLIC. TO ME, IT
SEEMS LIKE A VERY PRUDENT THING
TO DO AS THE GOVERNMENT ENTITY
THAT HAS TO ISSUE THOSE PERMIT
-- PERMITS. YOU SAID, I KNOW
THEY ARE DOING THE WORK, SAID TO
ME, IT DOESN'T SEEM LIKE A
HEAVY LIFT TO HAVE THEM SUBMIT
THE WORK THEY ARE DOING THEM A
BASICALLY, SO THAT IT SHOWS --
YOU KNOW, WE CAN SEE WHAT IT IS.
IN A MORE FORMAL WAY, I SUPPOSE.
NEVERTHELESS, IT WILL BE ON THE
RECORD. HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY
QUESTIONS.
>> GREAT. I SEE COUNCILMEMBER
RINCK AND COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS.
I AM NOT SURE WHO RAISED THEIR
HAND FOR US. LET'S START WITH
COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS.
>> THANK YOU, CHAIR. I AM GOING
TO SHARE -- AS YOU CAN SEE, I'M
STILL HERE AT THE SOUND TRANSIT
BOARD MEETING HERE. IT IS VERY
-- I WILL SHARE THREE THINGS
THAT ARE ALL TRUE. THE FIRST IS
THAT IT IS VERY IMPORTANT THAT
WE MOVE THIS LEGISLATION FORWARD
TODAY, AND QUICKLY. THE SECOND
THING THAT IS TRUE IS THAT
COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA'S AMENDMENT
IN INTENTION AND SPIRIT ARE GOOD
, AND THE THIRD THING THAT IS
TRUE IS THAT WE HAVE NOT HAD A
LOT OF TIME TO REFLECT ON THE
LANGUAGE OF COUNCILMEMBER
RIVERA'S AMENDMENT, BECAUSE I
BELIEVE IT WAS SHARED OUT IN THE
LAST 30 TO 60 MINUTES. MY ASK
TODAY IS THAT WE MOVE THE BILL
FORWARD , WE HOLD COUNCILMEMBER
RIVERA 'S AMENDMENT UNTIL FULL
COUNCIL WHEN IT CAN BE SUBMITTED
AS A NORMAL AMENDMENT, RATHER
THAN A WALK ON. THANK YOU,
CHAIR.
>> VERY GOOD. COUNCILMEMBER
RINCK.
>> I HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS
TO THE PANEL. IS IT CORRECT TO
SAY THE GOAL OF THIS UNDERLYING
BILL IS TO CUT COSTS AND SHORTEN
THE TIMELINE OF OUR SOUND
TRANSIT PROJECTS?
>> I WAS SAY THERE ARE A COUPLE
OF GOALS. I WOULDN'T PUT CUT
COSTS THAT I WOULD SAY KEEPING
THE PROJECT ON TIME AND ON
BUDGET IS ABSOLUTELY PARAMOUNT.
AS MENTIONED EARLIER, WE ARE
LOOKING AT THE GROWTH MANAGEMENT
ACT AND THE ESSENTIAL PUBLIC
FACILITY LANGUAGE AND THE
PARTNERING AGREEMENT THAT WAS
ADOPTED BY CITY COUNCIL AND
SIGNED BY THE MAYOR AND 20 AND T
AS ARE FOUNDATIONAL DOCUMENTS
THAT ARE TELLING US TO
STREAMLINE THE PERMIT PROCESS,
KEEP THESE PROJECTS MOVING
FORWARD. ALL OF THAT IS REALLY
IN SERVICE TO THE VOTERS THAT
PASSED THE -- PAST ST3 NINE
YEARS AGO AND TRY TO KEEP THIS
PROJECT MOVING FORWARD SO THEY
CAN BE DELIVERED IN A REASONABLE
TIMEFRAME.
>> -- SDCI IS THE AUTHOR OF THIS
LEGISLATION. I WANT TO MAKE SURE
IF THERE'S ANYTHING AT ABOUT
THE GOAL.
>> I THINK ALL OF THAT IS TRUE.
I THINK WE ALSO INTEND TO CREATE
CLEAR REGULATIONS FOR SOUND
TRANSIT TO FOLLOW, AND ALSO FOR
THE PUBLIC TO UNDERSTAND WHAT
THE REGULATIONS ARE THAT PERTAIN
TO LIGHT RAIL TRANSIT
FACILITIES. I THINK IN ALL
INSTANCES WE ARE TRYING TO
MITIGATE THE IMPACT OF THE
PROJECT BY THE DIFFERENT PLANS
AND STRATEGIES AND STANDARDS
THAT WE PUT IN THE CODE. SO
WHILE WE ARE KEEPING IT ON TIME
AND ON BUDGET, WE ARE ALSO
WORKING IN THE BEST INTEREST OF
THE PUBLIC TO BOTH ASSESS AND
MITIGATE THE IMPACTS OF THE
PROCESS THROUGH OUR PERMITTING
WORK.
>> THANK YOU BOTH FOR CENTERING
US ON THAT. AS A FOLLOW-UP TO
THAT, DO YOU HAVE A SENSE AT
THIS TIME HOW MUCH IMPLEMENTING
THIS BODY OF WORK OUTLINED IN
THIS AMENDMENT WOULD COST?
>> WE JUST SAW THE AMENDMENT AS
WELL. WE ARE ABSOLUTELY
SUPPORTIVE OF ENGAGEMENT HAVE
BEEN REALLY HAPPY TO BE
INTEGRATED INTO THE ENGAGEMENT
THAT SOUND TRANSIT HAS BEEN
DOING SINCE 2017 ON THESE
PROJECTS. REALLY GRATEFUL TO
HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO MEET
WITH COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA LAST
WEEK WITH SOUND TRANSIT TO WALK
THROUGH A LOT OF THAT
ENGAGEMENT. HAVING JUST SEEN THE
AMENDMENT, IT IS A LITTLE TOO
QUICK FOR US TO RESPOND DIRECTLY
TO WHAT THE IMPACT WOULD BE ON
OUR PERMIT PROCESS. I THINK WE
WOULD LIKE TO TAKE IT BACK AND
LOOK AT WHAT WE DO FOR OTHER
MAJOR PROJECTS AND HOW IT
COMPARES TO THAT, AND WHETHER
THERE WOULD BE ANY ANTICIPATED
ADDITIONAL TIME OR PROCESS OR
DELAY ASSOCIATED WITH IT. IN
THEORY, WE ARE VERY SUPPORTIVE
OF COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT AND
ENSURING THAT, AS COUNCILMEMBER
RIVERA SAID, WE ARE SHOWING THE
WORK.
>> CERTAINLY AGREED WITH THE
MATTER OF WANTING TO ENSURE
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT. OF COURSE,
ALSO WANTED TO UNDERSTAND THE
ASSOCIATED COSTS. MY FOLLOW-UP
WOULD BE A MATTER OF TIME AND
UNDERSTANDING HOW MUCH
ADDITIONAL ASSOCIATED STAFF TIME
THIS MIGHT TAKE IN ORDER TO
IMPLEMENT. UNDERSTAND THE
AMENDMENT SPONSOR HAS ENGAGED A
BIT WITH SOUND TRANSIT .
WONDERING HOW -- THIS IS
AGGRESSION FOR BOTH THE MOMENT
SPONSOR AND THE PANEL, HOW WE
HAVE BEEN ENGAGING WITH KING
COUNTY METRO AND SDOT AND OTHER
MAJOR STAKEHOLDERS IN DEVELOPING
THE AMENDMENT BEFORE US.
>> THE AMENDMENT CAME OUT OF
THIS LEGISLATION . WE HAVE BEEN
TALKING ABOUT THE PUBLIC
OUTREACH AND THE IMPORTANCE OF
THE PUBLIC OUTREACH. SO RATHER
THAN JUST HAVE A CONVERSATION, I
WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT GOT
CAPTURED AS PART OF THE
LEGISLATION. I DIDN'T THINK
THIS WAS A HEAVY LIFT AS SOUND
TRANSIT IS DOING THE ENGAGEMENT,
AND HAS TO DO THE ENGAGEMENT. IT
IS MORE THAT, ASKED THE BODY
THAT IS PERMITTING THE PROJECT ,
THE PUBLIC LOOKS TO US WHEN
SOMETHING DOES NOT GO WELL , AND
I WANT TO MAKE SURE WE HAVE
DOCUMENTATION ON OUR BOOKS TO
MAKE SURE THAT WE CAN SHOW, HEY,
THEY SHOWED IT TO US . WE ISSUE
THE PERMIT. IT IS REALLY TO
AVOID, ON THE BACKEND, SOME
POTENTIAL FOLKS SAYING THEY
DIDN'T KNOW ABOUT THE PROJECT.
YOU KNOW, OFTENTIMES WE DO THE
OUTREACH AND MANY THEY
NEVER HEARD ABOUT IT, EVEN
THOUGH THE OUTREACH IS DONE. IT
IS REALLY, LIKE I SAID, A WAY TO
SHOW OUR WORK. DIDN'T SEE THIS
AS A HEAVY LIFT. DID NOT -- THIS
IS NOT INTENDED -- AND BY THE
WAY, THE REASON THIS IS COMING
TODAY AS A WALK ON IS BECAUSE I
SHARED THE LANGUAGE WITH CENTRAL
STAFF, I BELIEVE, A COUPLE WEEKS
AGO, BUT IT HAS TO GO THROUGH
LAW REVIEW, LAURA REVIEWED IT
AND GAVE THEIR COMMENTS. WE HAD
THE CONVERSATION ABOUT THE
INTENT. DEFINITELY DO NOT INTEND
TO DELAY, AS I SAID, LAST TIME.
I HAVE SAID EVERY TIME I AM A
BIG PROPONENT OF PUBLIC TRANSIT
AND WANT TO MAKE SURE THESE
THINGS GET DONE. I AM TRYING TO
MITIGATE ON THE BACK AND -- END
FROM THE PUBLIC SAYING THE
OUTREACH HAD NOT BEEN THE PART
OF THE END OF THE DAY, EVEN
THOUGH THIS IS A SOUND TRANSIT
PROJECT, AS THE PEOPLE THAT HAVE
TO PERMIT THE PROJECT, THE PERM
-- THE PUBLIC WILL LOOK TO US,
AND WE WILL GET BLAMED IF
SOMETHING DOES NOT GET DONE WELL
REGARDLESS OF WHO IS ACTUALLY
CONSTRUCTING THE PROJECT. AGAIN,
I'M TRYING TO MITIGATE FOR THE
CITY'S RESPONSIBILITY HERE IN
TERMS OF HAVING TO GIVE THAT
PERMITTING AND MAKE SURE THIS IS
ALL DONE IN A WAY WE ARE ABLE TO
SHOW OUR WORK TO THE PUBLIC. IF
WE -- I WILL GO FURTHER TO SAY,
IF SHOWING OUR WORK IS A HEAVY
LIFT AND A PROBLEM, THEN I HAVE
BIGGER CONCERNS THAN I HAD,
ACTUALLY, COMING INTO THIS
AMENDMENT THAT WAS NOT MEANT TO
STALL THE PROJECT OR CREATE ,
YOU KNOW, AN OBSTACLE, IF YOU
WILL. QUITE THE OPPOSITE. I WANT
TO MAKE SURE ON THE BACK END
WHERE NOT STALLING PROJECTS
BECAUSE SOMEBODY IS SUING. ALL
THESE THINGS TO HAPPEN ON THE
BACK END. WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT
IS NOT HAPPENING.
>> THANK YOU FOR THAT BACKGROUND
AS SPONSOR OF THE AMENDMENT,
COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA. TO SPEAK
TO THE PANEL, THE MAIN POINT
HERE ABOUT ENGAGEMENT WITH OTHER
TRANSIT AGENCIES ALSO ON THIS
MATTER , HAVE YOU CONNECTED WITH
SDOT OR KING COUNTY METRO OR
OTHER MAJOR STAKEHOLDERS? IF NOT
YET, WHAT WAS THAT ENGAGEMENT
LOOK LIKE FOLLOWING TODAY? WHAT
WOULD BE THE KEY THINGS YOU WANT
TO UNDERSTAND FROM SOME OF THOSE
PARTNERS TO BETTER UNDERSTAND
IMPACT OF THIS AMENDMENT?
>> WE HAVE NOT ENGAGE. WE JUST
SAW THE AMENDMENT RIGHT BEFORE
THE COMMITTEE MEETING. WE HAVE
NOT ENGAGE, APART FROM
FORWARDING IT TO SOUND TRANSIT.
WE HAVE NOT ENGAGED WITH OTHER
TRANSIT AGENCIES ABOUT THE
CONTENT OF THE AMENDMENT YET.
>> IT IS UP TO THE DEPARTMENTS
TO DO THAT ENGAGEMENT, BECAUSE
THEY ARE THE ONES ISSUING THE
PERMITTING AS WELL. THE OTHER
THING IS, THOSE DEPARTMENTS ARE
NOT GOING TO BE ISSUING THOSE
PERMITS. WE ARE -- IT IS OUR
RESPONSIBILITY TO KEEP OUR
CONSTITUENTS'INTEREST AT HEART.
MANY OF US UP HERE HAVE TALKED
ABOUT THE DISPLACEMENT TO
RESIDENTS AND BUSINESSES IN THE
IMPORTANCE OF MAKING SURE WE ARE
DOING THAT ROBUST OUTREACH. MY
RESPONSIBILITY IS TO THE
CONSTITUENTS.
>> CERTAINLY CAN APPRECIATE
THAT. I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND
HOW WERE ALSO BEING IN LOCKSTEP
WITH THE OTHER PARTNERS. HEARING
THERE WILL BE THAT ENGAGEMENT
HAPPENING TO UNDERSTAND THE FULL
IMPACT OF THIS AMENDMENT, IT
CERTAINLY HEAR THE SPIRIT OF THE
AMENDMENT, AND I, IN GOOD FAITH,
NEED TO UNDERSTAND THE FULL
IMPACT OF WHAT IT MEANS FOR COST
AND TIME FOR THESE PROJECTS
BECAUSE OF THIS UNDERLYING GOAL
OF WHAT WE ARE TRYING TO DO
HERE. WITH THAT, I WILL CLOSE ON
THIS NOTE. AGAIN, THE PUBLIC HAS
VOTED TO APPROVE THESE PROJECTS
AND HAS BEEN PAYING FOR THEM FOR
YEARS. WE SHOULD NOT FORCE THEM
TO KEEP PAYING BALL PROGRESS IS
STALLED. THAT IS SOMETHING THAT
IS FRONT OF MIND FOR ME.
INSTANTLY WANT TO UNDERSTAND,
AGAIN, THE BROADER IMPACTS. I
DID HEAR COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS
MAKING , AT LEAST A COMMENT ON A
POTENTIAL MOTION FOR HOW TO MOVE
FORWARD TODAY. I WOULD VOICE MY
SUPPORT FOR THAT APPROACH BY
BEING ABLE TO ADVANCE THE BILL
OUT OF COUNCIL TODAY AND,
PERHAPS, REVISIT COUNCILMEMBER
RIVERA'S A MEMO BEFORE FULL
COUNCIL WHILE WE ALSO ARE ABLE
TO GARNER ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
ABOUT THE IMPACT FROM
DEPARTMENTS. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU. COUNCILMEMBER
STRAUSS , IS THAT A NEW HAND?
>> YEAH. IT IS A NEW HAND.
THANKS. I JUST WANTED --
COUNCILMEMBER RINCK BROUGHT UP
THE QUESTION OF COST SAVINGS, ET
CETERA. I WILL SHARE WITH YOU
THAT FROM THE BOARD MEETING
TODAY IT HAS BEEN ANNOUNCED THAT
BY THE MID-2040S THE SOUND
TRANSIT BUDGET IS NOT STABLE.
THIS HAS KICKED OFF OUR PROCESS
TO ENGAGE IN ENTERPRISE SERVICE
DELIVERY WHERE WE WILL BE
LOOKING AT STREAMLINING COSTS ,
REDUCING COSTS ACROSS
MAINTENANCE, OPERATIONS, CAPITAL
PLANNING, CAPITAL IMPLEMENTATION
ACROSS ALL SECTORS. I WILL BE
HAPPY TO SHARE WITH YOU AT
BRIEFING AT THE MONDAY COUNSEL
BRIEFING MORE INFORMATION ON
THIS, AND TO SAY THAT THIS BILL
IS INCREDIBLY IMPORTANT, NOT
NECESSARILY FOR COST SAVINGS,
BUT TO ENSURE THAT WE ARE NOT
COST DRIVERS. G FOR EVERYO
IS THE MOST EXPENSIVE COST
DRIVER IS TIMELINE DELAY . WITH
THIS BILL, WE ARE STREAMLINING
AND MAKING MORE CONSISTENT AND
MORE PREDICTABLE THE TIMELINES
TO BUILD THIS HUNDRED YEAR
INFRASTRUCTURE. IT IS IMPORTANT
FOR US TO PASS THIS BILL OUT
TODAY SO WE DON'T BECOME
BELLEVUE IN REGARDS TO SOUND
TRANSIT. MY QUESTION TO THE
SPONSOR OF THE AMENDMENT IS, ARE
YOU COMFORTABLE BRINGING THIS TO
FULL COUNCIL? I CAN SAY THAT
REAL QUICKLY, SINCE WE RECEIVED
IT, I WAS WALKING AROUND SOUND
TRANSIT STAFF TRIED TO GET
CONCERTED FEEDBACK ON YOUR
AMENDMENT, AND THE GENERAL
CONSENSUS I GET IS THAT THIS IS
A GOOD AMENDMENT, WE ARE NOT
SURE ABOUT THE LANGUAGE JUST
BECAUSE OF THE TIGHT TURNAROUND.
WOULD YOU BE COMFORTABLE
BRINGING THIS BACK TO FULL
COUNCIL
>> I WOULD BE MORE COMFORTABLE
PASSING THIS AS WE PASS THIS
BILL TODAY. AGAIN, I'M A LITTLE
CONFUSED ABOUT THE RETICENCE TO
PASS FORWARD A PIECE OF
LEGISLATION WHERE ALL IT SAYS IS
SOUND TRANSIT, YOU HAVE TO SHOW
US YOUR PUBLIC OUTREACH PLAN
THAT YOU SHOULD ALREADY HAVE
DONE, WHICH YOU -- THEY HAVE
ASSURED ME THEY HAVE DONE,
BEFORE WE ISSUE THESE PERMITS SO
WE ARE KEEPING OUR EYE OUT. THIS
IS IN SERVICE OF CONSTITUENTS.
QUITE FRANKLY, COUNCILMEMBER
STRAUSS, I AM VERY CONFUSED BY
THE RETICENCE TO PASS THIS VERY
SIMPLE, YOU KNOW, BILL TODAY, OR
AMENDMENT AS PART OF THIS BILL
AS WE ARE KEEPING OUR EYE OUT
FOR CONSTITUENTS. I HONESTLY DO
NOT UNDERSTAND. IN TERMS OF THIS
BILL , IT SHOULD NOT HAVE CAUSED
ANY DELAYS TO THE PROJECT.
BECAUSE THEY HAVE ALREADY DONE
ALL THIS WORK. AND LESS -- I
MEAN, THE CONVERSATION WE HAD
EARLIER, -- NOT YOU, SOUND
TRANSIT, HAS DONE ALL THIS WORK.
IT IS A MATTER OF SHOWING THE
WORK.
>> I THINK THAT IS ONE REASON
WHY WE JUST WANT TO HAVE SOME
TIME WITH THE LANGUAGE TO
UNDERSTAND THERE ISN'T AN
UNINTENDED -- DOES IS ADD ANY
ADDITIONAL ONUS OR PROCESS, OR
IS THIS JUST DOCUMENTING WHAT
HAS ALREADY BEEN DONE OVER THE
LAST NINE YEARS . LITERALLY, I
ONLY READ IT ONCE BEFORE THE
COMMITTEE MANY. I HAVE NOT HAD
TIME TO TALK WITH SOUND TRANSIT,
LAW, THE DEPARTMENTS IMPLICATED
BY IT JUST TO DO BASIC DUE
DILIGENCE FOR OPINING ON WHAT
THE RIGHT COURSE OF ACTION WOULD
BE. TO TALK --
>> THANK YOU. I WILL SAY I DID
TALK TO LAW, AND THEY DID NOT
FLAG FOR ME THAT THIS WOULD ADD
-- BECAUSE WE DO HAVE A LAW AT
THE STATE LEVEL THAT PREVENTS US
FROM SITTING ON PERMITS, YOU
KNOW, SO THAT WAS REALLY
IMPORTANT TO ME AS WELL THAT THE
WAY IT WAS WRITTEN WAS NOT
WRITTEN IN A WAY THAT WAS GOING
TO DELAY ANYTHING. I WILL SAY
THAT.
>> I THINK ALL THE INTENTION,
100% ON THE SAME PAGE. I THINK
THERE IS JUST BASIC DUE
DILIGENCE WE NEED TO DO BEFORE
WE REPRESENT THE EXECUTIVE OR
REPRESENT OTHER DEPARTMENTS OR
AGENCIES.
>> THANK YOU. COUNCILMEMBER
STRAUSS, AND THEN COUNCILMEMBER
MOORE.
>> THANK YOU. I WANTED TO
RESPOND. THE ONLY RETICENCE I
HAVE IS THAT I ONLY RECEIVED THE
LANGUAGE AN HOUR OR SO AGO.
EVERY TIME I'VE SPOKEN ON THIS
AMENDMENT, THE CONTENT AND
INTENT IS GOOD, MY RETICENCE IS
THAT I NEED TO MAKE SURE I TELL
MY CONSTITUENTS AND MY VOTERS
THAT I HAVE DONE MY JOB IN
REVIEWING THE LEGISLATION, WHICH
HAS NOT BEEN POSSIBLE IN THIS
SHORT TIMELINE. THANK YOU, CHAIR
.
>> COUNCILMEMBER MOORE .
>> THANK YOU, CHAIR. WHAT WAS I
GOING TO SAY? I THINK IT IS
IMPORTANT THAT WHEN WE LOOK AT
THE LANGUAGE OF THE AMENDMENT
THAT IT DOES SAY THE
CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT PLAN
SHALL INCORPORATE TO THE EXTENT
FEASIBLE PUBLIC COMMENT. THAT IS
A HUGE -- WHAT'S THE WORD?
CAVEAT TO THE EXTENT FEASIBLE. I
AM NOT AT ALL CONCERNED THAT
THIS IS GOING TO CREATE
UNNECESSARY DELAY OR UNNECESSARY
ADDITIONAL COST . BASICALLY, IT
IS JUST SAYING THAT YOU NEED TO
SHOW YOUR WORK , AS
COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA HAS
CONTINUED TO SAY, AND AT THE
BACK OF IT IT SHOWS YOU WHAT WE
WANT TO SEE IN YOUR WORK. I
THINK IF WE ARE ARGUING THAT IT
IS TOO BURDENSOME, TOO
CUMBERSOME TO INCORPORATE PUBLIC
FEEDBACK, THAT IS A SIGNIFICANT
PROBLEM. THE FACT THAT THERE IS
SO MUCH RETICENCE -- I
UNDERSTAND THE NEED TO DO DUE
DILIGENCE. IT IS VERY EASY TO
READ WHAT IS HERE. I THINK THE
INSTITUTIONAL POSITION IS ALWAYS
GIVE US MORE TIME , BUT IT IS
OUR JOB TO DECIDE WHETHER WHAT
WE ARE ASKING IS BURDENSOME, AND
I DON'T BELIEVE IT IS. I DON'T
THINK IT WILL ADD ANY ADDITIONAL
COSTS THAT YOU ARE ALREADY
REQUIRED TO DO THAT. EVEN IF IT
ADDS A LITTLE BIT ADDITIONAL
COSTS, THAT IS WHAT WE NEED TO
INCUR, BECAUSE WE ARE MAKING
SIGNIFICANT CHANGES , AND THE
PUBLIC HAS THE RIGHT TO BE
ENGAGED AND FOR US TO BE ABLE TO
GO BACK TO THEM WHEN THEY SAY
THEY HAVE NOT BEEN ENGAGED TO
SAY, ACTUALLY, YOU WERE. THIS IS
AS MUCH ABOUT COVERING OUR
GROUND AS IT IS ABOUT MAKING
SURE THAT A PROPER PROCESS IS
DONE . I'M NOT GOING TO VOTE
FOR THIS TO GET IT OUT OF
COMMITTEE TODAY IF THIS
AMENDMENT DOESN'T PASS. TALK
ABOUT SLOWING THINGS DOWN. THIS
IS A BASIC PROCESS AMENDMENT .
IT IS BEING -- ANYWAY. IT IS A
BASIC PROCESS AMENDMENT . IF IT
IS NOT, THAT IS A BIGGER
PROBLEM. THANK YOU.
>> BEFORE WE CONTINUE, I JUST
WANT TO BE CLEAR ABOUT OUR
TIMELINE. WHEN IS THIS VOTE --
IF WE VOTE OUT OF COMMITTEE
TODAY OR NEXT WEEK, WHEN DOES IT
COME BEFORE FULL COUNCIL FOR
CONSIDERATION? JUNE 10. OKAY.
REGARDLESS OF WHETHER WE PASS IT
OUT TODAY OR NEXT WEEK AFTER
PEOPLE HAVE HAD A CHANCE TO DO
DUE DILIGENCE FOR SOUND TRANSIT,
SDCI TO LOOK AT IT. IT DOESN'T
MATTER, IT WILL GO BEFORE FULL
COUNCIL UNTIL JUNE 10. CORRECT?
OKAY. SO AGAIN, I WANT TO BE
CLEAR ON THE TIMELINE.
COUNCILMEMBER RINCK, DID YOU
HAVE YOUR HAND UP? OKAY. RIGHT
NOW, THE ISSUE BEFORE US IS A
PROCEDURAL ONE. DO WE VOTE ON
THE AMENDMENT TO THE BILL , AND
THEN VOTE ON THE BILL , OR DO WE
VOTE TO POSTPONE? YOU COULDN'T
MAKE IT EASY FOR ME, COULD YOU?
GO AHEAD, PLEASE .
>> I AM GOING TO SUGGEST WE HOLD
-- THAT WE DON'T VOTE ON IT
TODAY, BECAUSE I BEEN HEARING MY
COLLEAGUES CHARACTERIZE MY
CONCERNS AS NOT WANTING SOUND
TRANSIT TO DO THE BASIC WORK WE
ARE ASKING THEM TO DO, AND BASED
ON THE CONTENT OF THE AMENDMENT,
WHICH IS FACTUALLY INACCURATE, I
WOULD SAY FALLS, I'VE SAID IT
AT EVERY POINT THAT THE
INTENTION OF THIS AMENDMENT IS
GOOD WITH THE PROBLEM BEING WE
ONLY JUST RECEIVED IT. IF THAT
IS THE CASE, YOU KNOW, I WOULD
SAY, LET'S HOLD THE BILL IN
COMMITTEE , LET'S HAVE TIME TO
BE ABLE TO READ IT WHILE WE ARE
NOT DOING, YOU KNOW, WHEN IT IS
NOT 30 TO 60 MINUTES BEFORE THE
COMMITTEE . I JUST REALLY HOPE,
COLLEAGUES, WE ARE NOT BECOMING
THE NEXT BELLEVUE IN REGARDS TO
SOUND TRANSIT. THANK YOU.
>> ALL RIGHT.
>> CHAIR, MAY I?
>> YES, PLEASE .
>> THANK YOU, CHAIR. HONESTLY, I
AM VERY STUNNED BY THIS
REACTION. I DID NOT MEAN TO
CAUSE DELAYS OR ISSUES FOR YOU
TODAY. MY APOLOGIES . THAT IS
NOT WHAT I WAS TRYING TO DO.
THIS IS -- ALSO, I WASN'T
TRYING TO DELAY THIS VOTE. THIS
IS AN IMPORTANT VOTE. IF WE'RE
TALKING ABOUT THIS BILL OR MIMIC
I AM BRINGING WOULD NOT CAUSE
DELAYS, BUT VOTING ON THESE
THINGS WILL. ALSO, COUNCILMEMBER
STRAUSS, I APPRECIATE THAT THIS
IS A WALK ON AMENDMENT. YOU TOO
HAVE BROUGHT WALK ON COMMITMENTS
IN THE PAST. WE HAVE, AS A BODY,
GIVEN EACH OTHER GRACE.
SOMETIMES IT TAKES A LITTLE
LONGER TO BRING THESE THINGS
FORWARD. BUT IF I HAD THOUGHT IT
WOULD CREATE THIS MUCH
DISCONTENT, I WOULD NOT HAVE
BROUGHT IT . I JUST DIDN'T WANT
TO DELAY THIS BOAT, BECAUSE THIS
IS AN IMPORTANT VOTE. I KNOW
THIS AMENDMENT WAS REALLY NOT --
THERE WAS NOT A LOT HERE , IN MY
OPINION . HAVING HAD THE OPINION
FROM LAW AND KNOWING THAT LAW
WAS VERY CLEAR , AND HAS BEEN
VERY CLEAR I'M NOT TRYING TO
DELAY THE PROCESS. I'M JUST
TRYING TO MAKE SURE WE HAVE
DOCUMENTATION FOR THE OUTREACH
THAT WAS DONE, SO IF WE ARE
CONSTANTLY -- WHEN WE GIVE
PERMITS AND MAKE OTHER
DECISIONS, NOT JUST PERMITTING,
WE ARE CONSTANTLY HEARING FROM
CONSTITUENTS, YOU DIDN'T LET US
KNOW THIS HAPPENS, YOU DIDN'T
HAVE A PUBLIC HEARING, AND SOME
OF THIS STUFF ISN'T US. WE ARE
GIVING PERMITS, BUT IT IS NOT
UNDER OUR CONTROL. AT THE VERY
LEAST, WE SHOULD BE ABLE TO SHOW
THE PUBLIC THAT OUTREACH THAT
WAS DONE, TO COUNCILMEMBER
MOORE'S PART, SO THEY DON'T SAY
NOBODY TOLD US WE COULD SAY,
ACTUALLY, IT IS RIGHT HERE ,
SORRY YOU DIDN'T SEE IT. THAT
PUTS US IN A MUCH STRONGER
POSITION THAN NOT BEING ABLE TO
PROFFER THAT AND BE ABLE TO GIVE
THAT TO OUR CONSTITUENTS. IT IS
TO PUT THE CITY IN A BETTER
POSITION THAT I OFFERED THIS.
AGAIN, APOLOGIES. I AM STUNNED
BY THE REACTION. THANK YOU,
CHAIR.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER
RIVERA. WE HAVE TALKED ABOUT THE
AMENDMENT COMING FORWARD. YOU
KNOW, BEING VERY UP FRONT THAT
AGAIN, WITH SOUND TRANSIT, SHOW
YOUR WORK. FROM WHAT I'VE BEEN
HEARING IN TERMS OF THE
ENGAGEMENT THAT HAS BEEN DONE,
THEY ARE DOING THE WORK. TO ME,
THIS IS REINFORCING THAT. I ALSO
UNDERSTAND THE POINT YOU ARE
MAKING TO SAY, YEAH, WE JUST SAW
THIS, SO WE REALLY CAN'T
COMMENT ON IT AS TO WHAT WE CAN
DO WITH IT. TRYING TO FIND A WAY
TO MOVE FORWARD. AGAIN,
UNDERSTAND THE SPIRIT AND INTENT
OF THE AMENDMENT . WE ALSO WANT
TO MOVE THIS LEGISLATION . WE
WANT TO DO -- YOU KNOW, WE WANT
TO GET THERE. TRYING TO FIGURE
OUT PROCEDURALLY HOW WE MAKE
THAT HAPPEN. COUNCILMEMBER
RINCK.
>> THANK YOU, CHAIR. I JUST HAD
AN ADDITIONAL QUESTION RELATED
TO THIS FOR MY OWN
UNDERSTANDING. DOES THIS
AMENDMENT CREATE NEW
REQUIREMENTS THAT HAVE NOT
PREVIOUSLY EXISTED?
>> NOT CURRENTLY , AND NOT IN
THE MAHER'S PROPOSAL. IT WOULD
BE A NEW REQUIREMENT FOR A
COMMUNITY OUTREACH PLAN. SORT OF
A KEY COMPONENT IS THAT IT IS A
PRIEST THE MIDDLE REQUIREMENT,
BUT THEN ALSO BECOMES PART OF
THE SDCI DIRECTOR'S REVIEW ONCE
THE APPLICATION IS MADE. IT IS
ULTIMATELY REFLECTED IN THE
DECISION THAT GOES ALONG WITH
THE PERMIT APPLICATION MADE BY
SOUND TRANSIT. A NEW COMPONENT
TO THIS IS THAT THERE IS A BODY
OF WORK THAT WOULD NEED TO
PRECEDE A PERMIT APPLICATION.
>> I THINK THERE IS ONE
ADDITIONAL PIECE TOO THAT NOT
ONLY PRECEDES THE PERMIT
APPLICATION ON THE PART OF THE
APPLICANT, BUT THEN THERE'S
ALSO THIS FINAL SENTENCE ABOUT
THE PERMIT DECISION SHALL
SUMMARIZE THE OUTREACH AND IT'S
PLAIN HOW THE DECISION ADDRESSES
PUBLIC, WHERE FEASIBLE. THAT
PIECE WE ARE TRYING TO DISSECT
IN REAL TIME HERE -- I THINK
THAT IS SOMETHING THAT I AM NOT
SURE WHAT THAT WOULD LOOK LIKE.
THAT IS SOMETHING THAT IS NOT
REQUIRED OF OTHER PERMITS NOW.
TRYING TO UNDERSTAND IF THIS IS
SOMETHING WE ARE APPLYING TO
SOUND TRANSIT THAT WE DON'T
APPLY TO OTHER PROJECTS. MAYBE
IT IS A VERY SIMPLE EXERCISE .
THAT IS SOMETHING WE WOULD WANT
TO GO BACK, ESPECIALLY SINCE IT
IMPLICATES DIRECTORS OF A COUPLE
OF -- DEPARTMENTS, WE WOULD WANT
TO CHECK WITH THOSE DEPARTMENTS
TO SEE WHAT THEY THINK THIS
MEANS FOR THEM.
>> CAN I ADD TO THAT? TYPICALLY,
IN A MASTER USE PERMIT DECISION,
WE HAVE PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD.
WE DO A POSTING ON THE SITE. WE
DO A MAILING TO EVERYONE WITHIN
300 FEET. THEY THEN SUBMIT
COMMENTS DIRECTLY TO THE
DEPARTMENT THAT BECOME THE BASIS
OF OUR DECISION AND
DECISION-MAKING. WHAT THIS DOES
IS SET THE PLAN THAT SOUND
TRANSIT WOULD BE RESPONSIBLE FOR
THAT WE WOULD APPROVE . THEY
WOULD IMPLEMENT, EXCEPT THE
COMMENTS AND SHOW HOW THEY ARE
RESPONSIVE TO THE COMMENTS. THEN
WE WOULD HAVE TO RENDER ABOUT OA
RELATIVE TO THEIR ENGAGEMENT
PLAN. THAT IS SOMETHING THAT
DOESN'T EXIST IN THE CODE RIGHT
NOW. NORMALLY, WE ARE RESPONSIVE
TO THE PUBLIC COMMENTS SUBMITTED
DIRECTLY TO THE DEPARTMENT, AND
NOT THROUGH AN OUTSIDE AGENCY
AND THEN CEMENTED TO THE
DEPARTMENT. THAT IS MY CONCERN
WITH IT, THAT NORMALLY THERE IS
A DIRECT REPRESENTATION BETWEEN
THE PUBLIC AND THE DEPARTMENT
FOR US TO RENDER A DECISION.
>> THANK YOU ALL FOR WEIGHING IN
ON THAT. THAT IS HELPFUL
CLARIFICATION. I THINK,
COLLEAGUES, TO THIS POINT, THESE
ARE THE PIECES I AM SEEKING TO
UNDERSTAND BEFORE TAKING A VOTE
ON THIS. UNDERSTAND THAT LAW HAS
WEIGHED IN. I WOULD LIKE TO HEAR
DIRECTLY FROM THE DEPARTMENTS
THAT WILL BE IMPLEMENTING THIS
WHAT THIS WOULD MEAN
LOGISTICALLY AND THE COST AND
TIME ASSOCIATED WITH IT. I JUST
WANT TO HAVE THAT KNOWLEDGE
BEFORE TAKING A VOTE ON THIS
MATTER. CERTAINLY WOULD WELCOME
MORE TIME FOR THAT ANALYSIS TO
BE CONDUCTED AND BROUGHT BEFORE
US. THANK YOU.
>> COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA .
>> THANK YOU, CHAIR. WE ARE NOT
PRECLUDED FROM DOING OUR OWN
OUTREACH AND DOING ALL THAT.
SOUND TRANSIT IS NOT OUR AGENCY.
THEY'RE NOT UNDER OUR
AUTHORITY. ALL WE ARE SAYING IS
SOUND TRANSIT, YOU'RE GOING TO
DO OUTREACH AND HAVE TO TELL US
WHAT OUTREACH WE ARE DOING. IT
DOESN'T PRECLUDE OUR OUTREACH,
BUT IT SHOULD IT ALSO MEANS THAT
WE ARE ONLY GOING TO RELY ON OUR
OUTREACH AND NOT THERE OUTREACH
SINCE THEY ARE THE ONES ACTUALLY
HAVING THE IMPACT ON COMMUNITY.
ONE DOES NOT PRECLUDE THE OTHER.
THIS DOES NOT SAY WE DON'T GET
TO STILL DO OUR OWN OUTREACH. I
JUST WANTED TO MAKE THAT VERY
CLEAR . CHAIR, I DO HAVE A
QUESTION ABOUT -- DO WE HAVE A
LAND USE COMMITTEE NEXT WEEK?
>> YES, WE DO. JUNE 4.
>> WERE YOU PROPOSING EARLIER TO
DELAY THE ENTIRE VOTE UNTIL
TUESDAY?
>> WE COULD DO THAT.
>> MY COLLEAGUES CAN HAVE MORE
TIME , AND DEPARTMENTS CAN HAVE
MORE TIME WITH THE AMENDMENT.
>> THAT WAS SOMETHING I WAS
THINKING ABOUT. I WAS ACTUALLY
-- THIS IS WHERE, PROCEDURALLY,
I WANT TO FIGURE OUT WHAT WE ARE
GOING TO DO. ADVANCED THE BILL
WITHOUT THE AMENDMENT , AND THEN
HAVE THE AMENDMENT BE TAKEN UP
IN THE NEXT COMMITTEE MEETING
BEFORE WE GET TO THE NEXT
COUNCIL MEETING, OR DELAY THE
VOTE UNTIL NEXT WEEK ON THIS
AMENDED BILL TO GIVE OUR
PARTNERS AT SDCI, SDOT, SOUND
TRANSIT AND COLLEAGUES TO HAVE A
CHANCE TO REVIEW THE AMENDMENT
AND SEE HOW THAT PLAYS WITH
EVERYTHING. AGAIN, GIVEN THAT ,
IF WE VOTE OUT OF COMMITTEE ON
THE FOURTH, IT CAN STILL BE
TAKEN UP AT FULL COUNCIL ON THE
10th. AS IT STANDS RIGHT NOW,
EVEN IF WE VOTED ON IT TODAY, IT
IS STILL NOT COME TO BE UNTIL
THE TENSE WHEN THIS WILL BE
BEFORE THE FULL COUNCIL.
>> I WOULD FEEL MOST COMFORTABLE
NOT VOTING ON THE BILL TODAY AND
WAITING TILL TUESDAY, AND THEN
FOLKS CAN HAVE THEIR TIME WITH
THE AMENDMENT FOR YOUR
CONSIDERATION, CHAIR.
>> ALL RIGHT. WHAT I'M HEARING
-- I'M GETTING A STRONG FEELING
THAT YOU ALL THE TIME .
COLLEAGUES NEED TIME. I DON'T
KNOW IF I CAN JUST UNILATERALLY
DECIDE THAT WE'RE GOING TO
DELAY THE VOTE ON THIS FULL BILL
UNTIL THE NEXT LAND USE
COMMITTEE, WHICH WILL BE NEXT
WEDNESDAY . SO --
>> I THINK, AS A CHAIR, YOU CAN.
WE HAVE A PARLIAMENTARIAN. AS
THE CHAIR, UNLESS SOMEBODY WANTS
TO MOVE THE BILL, YOU CAN
ADJOURN THE MEETING , THERE HAS
BEEN DISCUSSION, AND WE CAN COME
BACK ON WEDNESDAY AND TALK MORE.
>> OKAY. THANK YOU FOR THAT. ANY
OTHER THOUGHTS OR COMMENTS? YOU
KNOW, AS THE CHAIR OF THE
COMMITTEE, THAT IS WHERE I THINK
I WANT TO GO. I WANT TO GIVE MY
COLLEAGUES TIME. I WANT TO GIVE
OUR PARTNERS TIME TO CONSIDER
EVERYTHING. HOPEFULLY, WE WILL
HAVE A FINAL VOTE NEXT WEEK ,
MOVE EVERYTHING FORWARD TO KEEP
US ON TIME, AND ON SCHEDULE. IF
THAT IS EVEN A THING WITH
TRANSPORTATION PROJECTS. I
DON'T KNOW. ANY OTHER COMMENTS
FROM THE COMMITTEE? GREAT. GIVEN
THAT, ANY ADVICE FROM THE CLERK?
VERY GOOD. OKAY. I WANT TO THANK
EVERYONE. WE HAVE REACHED THE
END OF THE AGENDA. WANT TO THANK
YOU ALL FOR PRESENTING. I WANT
TO THANK COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA
FOR BRINGING FORWARD THE
AMENDMENT THAT, GET, WE TALKED
ABOUT I LIKE IT. LET'S DO IT,
BUT LET'S GIVE COLLEAGUES TIME
TO ABSORB IT . WERE GOING TO
HAVE THE FINAL VOTE NEXT WEEK AT
THE JUNE 4 LAND USE COMMITTEE,
WHICH WILL BE AT 2:00 P.M.
WEDNESDAY. ANY FURTHER BUSINESS
TO COME BEFORE THE COMMITTEE?
OKAY. HEARING NONE AND SEEING
NONE. WE ARE ADJOURNED. THANK
YOU VERY MUCH, EVERYONE.
APPRECIATE YOUR PARTICIPATION
TODAY.
>> THANK YOU, CHAIR.