-- HELLO? OKAY, THERE WE GO. ALL
RIGHT. GOOD AFTERNOON. THE
AUGUST 3rd, 2026 MEETING OF THE
HOUSING RIGHTS AND CIVIL RIGHTS
COMMITTEE WILL COME TO ORDER. IT
IS 2:02 P.M.. I'M DIONNE
FOSTER, CHAIR OF THE HOUSING AND
CIVIL RIGHTS COMMITTEE. WILL THE
COMMITTEE CLERK PLEASE CALL THE
ROLL?
-- COUNCIL PRESIDENT
HOLLINGSWORTH HERE.
COUNCILMEMBER JUAREZ HERE.
COUNCILMEMBER RINCK HERE. VICE
CHAIR. LIN HERE. CHAIR FOSTER.
HERE. CHAIR. THERE ARE FIVE
MEMBERS PRESENT.
-- GREAT. IF THERE IS NO
OBJECTION, THE AGENDA WILL BE
ADOPTED. HEARING NO OBJECTION,
THE AGENDA IS ADOPTED. WE WILL
NOW OPEN THE HYBRID PUBLIC
COMMENT PERIOD. PUBLIC COMMENTS
SHOULD RELATE TO ITEMS ON
TODAY'S AGENDA OR WITHIN THE
PURVIEW OF THIS COMMITTEE CLERK.
HOW MANY SPEAKERS ARE SIGNED UP
TODAY?
-- CURRENTLY, WE HAVE 17
SPEAKERS IN PERSON AND 719
REMOTE.
-- OKAY, GREAT. SO THAT IS MORE
THAN 30 PEOPLE. SO EACH SPEAKER
WILL HAVE ONE MINUTE. WE WILL
START WITH IN PERSON SPEAKERS.
FIRST CLERK CAN YOU PLEASE READ
THE PUBLIC COMMENT INSTRUCTIONS?
-- THE PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD IS
UP TO 60 MINUTES. SPEAKERS WILL
BE CALLED IN THE ORDER IN WHICH
THEY ARE REGISTERED. WE WILL
BEGIN WITH IN-PERSON SPEAKERS
AND THEN MOVE TO REMOTE
SPEAKERS. SPEAKERS WILL HEAR A
CHIME WHEN 10 SECONDS ARE LEFT
OF THEIR TIME. SPEAKERS MICS
WILL BE MUTE IF THEY DO NOT END
THEIR COMMENTS WITHIN THE
ALLOTTED TIME TO ALLOW US TO
CALL THE NEXT SPEAKER. THE
PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD IS NOW
OPEN, AND WE WILL BEGIN WITH THE
FIRST SPEAKER ON THE LIST. FIRST
SPEAKER IS JESSE SWISHER. SPEARS
WILL BE FOLLOWED BY HOWARD GALE.
-- HELLO, COUNCIL MEMBERS, THANK
YOU SO MUCH FOR THE OPPORTUNITY
TO SPEAK TODAY. MY NAME IS JESSE
SWISHER SPEARS, AND I'M THE
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR AT SEATTLE
HUMANE. WE ARE PART OF AN ANIMAL
WELFARE COALITION IN SUPPORT OF
CB 121254, ESPECIALLY AS IT
RELATES TO THE PROHIBITION OF
PET FEES BEYOND A REASONABLE
REFUNDABLE PET DAMAGE DEPOSIT,
HOUSING INSTABILITY IS ALREADY
ONE OF THE TOP REASONS THAT PETS
ARE SURRENDERED TO SHELTERS AT
SEATTLE HUMANE, 15% OF PET
SURRENDERS ARE DIRECTLY TIED TO
HOUSING RELATED BARRIERS,
MEANING THAT THESE COSTS ARE NOT
ABSTRACT. THEY ARE SEPARATING
FAMILIES FROM THEIR ANIMALS FEES
THAT ARE NOT CONNECTED TO ACTUAL
DAMAGE CREATED. UNINTENDED
CREATE UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES.
THEY PUSH RENTERS INTO
IMPOSSIBLE CHOICES, INCREASED
SURRENDER PRESSURES ON SHELTERS
AND SHIFT PRIVATE HOUSING COSTS
ONTO ALREADY STRAINED ANIMAL
WELFARE SYSTEMS. WE ASK YOU TO
ACT AFFIRMATIVELY ON THE JUNK
FEES ORDINANCE SO FEWER RENTERS
ARE FORCED TO CHOOSE BETWEEN A
ROOF OVER THEIR HEADS AND
KEEPING A BELOVED PET. THANK
YOU.
-- THANK YOU. OUR NEXT SPEAKER
IS HOWARD GAIL, FOLLOWED BY
HANNAH ZIFF.
-- GOOD AFTERNOON. I'VE LIVED
AND RENTED IN SEATTLE FOR A FEW
MONTHS SHORT OF 30 YEARS NOW
OVER THOSE 30 YEARS, PROBABLY, I
WOULD SAY 200 TIMES WOULD BE AN
UNDERESTIMATE OF HOW MANY TIMES
I'VE MADE COMPLAINTS ABOUT
INSUFFICIENCY IN MY BUILDING,
WHICH LANDLORDS HAVE NOT
RESPONDED TO, AND SDOT, I WOULD
SAY 98% OF THE TIME DOES
NOTHING. THE QUESTION IS, WE'RE
NOW HOPING AND PRAYING UNDER
THIS NEW LEGISLATION THAT SDCI
DOES SOMETHING AFTER NOT DOING
ANYTHING FOR MANY, MANY DECADES.
I WILL ALSO POINT OUT IN THE
FALL OF 2023, THERE WAS A SLY
PAST TO CREATE A WORK GROUP FOR
RENTERS STANDARDS ENTITY, JUST
LIKE WE HAVE AN OFFICE OF LABOR
STANDARDS. SDCI UNDERMINED THAT.
SO WHAT I'M REQUESTING AND WHAT
I'VE REQUESTED IN EMAILS TO ALL
OF YOU, AND I DON'T SEE IT ON
THE AMENDMENTS, IS SOME WAY TO
AUDIT AND ACTUALLY TRACK WHAT IT
IS THAT SDCI DOES OR DOESN'T DO
THAT IS SEVERELY LACKING. THIS
IS MINIMAL LEGISLATION AS IT IS,
BUT NOT PROVIDING SOME KIND OF
GUARDRAILS TO ENSURE THAT IT'S
ACTED ON IS REALLY DEVASTATING.
-- THANK YOU. OUR NEXT SPEAKER
IS HANNAH ZIFF, FOLLOWED BY
KEVIN SCHILLING.
-- HI, MY NAME IS HANNAH ZIFF,
AND I'M LOBBYING ON BEHALF OF
DOWNTOWN NOT BEING EMPTY. I
THINK THAT A CITY THRIVES WHEN
THERE'S A LOT OF ARTISTS
DOWNTOWN. AND I'M SAYING WE
ALSO NEED TO STIMULATE THE
ECONOMY FOR THE PEOPLE WHO LIVE
HERE. SO WHEN WE'RE MAKING THESE
CHOICES, CAN WE PLEASE TRY TO
PROMOTE A THRIVING ARTIST
COMMUNITY DOWNTOWN? THANK YOU.
-- THANK YOU. OUR NEXT SPEAKER
IS KEVIN SCHILLING, FOLLOWED BY
CARTER NELSON.
-- GOOD AFTERNOON, CHAIR FOSTER.
MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE, KEVIN
SCHILLING, DIRECTOR OF
GOVERNMENT AFFAIRS FOR THE
RENTAL HOUSING ASSOCIATION OF
WASHINGTON, REPRESENTING OVER
1000 INDEPENDENT RENTAL HOUSING
PROVIDERS IN THE CITY OF
SEATTLE. WE SUPPORT TRANSPARENCY
AND RENTAL PRICING. RENTERS
SHOULD KNOW THE FULL COST OF A
HOME BEFORE THEY SIGN A LEASE,
BUT THIS ORDINANCE GOES FAR
BEYOND JUST TRANSPARENCY. THE
ORDINANCE BANS ITEMIZED FEES,
BUT IT DOESN'T ELIMINATE THE
COSTS BEHIND THEM WHEN THEY WHEN
THEY CAN'T BE CHARGED TO THE
RESIDENT WHO USES THE SERVICE,
THEY MOVE INTO BASE RENT FOR
EVERYONE. AND THE ENFORCEMENT
REGIME IS BUILT FOR CORPORATE
PORTFOLIOS, BUT IT LANDS ON
SMALL PROVIDERS. A NATIONAL
OPERATOR HAS A COMPLIANCE
DEPARTMENT FOR THAT. THE OWNER
RENTING OUT HALF A DUPLEX DOES
NOT. THAT COULD BE SOMEONE PUT
OUT OF BUSINESS, AND OUR
MEMBERSHIP DOES NOT HAVE ACCESS
TO THE PRIVATE EQUITY SAFETY
NETS OF FULL TIME COMPLIANCE AND
ACCOUNTING STAFF. WE ASK YOU TO
AMEND IT A DISCLOSURE STANDARD
INSTEAD OF A FEE BAN. SCALED
REQUIREMENTS FOR SMALL
PROVIDERS. A PUBLIC HEARING
BEFORE YOU ACT AND A CURING
PERIOD FOR HOUSING PROVIDERS TO
SOLVE PROBLEMS BEFORE THEY
BECOME LAWSUITS. WE'RE READY TO
HELP WRITE THAT LANGUAGE. THANK
YOU VERY MUCH.
-- THANK YOU. OUR NEXT SPEAKER
IS CARTER NELSON, FOLLOWED BY
CLIVE MAYWARD.
-- GOOD AFTERNOON, CHAIR FOSTER
AND MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE,
CARTER NELSON, ON BEHALF OF THE
COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE
DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATION, OR
CREDO WASHINGTON STATE,
REPRESENTING THOSE WHO DESIGN,
BUILD, FINANCE AND OPERATE
RENTAL HOUSING ACROSS SEATTLE
AND WASHINGTON STATE. CREDO
STRONGLY SUPPORTS TRANSPARENCY
AND ADEQUATE DISCLOSURE. RENTERS
SHOULD KNOW WHAT THEY'RE
SIGNING UP TO PAY, AND WE
SUPPORT REASONABLE POLICIES THAT
ENSURE THOSE COSTS ARE
COMMUNICATED CLEARLY AND
UPFRONT. WE APPRECIATED THE
OPPORTUNITY TO PARTICIPATE IN
THE MAYOR'S STAKEHOLDER PROCESS.
HOWEVER, THE FEEDBACK AND
RECOMMENDATIONS MADE BY HOUSING
PROVIDERS ARE NOT REFLECTED IN
THE LEGISLATION BEFORE YOU
TODAY. OUR CONCERN IS NOT WITH
TRANSPARENCY. IT'S THAT THIS
PROPOSAL SENDS ANOTHER SIGNAL OF
REGULATORY UNCERTAINTY AT A TIME
WHEN SEATTLE DESPERATELY NEEDS
MORE HOUSING DEVELOPMENT, NOT
LESS AFFORDABILITY WILL
ULTIMATELY BE SOLVED BY
INCREASING HOUSING SUPPLY.
RENTERS WILL BEAR THE COST WHEN
FEWER HOMES ARE LIKELY TO COME
ONLINE IN THE YEARS AHEAD. WE
URGE THE COUNCIL TO TAKE
ADDITIONAL TIME FOR STAKEHOLDER
ENGAGEMENT. WE CAN ACHIEVE
GREATER TRANSPARENCY FOR RENTERS
WHILE ALSO MAINTAINING
PREDICTABILITY NECESSARY TO
ENCOURAGE INVESTMENT AND MUCH
NEEDED HOUSING. THANK YOU. THANK
YOU.
-- OUR NEXT SPEAKER IS CLIVE
HAYWARD, FOLLOWED BY VIOLET
LAVERTY.
-- THANK YOU. AND JUST A
REMINDER, WHEN YOU HEAR THE
CHIME, YOU'VE GOT 10 SECONDS
LEFT AND WE'LL TRY TO BE MOVING
THAT A LITTLE BIT MORE CLOSELY
TO THE TIME. THANKS EVERYONE.
-- MY NAME IS CLIVE HAYWARD.
I'M A MAGICIAN. I PERFORMED ON
THE SEATTLE WATERFRONT FOR 11
YEARS. THE CITY HAS PAINTED FIVE
BLUE BOXES ON THE WATERFRONT AND
CALLED THEM FREE SPEECH ZONES.
ALSO OUTSIDE THOSE BOXES, MY ACT
IS A PERFORMANCE. IT'S A
TRESPASS. POLICE CALLED BAND FOR
UP TO A YEAR. ARRESTED. IF I
COME BACK, THAT'S PRIOR
RESTRAINT ON PROTECTED
EXPRESSION IN A PUBLIC SPACE.
IT'S NOT JUST MAGICIANS, IT'S
BALLOON TWISTERS, LIVING
STATUES, MUSICIANS AND PAINTERS.
THE CITY EXCLUDED A PAINTER FROM
THE WATERFRONT ON THE FOURTH OF
JULY, WATERFRONT ARTISTS HAVE
RENT OR MORTGAGES AND BILLS AND
FAMILIES TO FEED. ENFORCEMENT IS
ARBITRARY, DOESN'T SILENCE JUST
ARTISTS. IT DESTABILIZES
HOUSEHOLDS. I'VE WRITTEN THE
MAYOR, THE CITY, THE SEATTLE
CENTER INSPECTOR GENERAL, THE
OFFICE OF CIVIL RIGHTS. NO ONE
HAS ANSWERED. THE COMMITTEE HAS
CIVIL RIGHTS IN ITS NAME. WILL
YOU HAVE SOMEONE HELP?
-- AND YOU CAN ADD ADDITIONAL
COMMENTS THERE IN THE BOX. THANK
YOU. OUR NEXT SPEAKER WILL BE
FOLLOWED BY ALICE LOCKHART.
VIOLET, YOU'RE UP.
-- GOOD AFTERNOON,
COUNCILMEMBERS. DIONNE. FOSTER.
EDDIE. LIN. AND EVERYONE, THANK
YOU FOR HEARING ALL OF US. I
REPRESENT THE COMMUNITY FIRST.
MY NAME IS VIOLET LAVERTY AND,
I'M AN EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF A
HOUSING JUSTICE, ALSO A
COMMUNITY ACTIVIST. FOR MANY
YEARS. I SPEAK FOR HUNDREDS OF
TENANTS RIGHT NOW. JUNK FEES IS
A BILL THAT REALLY WILL HELP
MANY PEOPLE. AND WE SUPPORT
SUPPORTS THE AMENDMENTS THAT ARE
COMING. THAT WE READ IS ONE AND
TWO, BUT WE URGE CITY COUNCIL
THAT TO TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION
MANY YEARS THESE UNNECESSARY
FEES HAVE LED TO SOMETIMES
EVICTIONS AND MORE BARRIERS THAT
TENANTS FACE EVERY DAY. AND I'M
NOT JUST TALKING BECAUSE I'M A
RENTER, TOO. I'M TALKING ABOUT
THE HUNDREDS OF PEOPLE THAT COME
TO TOA TO ABOUT THESE JUNK FEES.
SO THANK YOU SO MUCH.
-- THANK YOU. OUR NEXT SPEAKER
IS ALICE LOCKHART, FOLLOWED BY
TANISHA THOMAS BIRD. AND THEN
OUR THIRD SPEAKER WILL BE
MICHELLE THOMAS.
-- GOOD AFTERNOON. COMMITTEE
MEMBERS., I'M ALICE LOCKHART
WITH 350 SEATTLE EDDIE. I
COULDN'T BE HERE. SENT ME., WE
WOULD BOTH LIKE TO THANK YOU ALL
SO MUCH FOR WORKING WITH
COMMUNITY. RECENTLY. THIS HAS
BEEN A GREAT COUNCIL. RECENTLY
WE APPRECIATED THE, THE COME ON,
COME ON. DATA CENTER MORATORIUM.
AND NOW YOU'RE WORKING ON THIS,
WHICH IS SO IMPORTANT., 350
SEATTLE HAS BEEN A MEMBER OF
STATE HOUSE STAY HEALTHY
COALITION SINCE ITS INCEPTION.,
BECAUSE WE MEET OUR CLIMATE
GOALS WHEN WE CAN PROVIDE SAFE
AND STABLE WORKFORCE HOUSING
THAT DOESN'T INCLUDE A LONG
COMMUTE. THIS ISN'T ABOUT
TRANSPARENCY. THIS IS ABOUT
BASIC FAIRNESS. AND YOU ALL ARE
WORKING TO PUT BASIC FAIRNESS
INTO THE, AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE
LESS POWERFUL AND THE MORE
POWERFUL. THANK YOU ALL SO MUCH.
-- OUR NEXT SPEAKER, TANISHA
THOMAS, FOLLOWED BY MICHELLE
THOMAS AND THEN OWEN KNIGHT.
-- HELLO, MY NAME IS TANISHA
THOMPSON BIRD, AND I'M CAMPAIGN
DIRECTOR AT GOT GREEN. I'M HERE
TODAY TO SPEAK IN FAVOR OF
STRENGTHENING AND ENFORCING
RENTER PROTECTIONS AND BANNING
JUNK FEES WITHOUT WATERED DOWN
AMENDMENTS. I HAVE BEEN WORKING
WITH TENANTS LIVING IN MARINA
VISTA IN DISTRICT TWO, FOR A
VERY LONG TIME., AND ONE OF THE
MANY, AS ONE OF THE MANY PUBLIC
HOUSING SITES THAT ARE OWNED AND
OPERATED BY SEATTLE HOUSING
AUTHORITY, THE STORIES THAT I
HAVE HEARD FROM MARINA VISTA AND
OTHER TENANTS, ABOUT LIVING IN
DISREPAIR AND NEGLECT ARE
EXTREMELY CONCERNING. TENANTS
ARE LIVING IN UNHEALTHY
CONDITIONS, LIVING WITH BROKEN
APPLIANCES, MOLD LEAKS, FLOODS,
ELECTRICAL ISSUES, AND MORE
WAITING WEEKS, MONTHS AND EVEN
YEARS FOR REPAIRS TO GET DONE.
IF YOU ARE INTERESTED IN
LEARNING MORE DETAILS ABOUT THE
CONDITIONS TENANTS ARE LIVING
IN, YOU CAN READ OUR REPORT ON
GOD GREENS WEBSITE. BECAUSE
TENANT PROTECTIONS ARE NOT
STRONG ENOUGH, IT HAS BEEN
CHALLENGING FOR TENANTS.
-- AND ADD ADDITIONAL COMMENTS
IN THE BOX THERE.
-- OKAY, IT'S CHALLENGING FOR
THEM TO HOLD SEPA ACCOUNTABLE.
-- MICHELLE THOMAS, THEN OWEN
KNIGHT, FOLLOWED BY.
-- HI, I'M MICHELLE THOMAS WITH
THE WASHINGTON HOUSING ALLIANCE
HERE IN STRONG SUPPORT OF THE
BAN TO THE PROPOSED BAN ON JUNK
FEES, WE'RE HEARING FROM
RENTERS ACROSS THE CITY AND
ACROSS THE STATE ABOUT UNFAIR,
EXPENSIVE AND DECEPTIVE FEES
THAT THEY'RE ALREADY PAYING ON
TOP OF TODAY'S SKY HIGH RENT,
MANY TENANTS REPORT THAT FEES
ARE ADDED AFTER MOVE IN AND AT
LEAST RENEWAL, TRAPPING TENANTS
WHO CAN'T AFFORD TO MOVE INTO
SOMETHING THAT THEY CAN'T AFFORD
TO PAY, AND MERE TRANSPARENCY
CANNOT SOLVE. TENANTS REPORT SO
MANY FEES, INCLUDING FEES, TO
PAY THEIR RENT FEES TO COVER
UTILITIES AND COMMON AREAS, AND
THE MANAGEMENT OFFICES,
IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT FEES AND MY
FAVORITE FEES TO SUBMIT
MAINTENANCE REQUESTS OUT OF
STATE. THIRD PARTY COMPANIES ARE
INCREASINGLY ENTERING INTO
CONTRACTS WITH LANDLORDS FOR
SHAM SERVICES THAT TENANTS PAY,
AND THAT LANDLORDS TAKE A CUT
OF. THIS IS ONE OF THE BIG
REASONS THAT JUNK FEES ARE ON
THE RISE NATIONWIDE. YOU HAVE AN
OPPORTUNITY TO STOP THIS. PLEASE
VOTE YES TODAY ON THIS CRITICAL
LEGISLATION. HOWEVER, AS OTHERS
HAVE SAID, WE BELIEVE THAT
AMENDMENTS THREE AND FOUR NEED A
LITTLE BIT MORE WORK, IN FULL
COUNCIL TO ADDRESS SOME POSSIBLE
MISINTERPRETATIONS. THANK YOU
-- ALL. NEXT SPEAKERS. OWEN
KNIGHT, FOLLOWED BY AND THEN
HEIDI D ANDRADE
-- THANK YOU, COUNCIL, FOR
BRINGING THIS PROPOSAL FORWARD.
I'M MY NAME IS OWEN KNIGHT.
I'M A RENTER IN DISTRICT FOUR.,
I PAY ABOUT $100 EACH MONTH JUST
IN JUNK FEES ON TOP OF MY RENT.,
SO THAT'S ABOUT $1,200 A YEAR
JUST IN JUNK FEES. LIKE SETTING
ASIDE THE COST OF RENT., I
RECENTLY SIGNED MY LEASE AGAIN
AND PAID A $100 RENEWAL FEE,
WHICH IS A LITTLE GOOFY THERE.
SO I HOPE THAT THIS PROPOSAL
MOVES FORWARD SO THAT IF I DO
HAVE TO SIGN MY LEASE AGAIN, I
CAN SAVE $100. MUCH APPRECIATE
IF THE COUNCIL CAN DO THAT. I
ALSO WANT TO THANK
COUNCILMEMBERS, RINCK AND FOSTER
FOR BRINGING FORWARD AMENDMENTS
ONE AND TWO. I THINK THOSE ARE
REALLY CONSTRUCTIVE AND HELP
STRENGTHEN THE BILL. I DID WANT
TO RAISE SOME CONCERNS IN
PARTICULAR ABOUT AMENDMENT
THREE. I THINK THE INTENTION TO
THAT AMENDMENT IS GOOD, RIGHT?
WE SHOULD TRY AND PROVIDE
FORGIVENESS AND GIVE SECOND
CHANCES. BUT I ALSO THINK THAT
THE EXISTING PROPOSAL, WITH ITS
FIRST TIME OFFENSE WAIVER, IS A
GOOD FIRST STEP THERE. AND I
THINK THIS PROPOSAL NEEDS SOME
MORE WORK.
-- THANK YOU. THANK YOU. OUR
NEXT SPEAKER IS FOLLOWED BY
HEIDI DE ANDRADE.
-- THANK YOU, COUNCIL MEMBERS.
MY NAME IS AND I'M THE GENERAL
MANAGER FOR THE TRANSIT RIDERS
UNION. I'M ALSO HERE TODAY AS
THE CO-COORDINATOR OF THE STATE
HOUSE STAY HEALTHY COALITION,
WHICH IS A COALITION OF OVER 40
ORGANIZATIONS REPRESENTING
THOUSANDS AND THOUSANDS OF
TENANTS WHO NEED RELIEF. AND
THIS LEGISLATION HERE TODAY
PROVIDES RELIEF. IT DOESN'T
SIMPLY SAY, WE CAN TELL YOU HOW
MUCH YOU'RE WE'RE SCREWING YOU
OVER. WE'RE ACTUALLY GOING TO DO
SOMETHING ABOUT IT. AND SO I'M
HERE TODAY ON BEHALF OF THE
THOUSANDS AND THOUSANDS OF
COMMUNITY MEMBERS WHO ARE ASKING
FOR YOU TO HELP US AVOID YET
ANOTHER YEAR OF RECORD EVICTIONS
IN SEATTLE TO PASS THIS
LEGISLATION WITH AMENDMENTS ONE
AND TWO, AMENDMENTS THREE AND
FOUR ARE ACTUALLY POTENTIALLY
REALLY POWERFUL TOOLS FOR
TENANTS AND TENANT RIGHTS, AND
WE SUPPORT THOSE IN SPIRIT.
HOWEVER, WE DO HAVE CONCERNS
ABOUT THEM BEING POTENTIALLY
MISINTERPRETED AND MISUSED BY
LANDLORDS AND THEIR ATTORNEYS.
AND AS AN I REALLY HOPE THAT WE
CAN WORK WITH YOU TO MAKE SURE
THAT THE SPIRIT OF WHAT YOU'RE
TRYING TO DO IS EFFECTUATED.
THANK YOU.
-- ALL RIGHT. NEXT SPEAKER IS
HEIDI DE ANDRADE, FOLLOWED BY
LEXI SALAS.
-- HI. THANK YOU FOR LETTING ME.
THANK YOU FOR LETTING ME SPEAK.
MY NAME IS HEIDI DE ANDRADE. MY
BROTHERS, JAMIE FACKLER. SO IF
YOU NEED TO KNOW MORE ABOUT
THIS, PLEASE REACH OUT TO HIM.
I'M HERE ON BEHALF OF MY SON,
MERCADO DE ANDRADE. HE IS NOT
HERE TODAY BECAUSE HE COMMITTED
SUICIDE IN JANUARY DUE TO BEING
EVICTED. HIS EVICTION WAS DUE TO
A WORK INJURY WHERE L AND I DID
NOT PAY HIM IN A PROMPT ENOUGH
TIME. WHEN I WENT THROUGH HIS
THINGS, THE THE FEES THAT RUBS
WERE CHARGING HIM WERE $180 A
MONTH ON A $1,300, 600 SQUARE
FOOT APARTMENT. IT HAD STARTED
AT 50 WHEN HE FIRST WENT IN AND
WENT UP., THE STRESS OF NOT
BEING ABLE TO AFFORD TO LIVE IN
THE CITY IS THE TEXT I GOT WHEN
HE KILLED HIMSELF. SO I AM
HOPING THAT YOU PASS THIS. I
KNOW THAT I HAVEN'T READ IT ALL,
THERE'S MORE TO IT, BUT THE
RUBS FEES ARE NOT SUSTAINABLE.
WE NEED TO HAVE MORE SUPPORT FOR
THE PEOPLE IN THE CITY. WE
DON'T HAVE IT. RENTING IN THE
CITY IS UNAFFORDABLE FOR MOST
PEOPLE. THANK YOU.
-- THANK YOU.
-- [APPLAUSE]
-- ALL RIGHT. NEXT SPEAKER IS
LEXI, FOLLOWED BY HOLLY WILLIS.,
-- THANK YOU FOR SHARING THAT.
STORY. MY NAME IS LEXI SALAS. I
LIVE IN DISTRICT THREE, AND I'M
HERE BECAUSE OUR CITY NEEDS TO
BAN JUNK FEES AND CREATE SYSTEMS
WHERE RENTERS CAN TRULY SEEK
JUSTICE. WHEN OUR LANDLORDS
VIOLATE OUR PROTECTIONS. I LIKE
AMENDMENTS ONE AND TWO. I
APPRECIATE THE SPIRITS OF THREE
AND FOUR, BUT I THINK THEY NEED
MORE WORK., I HAVE SOUGHT
SUPPORT FROM BOTH SDCI AND THE
HEARING EXAMINER ABOUT EXISTING
VIOLATIONS, AND IT RESULTED IN
MY LANDLORD GETTING A SLAP ON
THE WRIST WHILE CONTINUING
VIOLATIONS. OUR CITY'S
AFFORDABILITY CRISIS IS LIFE OR
DEATH FOR RENTERS. AS YOU JUST
HEARD. AND WHILE LANDLORDS
EMPHASIZE THE COST OF BUSINESS,
US RENTERS EMPHASIZE THE COST OF
LIFE. AND SO I ASK YOU TO STAND
WITH STRONG RENTER PROTECTIONS
AND ACCOUNTABILITY AGAINST
EXPLOITATION, AGAINST RENTERS.,
IT LITERALLY SAVES LIVES.
-- OUR FINAL THREE IN-PERSON
SPEAKERS ARE HOLLY WILLIS,
FOLLOWED BY KATE RUBEN AND THEN
LYDIA RUBENSTEIN
-- GOOD AFTERNOON, COMMITTEE
MEMBERS. MY NAME IS HOLLY WILLIS
AND I'M THE POLICY MANAGER AT
THE SEATTLE KING COUNTY
COALITION ON HOMELESSNESS. AND
I'M ALSO A RENTER AND PET OWNER
IN DISTRICT FIVE. HERE IN
SUPPORT OF THE JUNK FEE
LEGISLATION SPONSORED BY
COUNCILMEMBER FOSTER. WE
APPRECIATE THE INTENT OF
AMENDMENTS PUT FORWARD AND ALSO
WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT NONE OF
THEM INADVERTENTLY LET LANDLORDS
OFF THE HOOK WHEN THEY, WHEN FOR
VIOLATIONS. WE ALSO APPRECIATE
YOUR ACKNOWLEDGMENT THAT
TRANSPARENCY ALONE IS NOT
SUFFICIENT TO SOLVE THIS
PROBLEM, AND THAT WE NEED TO
REGULATE FEES TO PROTECT
TENANTS. MANY PEOPLE
EXPERIENCING HOMELESSNESS AND
POVERTY HAVE PETS. IT'S NOT
FAIR OR REASONABLE TO CHARGE
EXTRA RENT JUST BECAUSE SOMEONE
HAS A PET IN THEIR HOUSEHOLD.
THAT MAKES IT HARDER FOR PEOPLE
TO AFFORD RENT AND FORCES PEOPLE
TO SURRENDER THEIR PETS TO
SHELTER WHEN THEY CAN'T AFFORD
THE FEES. PLEASE VOTE YES TO BAN
JUNK FEES AND BRING DOWN COSTS
FOR TENANTS. THANK YOU
-- NEXT SPEAKER IS KATE RUBIN,
FOLLOWED BY LYDIA RUBENSTEIN.
THEN WE'LL MOVE TO ONLINE
SPEAKERS.
-- MY NAME IS KATE RUBIN. I AM A
RENTER LIVING IN DISTRICT TWO,
AND I SERVE AS CO-EXECUTIVE
DIRECTOR OF BE SEATTLE,
CO-COORDINATOR OF THE STATE
HOUSE HEALTHY COALITION AND
CO-CHAIR OF THE SEATTLE RENTERS
COMMISSION. THE COST OF RENT
INCLUDES THE COST OF DOING
BUSINESS. LANDLORDS HAVE FULL
CONTROL OVER WHAT AMENITIES THEY
INCLUDE IN THE BUILDING, AND
THEY SET THE RENT ACCORDINGLY. I
URGE THE COMMITTEE TO SUPPORT
THE BILL TO BAN RENTAL JUNK FEES
AND PASS AMENDMENTS ONE AND TWO.
AND THEN THE COALITION WOULD
LOVE TO WORK WITH
COUNCILMEMBERS, FOSTER AND LIN
ON AMENDMENTS THREE AND FOUR. WE
RECOGNIZE THE INTENT OF THESE,
AND WE THINK THAT THEY ARE
REALLY POWERFUL. AND WE. AND WE
CAN MAKE THEM STRONG FOR RENTERS
IN GENERAL., THANK YOU SO MUCH.
-- THANKS. LYDIA RUBENSTEIN
-- HELLO. MY NAME IS LYDIA
RUBENSTEIN. I'M A SEATTLE
RENTER IN DISTRICT THREE HERE AS
A RENTER. AND ON BEHALF OF THE
TENANTS UNION OF WASHINGTON, IN
STRONG SUPPORT TO PASS THE BILL
TO BAN JUNK FEES. WE APPRECIATE
THE COUNCIL TAKING ON ACTION
TOWARDS REDUCING HIDDEN AND
UNNECESSARY HOUSING COSTS AND
HOLDING LANDLORDS ACCOUNTABLE BY
SUPPORTING THE PROPOSED BAN WITH
AMENDMENTS ONE AND TWO. AND I'LL
ECHO WHAT A LOT OF OTHERS HAVE
SAID, AND I'M EXCITED TO WORK
WITH YOU TO ADJUST THREE AND
FOUR TO BETTER ALIGN WITH THE
SPIRIT., AS A TENANT EDUCATOR, I
SPEAK TO THOUSANDS OF RENTERS
STATEWIDE, BUT ESPECIALLY IN
SEATTLE WHO ARE SEEING EXCESSIVE
JUNK FEES ATTACHED TO THEIR
LEASES, AS WELL AS THAT SHOW UP
SUDDENLY. ONE OF THE MOST
CONCERNING ONES THAT WE'VE SEEN
LATELY, THAT I CAN SPEAK TO IS
SOMEONE WHO I SPOKE TO IN JULY,
WHO IS A PERSON USING A HOUSING
CHOICE VOUCHER., IT PUT HER AT
RISK OF EVICTION VERY QUICKLY
AND IMMEDIATELY, THE JUNK FEES
THAT WERE ADDED WERE FOR AN
EMOTIONAL SUPPORT ANIMAL THAT
SHE DIDN'T HAVE TIME TO GET THE
PROPER DOCUMENTATION FOR,
RESULTING IN HUNDREDS OF FEES
THAT SHE WAS EXPECTED TO PAY.
SUDDENLY.
-- YOU.
-- THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. WE WILL
NOW MOVE ON TO VIRTUAL SPEAKERS.
THE FIRST REMOTE SPEAKER IS
LYDIA FELTY. PLEASE PRESS STAR
SIX. WHEN YOU HEAR THE PROMPT
THAT YOU HAVE BEEN UNMUTED.
-- HI, MY NAME IS LYDIA. I'M A
RENTER IN D.C. AS WELL AS A
CO-CHAIR OF THE SEATTLE RENTERS
COMMISSION. THE RENTERS
COMMISSION SUPPORTS BANNING JUNK
FEES TO REDUCE HIDDEN AND
UNNECESSARY HOUSING COSTS. AS
RENTER ADVOCATES AND RENTERS
OURSELVES, WE ARE NO STRANGER TO
THE INTIMATE IMPACT OF JUNK FEES
ON HOUSING STABILITY. THIS
LEGISLATION IS ABOUT
TRANSPARENCY AND PREDICTABILITY
AND ABOUT UPHOLDING THE RENTER
PROTECTIONS DESIGNED TO PROTECT
RENTERS FROM PRICE GOUGING AND
PREVENT, WHICH DOES NOT PREVENT
LANDLORDS FROM SETTING FAIR
MARKET RENTS OR CHARGING FOR
TRULY OPT IN SERVICES. AS SUCH,
THE COMMISSION STRONGLY SUPPORTS
AMENDMENT ONE, CLOSING A
LOOPHOLE THAT WOULD ALLOW
LANDLORDS TO SKIRT THIS
IMPORTANT LEGISLATION BY
BUNDLING OPTIONAL FEES. WHILE
THE COMMISSION HAS NOT BEEN ABLE
TO DISCUSS AMENDMENTS TWO, THREE
AND FOUR, THE COMMISSION IS PART
OF THE STATE HOUSE STAY HEALTHY
COALITION, AND I HOPE THAT
YOU'LL WORK WITH THE COALITION
ON DISCUSSING THOSE AMENDMENTS.
AS OTHERS HAVE MENTIONED, THIS
COMPREHENSIVE JUNK FEE BAND,
WITH ITS ENFORCEMENT MECHANISMS
AND AMENDMENT ONE, IS A CLEAR
NEED. PLEASE PASS THIS ORDINANCE
WITH AMENDMENT ONE AND WITHOUT
ANY WEAKENING AMENDMENTS. THANK
YOU.
-- THANK YOU. OUR NEXT SPEAKER
IS ANGIE GERALD, FOLLOWED BY
HOLLY GOLDEN.
-- HI, MY NAME IS ANGIE. I'M A
SMALL HOUSING PROVIDER FROM
BALLARD AND A MEMBER OF SEATTLE
GRASSROOTS LANDLORDS. THIS
LEGISLATION IS NOT READY TO MOVE
OUT OF COMMITTEE. I REALIZE
THERE'S TREMENDOUS POLITICAL
PRESSURE TO DELIVER A NEW WIN
FOR RENTERS, BUT THIS LOOKS AT
ONLY HALF THE EQUATION AND SENDS
A STRONG MESSAGE THAT SEATTLE IS
BUSINESS AS USUAL,
ANTI-BUSINESS, ALLERGIC TO
PROVIDING A HOLISTIC PUBLIC
PROCESS. IT'S HOW SEATTLE HAS
APPROACHED LANDLORD TENANT
REGULATIONS FOR MORE THAN A
DECADE, WITH AN EVER GROWING
STOCKPILE OF UNINTENDED
CONSEQUENCES. THIS IS NOT GOOD
GOVERNANCE. IT'S AUGUST, AND
YOU HAVEN'T EVEN RECEIVED THE
2025 END OF YEAR REO REPORT.
THERE'S NO ACCOUNTABILITY FOR
WHAT IS ALREADY IN PLACE, BUT
YOU ARE FORGING AHEAD WITH $1
MILLION NEW PROGRAM. IT'S SAD TO
SEE THE LACK OF QUESTIONS
COUNCIL IS ASKING, AND THE LACK
OF EVIDENCE THAT YOU UNDERSTAND
AND HAVE A RELATIONSHIP WITH THE
OPERATIONAL SIDE OF RENTAL
HOUSING FROM THE SMALLEST
PROVIDERS ON UP. IF YOU WANT TO
WORK TOGETHER, WE'RE ALL
AVAILABLE THROUGH THE REO
CONTACT DATABASE. PLEASE DO NOT
ADVANCE THIS LEGISLATIVE PACKAGE
OUT OF COMMITTEE. THANK YOU.
-- NEXT SPEAKER IS HOLLY GOLDEN,
FOLLOWED BY HANNAH WHITWORTH.
-- GOOD AFTERNOON. I'M HOLLY
GOLDEN, A LAND USE ATTORNEY AT
HILLIS CLARK AND ONE OF THE
CO-FOUNDERS OF THE SEATTLE
HOUSING ROUNDTABLE, A GROUP OF
ABOUT 35 HOUSING PROVIDERS AND
OPERATORS IN SEATTLE. WE SUPPORT
THE GOAL OF IMPROVED
TRANSPARENCY. NOBODY BENEFITS
WHEN TENANTS ARE SURPRISED OR
FEEL UNINFORMED. THERE ARE
CONCERNS ABOUT SOME OF THE FEES,
RESTRICTIONS ON SOME FEES. THE
REALITY IS, IF THE COSTS CAN'T
BE DISCLOSED AND COLLECTED, THEN
THEY WILL BE ABSORBED INTO
INCREASED BASE RENT FOR ALL
TENANTS WITHOUT TRANSPARENCY.
FOR INSTANCE, WE KNOW DOGS CAUSE
WEAR AND TEAR AND CLEANING
COSTS. RESIDENTS WITHOUT DOGS
SHOULDN'T HAVE TO PAY FOR THOSE
COSTS. REASONABLE DOG FEES ARE A
MORE EQUITABLE SOLUTION. THERE
ARE ALSO CONCERNS ABOUT RULES
CHANGING MIDSTREAM, LIKE
BUILDING WIDE TECHNOLOGY
INVESTMENTS THAT CAN NO LONGER
BE RECOVERED EVEN IF THE FEES
ARE DISCLOSED. IT'S PROBLEMATIC
WHEN THE MATH CHANGES ON HOUSING
AFTER IT'S ALREADY BUILT.
FINALLY, ON ENFORCEMENT, HONEST
MISTAKES WILL HAPPEN. WE URGE
YOUR SUPPORT OF AMENDMENTS THREE
AND FOUR TO ALLOW QUICK AND
REASONABLE RESOLUTION.
OTHERWISE, IT WILL FORCE TENANTS
INTO EXPENSIVE LAWSUITS AND
CAUSE SMALL LANDLORDS TO REMOVE
THEIR UNITS FROM THE MARKET.
THESE CHANGES ARE BENEFICIAL FOR
EVERYONE. THANKS.
-- OUR NEXT SPEAKER IS HANNAH
WHITWORTH, FOLLOWED BY CASEY
BURTON.
-- MY NAME IS HANNAH WHITWORTH
AND I'M THE DOMESTIC VIOLENCE
HOUSING SYSTEMS MANAGER AT THE
COALITION. ENDING GENDER BASED
VIOLENCE. OUR WORK AS A
COALITION IS TO CARE FOR,
CONNECT WITH AND MOBILIZE OVER
35 LOCAL GENDER BASED VIOLENCE
PROGRAMS WHO ARE ALL WORKING TO
SUPPORT SURVIVORS OF DOMESTIC
VIOLENCE, SEXUAL ASSAULT AND
TRAFFICKING. WE'D LIKE TO
EXPRESS OUR SUPPORT FOR THIS
PROPOSED LEGISLATION TO BAN
HIDDEN RENTAL FEES, AND WE URGE
THE COUNCIL TO DO THE SAME. WE
ALSO SUPPORT THE AMENDMENT
PROHIBITING MANDATORY BUNDLING
OF OPTIONAL SERVICES.
TRANSPARENCY IS A CRITICAL
COMPONENT IN WORKING WITH
SURVIVORS, AND WE NEED TO CARRY
THAT OVER INTO OUR HOUSING
SURVIVORS. TIME AND TIME AGAIN,
I HEAR FROM ADVOCATES ABOUT THE
BARRIERS THEY AND SURVIVORS
ENCOUNTER WHEN NAVIGATING THE
RENTAL MARKET. THEY GET SEVERAL
STEPS IN AND FIND OUT THAT THE
RENTAL THEY'RE CONSIDERING IS
NOT AN OPTION GIVEN THEIR
RESOURCES. THIS ERODES TRUST,
INCREASES THE SENSE OF
HOPELESSNESS, AND EXTENDS THE
TIME A SURVIVOR IS UNHOUSED, ALL
OF WHICH CAN MAKE IT HARDER FOR
SURVIVORS TO LEAVE ABUSIVE
RELATIONSHIPS AND STAY SAFE.
IT'S ALSO AN INEFFICIENT USE OF
OUR ALREADY LIMITED HOUSING
SUPPORT SERVICES, BANNING
HITTING RENTAL FEES WOULD
IMPROVE THE TRANSPARENCY OF OUR
HOUSING MARKET AND IN TURN,
IMPROVE SUPPORT FOR SURVIVORS
WHO ARE NAVIGATING HOMELESSNESS.
SURVIVORS DESERVE TRANSPARENCY
AND ACCURATE INFORMATION ABOUT
THE ALL IN COSTS OF RENT SO THEY
CAN MAKE INFORMED CHOICES AS
THEY HEAL FROM ABUSE. THIS
LEGISLATION IS A STEP IN THE
RIGHT DIRECTION TO DO JUST THAT,
AND WE ASK FOR YOUR SUPPORT.
THANK YOU FOR THE TIME TO SPEAK
TODAY
-- THANK YOU. OUR NEXT SPEAKER
IS HANNAH BURTON, FOLLOWED BY,
I'M SORRY, CASEY BURTON,
FOLLOWED BY JUSTIN MERRIMAN.
-- GOOD AFTERNOON, AND THANK YOU
FOR YOUR TIME TODAY,
COUNCILMEMBERS. MY NAME IS CASEY
BURTON. I AM A MEMBER OF THE
RENTERS COMMISSION AND THE STATE
HOUSE STAY HEALTHY COALITION. I
AM ASKING YOU TO PASS THIS BILL
AS WELL AS AMENDMENTS ONE AND
TWO, WHILE CONTINUING TO WORK
WITH COMMUNITY PARTNERS ON
AMENDMENTS THREE AND FOUR.
SEATTLE RENTERS DESERVE TO KNOW
WHAT THEY'RE GETTING INTO BEFORE
THEY SHOW UP TO SIGN A LEASE.
REALIZE THEY CAN'T AFFORD THE
APARTMENT, AND LOSE THEIR
HOLDING, DEPOSIT, THEIR
APPLICATION FEE, AND ANYTHING
ELSE THEY'VE PAID. THE LANDLORD
IN PARTICULAR, I ASK THAT YOU
SUPPORT THE BAN ON PET LANDLORDS
SAY IT'S TO COVER DAMAGE SINCE
THE DEPOSIT SIMPLY ISN'T ENOUGH.
BUT MY LANDLORD CHARGES FOLKS
$95 A MONTH FOR PET RENT PER
PET. THAT'S ALMOST $1,200 TO MY
LANDLORD PER YEAR. I'VE LIVED
HERE ALMOST THREE YEARS. IF MY
PET DOESN'T CAUSE ANY DAMAGE, I
DON'T GET ANY OF A DIME OF
THOSE THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS BACK.
THIS WON'T INCREASE RENT
BECAUSE WE'RE ALREADY PAYING
THIS AMOUNT. LET'S BE HONEST
ABOUT WHAT WE'RE ACTUALLY PAYING
BEFORE IT'S TOO LATE. THANK
YOU.
-- ALL RIGHT.
-- IT LOOKS LIKE JUSTIN IS NO
LONGER ON, SO WE'LL JUMP TO CAT
MUNSON. BUT JUST IF YOU JOIN,
WE'LL COME BACK TO YOU. SO CAT
MUNSON, FOLLOWED BY LESLIE
SHELTON
-- GOOD AFTERNOON, CHAIR FOSTER
AND MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE. MY
NAME IS CAT MUNSON. I'M A RENTER
IN DISTRICT FOUR, AND I'M THE
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT AND
ADVOCACY MANAGER WITH SOUND
GENERATIONS, WHERE WE SERVE
OLDER ADULTS ACROSS SEATTLE AND
KING COUNTY THROUGH MEALS ON
WHEELS, THE HYDE SHUTTLE, SENIOR
RIGHTS ASSISTANCE, AND MUCH
MORE. I'M HERE IN STRONG
SUPPORT TODAY OF THE ORDINANCE
TO BAN JUNK FEES, LOW INCOME
OLDER RENTERS THAT WE SERVE LIVE
ON FIXED INCOMES. SO EVEN A
SEEMINGLY SMALL HIDDEN FEE CAN
TIP THE BALANCE TOWARDS HOUSING
INSECURITY. AND OLDER ADULTS ARE
OFTEN SPECIFICALLY TARGETED BY
PREDATORY LANDLORDS WHO
CAPITALIZE ON THE FACT THAT
THEY'RE MUCH LESS LIKELY TO
MOVE. MY OWN MOM, WHO LIVED IN A
CAPITOL HILL HOUSING COMPLEX FOR
15 YEARS, FOUGHT AGAINST PET
RENT FOR HER BELOVED DOG AND
COMPANION PHOEBE AND HER
NEIGHBOR TRIED UNSUCCESSFULLY
BECAUSE I HELPED HER FOR MONTHS
TO UNBUNDLE THE CABLE SHE
DIDN'T WANT FROM HER INTERNET
SERVICE. SO COUNCILMEMBER RINCK
AMENDMENT ADDRESSING THIS IS A
CRUCIAL PIECE OF THE
LEGISLATION. THANK YOU FOR
VOTING YES ON AMENDMENTS ONE AND
TWO, REFINING THREE AND FOUR AND
PROTECTING OLDER RENTERS IN
SEATTLE.
-- THANK YOU.
-- NEXT WE HAVE LESLIE SHELTON,
FOLLOWED BY MARGARET SCHILD.
-- HELLO, MY NAME IS LESLIE
SHELTON. I LIVE ON FIRST HILL.
THE WAY THE CURRENT TENANTS
RIGHTS LAWS ARE SET UP CREATES A
LOOPHOLE. THIS LOOPHOLE ALLOWS
CORRUPT THIRD PARTY UTILITY
MANAGEMENT COMPANIES TO CHARGE
UNREGULATED AND UNCHECKED FEES
OF ANY AMOUNT THEY CHOOSE, NEVER
NEEDING TO DISCLOSE IN ADVANCE
HOW MUCH THESE FEES WILL BE, OR
WHEN THESE FEES MAY INCREASE
FROM MONTH TO MONTH. THIS LEAVES
TENANTS UNABLE TO CREATE A
CONSISTENT BUDGET FOR THEIR
LIVING EXPENSES, AND CAN CAUSE
GREAT HARDSHIP FOR WORKING CLASS
FAMILIES. AS YOU HEARD, MONTHS
AFTER I RENEWED MY CURRENT
LEASE, I FOUND I WAS BEING
CHARGED AN EXTRA $165 BY A THIRD
PARTY BILLING COMPANY CALLED
REALPAGE. I CANNOT AFFORD THIS.
SO I TRIED TO LOOK FOR A NEW
PLACE TO LIVE. I WAS SURPRISED
TO FIND THAT THE AVERAGE PRICE
POSTED FOR A RENTAL WAS LOW, AND
I WONDERED WHY. AFTER SOME
DIGGING, I FOUND OUT THAT MOST
OF THESE MANAGEMENT COMPANIES
WERE CHARGING HUGE JUNK FEES ON
TOP OF RENT, UPWARDS OF 200 OR
MORE A MONTH AFTER YOU SIGNED
THE LEASE, IT FELT LIKE A BAIT
AND SWITCH. AND IT'S NOT JUST A
FEW COMPANIES DOING THIS. IT HAS
BECOME STANDARD PRACTICE. IF
THIS CONTINUES, IT MAY FORCE
WORKING CLASS PEOPLE LIKE MYSELF
TO LEAVE SOUTH SEATTLE
ALTOGETHER. YOU CAN PREVENT
THIS. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.
-- OUR NEXT SPEAKER IS MARGARET
SCHILD, FOLLOWED BY ELIZABETH
CAMPBELL.
-- I'M MARGARET SCHILD IN LAKE
CITY IN D FIVE HERE IN SUPPORT
OF COUNCILMEMBER FOSTER BILL TO
PROHIBIT UNFAIR, UNEXPECTED
RENTAL FEES THAT SOME LANDLORDS
USE TO GET AROUND RENTER
PROTECTION LAWS. THANK YOU FOR
WORKING ON THIS BIG PROBLEM.
THIS BILL IS CRITICAL TO
PREVENTING HOMELESSNESS. LAST
YEAR I HEARD A RESIDENT OF TENT
CITY FOUR EXPLAIN HOW HE HAD
BEEN WORKING SO HARD TO STAY IN
HIS APARTMENT BECAUSE HE HAD
PREVIOUSLY BEEN HOMELESS. HE HAD
A HOUSING VOUCHER AND WAS JUST
MANAGING TO PAY HIS SHARE OF THE
RENT EACH MONTH. THEN THE
LANDLORD ADDED AN EXTRA FEE FOR
GARBAGE AND RECYCLING. THOSE
ADDED FEES PILED UP. HE WAS
EVICTED AND ENDED UP IN A
SHELTER. THAT'S WRONG. I USED
TO BE A RENTER TOO. IN THE 80s,
90s AND 2000 AND THESE JUNK
RENTAL THINGS WERE JUST NOT A
THING. THEN I PAID A DEPOSIT,
PLUS A PET DEPOSIT AND RENT AND
THAT'S IT. AND I NOTICED THAT
THE LANDLORDS WERE DOING RENTON.
NOW, MORE THAN HALF OF ALL
SEATTLE PEOPLE ARE RENTERS.
PLEASE MAKE OUR CITY STRONGER.
PROTECT THEM.
-- THANK YOU.
-- NEXT, WE HAVE MARGARET
CAMPBELL, FOLLOWED BY MARK
ANGELILLO.
-- HI, MY NAME IS ELIZABETH
ARCHAMBAULT AND I'M A RENTER IN
SOUTH LAKE UNION NEIGHBORHOOD.
I'M TESTIFYING TODAY. EXCUSE
ME. TO SUPPORT THE PROPOSED JUNK
FREE LEGISLATION., AND I WANTED
I WANTED TO LET YOU KNOW THAT IN
TALKING WITH MY NEIGHBORS IN THE
BUILDING THAT I LIVE, WHEN JUNK
FEES ARE ADDED TO THEIR MONTHLY
AMOUNT OF RENT, PEOPLE HAVE A
REALLY HARD TIME AND STRUGGLE TO
KEEP ON TOP OF THEIR PAYING
RENT. THIS CAN OFTEN LEAD TO TEN
DAY NOTICES AND POSSIBLY FACING
EVICTION. SO I THINK IT'S REALLY
IMPORTANT. AND I URGE YOU AS A
COMMITTEE TO GO AHEAD AND VOTE
YES ON THE THE PROPOSED
LEGISLATION TO BAN JUNK FEES AND
TO REJECT ANY OF THE AMENDMENTS
THAT REDUCE THE PROTECTION FOR
TENANTS AND WRITERS. EXCUSE ME.
RENTERS. THANK YOU.
-- NEXT, SPEAKER IS MARK ANDREW
LEE, FOLLOWED BY, B ILANA RODAN
HAMIL
-- GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS
MARK ANGELILLO. I'M THE MANAGING
MEMBER OF SCREEN REAL ESTATE.
WE'RE A LOCAL DEVELOPER FOCUSED
ON HOUSING, BOTH MARKET RATE AND
AFFORDABLE IN THE SEATTLE
MARKETPLACE. WE'VE BEEN BUILDING
IN SEATTLE FOR APPROXIMATELY 20
YEARS, AND I'VE LIVED IN THE
CITY OF SEATTLE FOR 35 YEARS.
HERE TODAY HAS A SMALL LOCAL
DEVELOPER TO COMMENT ON PROPOSED
CB 121254 AS DRAFTED. REGARDING
PET RENTAL WILL FORCE US TO
CHARGE ALL TENANTS MORE RENT TO
COVER THE COST OF THOSE TENANTS
WHO DO HAVE PETS. DOGS AND CATS
DO REAL DAMAGE AND HAVE REAL
IMPACTS ON WEAR AND TEAR. ANY OF
YOU THAT HAVE PETS CAN SURELY
ATTEST TO THIS. OUR BUILDINGS
ARE CURRENTLY PET FRIENDLY AND
WE DISCLOSE ALL PET COSTS,
IMPACTS, AND DEPOSITS UPFRONT TO
POTENTIAL TENANTS AS WE ALWAYS
HAVE. WE ALSO BELIEVE LANDLORDS
SHOULD BE OBLIGATED TO DO THE
SAME DISCLOSURE AND ALL COSTS
RELATED TO HAVING PETS UPFRONT
AND IN WRITING TO POTENTIAL
TENANTS AND CURRENT TENANTS. THE
LEGISLATION IS DRAFTED REGARDING
BULK INTERNET IS A SIGNIFICANT
ISSUE. FOR INSTANCE, WE'RE JUST
COMPLETING A 74 UNIT BUILDING.
THE INTERNET IS OPTIONAL.
SERVICE THAT CAN CHOOSE TO SIGN
UP FOR THE BULK COST OF THE
INTERNET TO US IS APPROXIMATELY
$850.
-- OUR NEXT SPEAKER IS ILANA
HAMMEL, FOLLOWED BY DYLAN GREER.
AS A REMINDER, IF YOU HAVE
ADDITIONAL COMMENTS IN YOUR
VIRTUAL, YOU CAN EMAIL THOSE TO
COUNCILMEMBER FOSTER
AND ILANA, YOU SHOULD BE ABLE TO
PRESS STAR SIX TO UNMUTE.
-- AND OH.
-- MY NAME IS ALANA ROTHERMEL
AND I AM A RENTER IN WEST
SEATTLE. AND I SUPPORT THE
PROPOSED BAN ON RENTAL JUNK
FEES. WHEN MY WIFE AND I WERE
PREPARING TO MOVE, WE FOUND A
RENTAL THAT SEEMED TO FIT OUR
BUDGET. BUT THEN BEFORE WE COULD
MOVE IN, WE WERE TOLD THAT
BECAUSE WE HAD A CAT, WE ALSO
WERE CHARGED AN ADDITIONAL $300
NONREFUNDABLE PET CLEANING FEE.
SEATTLE RENTERS ARE ALREADY
RESPONSIBLE FOR PAYING ANY
DAMAGE. THEIR PETS ACTUALLY
CAUSE, BUT THE FEE WASN'T
APPLIED TOWARD DAMAGES OR EXTRA
CLEANING. AND BECAUSE LANDLORDS
HOLD THE POWER DURING THE RENTAL
PROCESS, SAYING NO WASN'T REALLY
AN OPTION. IF WE WANTED TO RENT
A HOME, IT TAKES A LOT OF TIME
TO FIND A RENTAL AND ALSO RENTAL
APPLICATION FEES STACK UP.
WALKING AWAY WOULD HAVE MEANT
STARTING THE SEARCH OVER, PAYING
ADDITIONAL APPLICATION FEES WITH
NO GUARANTEE THE NEXT RENTAL
WOULDN'T COME WITH ITS OWN
HIDDEN FEES. JUST TWO MONTHS
AFTER WE MOVED IN, OUR ELDERLY
CAT PASSED AWAY FROM OLD AGE.
SHE NEVER CAUSED ANY DAMAGE THAT
WOULD JUSTIFY AN EXTRA $300
CLEANING CHARGE, YET WE NEVER
GOT THAT MONEY BACK. IF THIS
EXPERIENCE SHOWED ME THESE FEES
ARE NOT INTENDED TO COVER ACTUAL
COSTS. INSTEAD, THEY'RE ABOUT
CHARGING RENTERS MORE WHILE
OBSCURING THE TRUE COST OF
HOUSING.
-- OUR NEXT SPEAKER IS DYLAN
GREER, FOLLOWED BY AMY DAMANI.
-- GOOD AFTERNOON,
COUNCILMEMBERS. MY NAME IS DYLAN
GREER. I'M A CURRENT UW GRADUATE
STUDENT STUDYING REAL ESTATE AND
THE CURRENT DISTRICT FOUR
RENTER, AND WILL BE MOVING TO
DISTRICT SEVEN AS A RENTER THIS
FRIDAY. I'M SPEAKING TODAY ON
COUNCIL BILL 121254.
SPECIFICALLY REGARDING PET RENT,
LANDLORDS HAVE THE OBLIGATION TO
MAINTAIN COMMON AREAS AND
MULTIFAMILY UNITS IN BETWEEN
TENANTS, AND THIS MAINTENANCE
REPRESENTS A SIGNIFICANT
OPERATIONAL COST. PET RENT
ALLOWS THIS BURDEN TO BE PLACED
ON THE PET OWNERS DIRECTLY. IF
PET RENT IS ELIMINATED, EITHER
BASE RENT FOR ALL TENANTS WILL
INCREASE OR COMMON AREAS WILL
NOT BE UP TO CURRENT STANDARDS.
PET RENT AND OTHER SIMILAR FEES
MAKE RENTING MORE AFFORDABLE
OVERALL FOR THE INDIVIDUAL
RENTER, RATHER THAN BEARING THE
INCREASED COST OF PET RELATED
MAINTENANCE. IN MY MONTHLY RENT,
I CAN MAKE THE CHOICE TO NOT BE
A PET OWNER AND THEREFORE NOT
PAY THE COSTS OF PET OWNERSHIP.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.
-- NEXT WE HAVE AMY DAMANI,
FOLLOWED BY BRADLEY DOUCHE.
AMY, IF YOU CAN PRESS STAR SIX,
YOU SHOULD BE UNMUTED. ALL
RIGHT, WE'LL CIRCLE BACK. WE'LL
NEXT GO TO BRADLEY DOUCHE AND
THEN ETHAN STEGER.
BRADLEY, IF YOU PRESS STAR SIX,
YOU SHOULD BE ABLE TO UNMUTE.
OKAY. WE'LL, NEXT JUMP DOWN TO
ETHAN AND CIRCLE BACK FOR AMY
AND BRADLEY. ETHAN STEGER,
FOLLOWED BY LUANA REID.
ETHAN, ARE YOU ABLE TO PRESS
STAR SIX? I HOPE WE'RE NOT
HAVING TECHNICAL DIFFICULTIES.
-- GOOD AFTERNOON COUNCIL. MY
NAME IS ETHAN AND I'M A SEATTLE
RENTER. THANK YOU FOR GATHERING
TODAY FOR US ALL TO DISCUSS THE
BILL TO BAN JUNK FEES. I'M PROUD
TO SUPPORT THIS BILL THAT
PROTECTS RENTERS. THE MAJORITY
OF SEATTLE AND PROVIDES THE MORE
FINANCIAL FREEDOM AND OPTIONS IN
HOUSING. WHEN CONSIDERING THIS
BILL, I ENCOURAGE YOU TO THINK
ABOUT THE THOUSANDS OF RENTERS
THAT ARE PREYED UPON BY THESE
FEES AND HOW YOU COULD EASE
THEIR LIVES AND FEELINGS OF
HOUSING INSECURITY BY PASSING
THIS BILL WITH NO WEAKENING
AMENDMENTS, AND JUNK FEES. THANK
YOU.
-- NEXT WE HAVE LUANA, AND THEN
WE'LL CIRCLE BACK TO AMY
DAMANI.
-- HI THERE. MY NAME IS TAWANNA
REED AND I'M WITH THE TIMOTHY
UNIT, WASHINGTON STATE IN
SUPPORT OF THE JUNK FEE
ORDINANCE WITH AMENDMENTS ONE
AND TWO. AND I'M HERE TODAY ON
BEHALF OF THE THOUSANDS OF
TENANTS WHO CONTACT ADVOCATES
BECAUSE THEY ARE BEING EVICTED
AND CAN'T BECAUSE THEY CAN'T
AFFORD THE RENT, AND ALSO JUNK
FEES. EVERY SINGLE DAY, TENANTS
CONTACT US ALREADY STRUGGLING TO
KEEP UP. WHAT MAKES IT EVEN
HARDER IS THE UNEXPECTED FEES
THAT PEOPLE MOVE IN OR
THROUGHOUT THE TENANCY PACKAGE
FEES, PAYMENT PROCESSING FEES,
VALET FEES, PAYMENT FEES SLAP
YOUR MOM FEES, WHATEVER THE FEE
IS. LET'S BE HONEST, LANDLORDS
OPERATE AS A BUSINESS, YET THEY
DO NOT PAY TAXES LIKE
BUSINESSES. SO THE RENT ON THE
RENT THEY COLLECT, THEY'RE
CURRENTLY PERMITTED TO CHARGE
WHATEVER THEY WANT TO PROFIT.
TENANTS. THE CONSUMERS NEED TO
BE PROTECTED. A UNIT ADVERTISED
AT ONE PRICE ENDS UP COSTING
HUNDREDS OF DOLLARS MORE EACH
MONTH. THESE CHARGES ARE NOT
ABOUT IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF
LIVING. THEY'RE ABOUT INCREASING
PROFITS. I RESPECTFULLY URGE YOU
TO PASS THIS TO VOTE YES ON THIS
ORDINANCE. THANK YOU.
-- ALL RIGHT. WELL, AMY DOMANI
AND THEN BRADLY DOSS AGAIN.
-- HELLO., I LIVE IN PEOPLE WHO
RENT ARE NOT CONSUMERS.
-- CUTTING OUT WILL RESTART YOUR
TIME.
-- SHOULD
-- ALL RIGHT. GO FOR IT.
-- HI, I'M AMY FROM NEW
DISTRICT. I WANT TO BE CLEAR
THAT, CONSUMERS ARE FOR
BUSINESSES AND RENTING A HOUSE.
HAVING A HOME IS NOT A BUSINESS.
WE'RE JUST PEOPLE TRYING TO
MAKE A LIVING AND HAVING HIDDEN
RENTAL FEES ADD UP IN SUCH A WAY
THAT IT CAN BE BETWEEN PEOPLE
HAVING A HOME AND A PLACE TO
SLEEP AND A PLACE TO EAT, VERSUS
BEING ON THE STREET. SO I'M HERE
TO VOICE MY SUPPORT FOR BANNING,
RENT, JUNK FEES. AND IN
ADDITION, I KNOW THIS IS NOT
ABOUT RUBS, BUT RUBS, UTILITY
BILLING IS THE SAME CONCEPT,
SAME PRINCIPLE BEING CHARGED AN
UNKNOWN AMOUNT OF MONEY EACH
MONTH WITH QUITE A STICKER
SHOCK. AND IF YOU DON'T FIGHT
AGAINST ONE THING, IT'S JUST
GOING TO KEEP PILING UP. SO
PLEASE FIGHT FOR SEATTLE
RENTERS. THANK YOU.
-- THANK YOU. AND OUR FINAL
SPEAKER IS BRADLEY DOUCHE.
-- HELLO, MY NAME IS BRADLEY
DOSH I'M A MENTOR IN CAPITOL
HILL, AND I'M SPEAKING IN
SUPPORT OF BANNING JUNK FEES., I
PAY THE WATER BILL EVERY MONTH
IN MY APARTMENT HERE, AND JUST A
FEW MONTHS AGO, I RECEIVED
NOTICE THAT THEY WERE GOING TO
SHUT THE WATER OFF FROM SEATTLE
PUBLIC UTILITIES. THAT WAS
INFURIATING BECAUSE, WE PAY THAT
BILL EVERY MONTH. AND CLEARLY
OUR MANAGEMENT WAS NOT PAYING
THE WATER BILL WITH THAT. AND I
THINK WE ALL SUSPECT THAT
SIMILAR THINGS ARE HAPPENING
WITH OTHER BILLS. AND THAT,
AGAIN, IS NOT ACTUALLY ABOUT
CHARGING TRUE COSTS THAT THE
BUILDING OWNER HAS, BUT RATHER
JUST TRYING TO SUCK MORE MONEY
OUT OF TENANTS, OUT OF WORKING
PEOPLE WHO ARE ALREADY
STRUGGLING. SO, THANK YOU ALL
FOR YOUR TIME AND PLEASE BAN
JUNK JUICE. THANK YOU.
-- ALL RIGHT., THAT IS THERE ARE
NO ADDITIONAL REGISTERED
SPEAKERS.
-- ALL RIGHT. FANTASTIC. THANK
YOU SO MUCH. WE WILL NOW MOVE ON
TO OUR FIRST ITEM OF BUSINESS,
ITEM ONE. WILL THE CLERK PLEASE
READ ITEM ONE INTO THE RECORD.
-- AGENDA ITEM ONE COUNCIL BILL
ONE, TWO, 1254. AN ORDINANCE
RELATING TO RENTAL AGREEMENT
REGULATION REQUIRING DISCLOSURE
OF FEES. PROHIBITING AND
LIMITING CERTAIN FEES, REQUIRING
RETENTION OF COMPLIANCE RECORDS.
EXPANDING INVESTIGATIVE
AUTHORITY AND ESTABLISHING NEW
ENFORCEMENT MECHANISMS. AMENDING
SECTION 7.240207.240507.24060,
7.24120 AND 7.24130 OF AND
ADDING NEW SECTION
7.240397.240407.240457.2,
4.1707.24180, 7.24190, 7.2,
4.200, 7.2, 4.210, 7.2, 4.220,
7.24230 AND 7.24240 TO THE
SEATTLE MUNICIPAL CODE FOR
BRIEFING, DISCUSSION AND
POSSIBLE VOTE.
-- [APPLAUSE] [LAUGHTER]
-- YOU ALL ARE TOO WONDERFUL. I
WAS ACTUALLY GOING TO SAY, CAN
WE GIVE IT UP FOR THE CLERK? BUT
YOU ALREADY KNEW, SO THAT WAS
GREAT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU SO
MUCH, SAGE. ALL RIGHT.
FANTASTIC. I'M REALLY EXCITED TO
HAVE THIS DISCUSSION TODAY. I'LL
BE SAVING MY KIND OF LONGER
COMMENTS FOR THE END. SO I'LL
JUST GET RIGHT ON INTO IT. I
MOVE THAT THE COMMITTEE
RECOMMEND ADOPTION OF COUNCIL
BILL ONE TWO, 1254. IS THERE A
SECOND?
-- SECOND.
-- ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU., SO
FIRST, AS WE KNOW, THERE'S A FEW
AMENDMENTS. AND SO I WANT TO
INVITE UP AND SHE'S ALREADY AT
THE TABLE. H P HARPER FROM
COUNCIL CENTRAL STAFF, WHO'S
GOING TO PROVIDE AN OVERVIEW OF
THE FOUR AMENDMENTS BEING
BROUGHT FORWARD AND WILL ANSWER
ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT THE
LEGISLATION. SO, COLLEAGUES, THE
PROCESS HERE IS GOING TO BE THAT
WE'RE GOING TO DISCUSS AND VOTE
ON EACH AMENDMENT, ONE AT A
TIME. SO DON'T HOLD YOUR
QUESTIONS FOR LATER BECAUSE
WE'RE GOING TO TALK ABOUT THE
AMENDMENT, THEN VOTE ON THE
AMENDMENT AND MOVE FORWARD. SO
HP, ONCE YOU'RE READY, PLEASE
INTRODUCE YOURSELF AND GO AHEAD.
-- HP HARPER CENTRAL STAFF. SO
WE'LL START WITH AMENDMENT ONE.
-- OKAY. COUNCILMEMBER RINCK
WOULD YOU LIKE TO MOVE YOUR
AMENDMENT?
-- CERTAINLY. I MOVE TO AMEND
THE BILL AS PRESENTED ON
AMENDMENT ONE.
-- SECOND.
-- ALL RIGHT. IT HAS BEEN MOVED
AND SECONDED. COUNCILMEMBER
RINCK AS SPONSOR OF THE
AMENDMENT, I'LL INVITE YOU TO
SPEAK TO. OH, WHOOPS. I'M
SORRY. I THINK WE'RE GOING TO
GO OVER TO HB AND THEN I'M GOING
TO GO TO YOU. COUNCILMEMBER
RINCK. I APOLOGIZE.
-- SO AMENDMENT ONE REQUIRES
THAT WHEN OPTIONAL FEES ARE
BUNDLED, EACH DISCRETE PORTION
OF THAT BUNDLE SHALL ALSO BE
SEPARATELY AVAILABLE. SO AS YOU
MAY RECALL, THERE WERE THREE
CATEGORIES OF FEES IN THE BILL.
THOSE THAT ARE PERMITTED, THOSE
THAT ARE PROHIBITED, AND THOSE
THAT ARE OPTIONAL, THAT TENANTS
CAN OPT INTO AFFIRMATIVELY ALL
OF THOSE OPTIONAL FEES HAD TO
MEET CERTAIN REQUIREMENTS
RELATED TO DISCLOSURE, THE
PROCESS BY WHICH OPTING OUT IS
GIVEN TO THE TENANT WITH NO FEE,
ET CETERA. AND SO THIS WOULD ADD
A FURTHER REQUIREMENT FOR THOSE
OPTIONAL FEES SUCH THAT IF
THERE'S A BUNDLE OFFERED THAT
THE LANDLORD SHALL MAKE EACH
COMPONENT OF THE BUNDLE
AVAILABLE SEPARATELY AS
OPTIONAL, AS WELL. THANKS.
-- THANK YOU. COUNCILMEMBER
RINCK YOU'RE RECOGNIZED.
-- THANK YOU CHAIR FOSTER, AND
THANK YOU FOR THE OVERVIEW. HB
COLLEAGUES, THIS IS THE
AMENDMENT THAT WE DISCUSSED
DURING OUR LAST COMMITTEE
MEETING. WE HAVE NOT CHANGED IT
IN ANY TYPE OF WAY JUST TO
AFFIRM THAT POINT. BUT I BROUGHT
THIS AMENDMENT FORWARD TODAY
AFTER OUR DISCUSSIONS WITH
TENANTS RIGHTS ADVOCATES, AS
WELL AS THOSE WHO PROVIDE TENANT
SUPPORT SERVICES AND LEGAL AID,
I BELIEVE IT SERVES AS IMPORTANT
CLARIFICATION, BUT ALSO A
CLOSURE OF A LOOPHOLE TO ENSURE
THE JUNK FEES THAT WERE BANNING
WOULD NOT BE REQUIRED TO RECEIVE
A SERVICE THAT YOU MIGHT NEED
THAT TO MANY IS VERY ESSENTIAL.
SO WHILE BUNDLING ISN'T THE MOST
COMMON ISSUE THAT WE FACE TODAY,
I HAVE CONCERNS THAT IT WILL
BECOME MORE FREQUENT., SO THIS
IS THE REASON THAT I BROUGHT
FORWARD THIS AMENDMENT. I WANT
TO NOTE THAT SINCE OUR LAST
COMMITTEE MEETING, I'VE HAD A
CONVERSATION WITH INTERNET
PROVIDERS SUCH AS COMCAST. WE
HAD A PRODUCTIVE MEETING. THERE
WERE NO MAJOR CONCERNS WITH THE
AMENDMENT., BY THE END OF THAT
MEETING. AND SO I'M BRINGING IT
FORWARD TODAY AND I HOPE I HAVE
YOUR SUPPORT. THANK YOU
-- THANK YOU SO MUCH.
COUNCILMEMBER RINCK COLLEAGUES,
ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS BEFORE
WE VOTE ON THIS AMENDMENT? OKAY.
WILL THE CLERK PLEASE CALL THE
ROLL ON THE ADOPTION OF
AMENDMENT ONE? YES.
-- COUNCILMEMBER JUAREZ.
COUNCILMEMBER RINCK. YES. VICE
CHAIR. LIN. YES. CHAIR FOSTER.
-- YES.
-- CHAIR, THERE ARE FIVE VOTES
IN FAVOR AND NONE OPPOSED.
-- THE MOTION CARRIES AN
AMENDMENT ONE IS ADOPTED., I
WILL GO AHEAD BACK OVER TO HB
FOR A DESCRIPTION OF AMENDMENT
TWO.
-- AMENDMENT TWO CLARIFIES
DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENTS. SO AS
TRANSMITTED, THE DISCLOSURE
REQUIREMENTS DIDN'T CLEARLY
INCLUDE ESTIMATED UTILITY COSTS.
AND THERE WAS ALSO AMBIGUITY
ABOUT TIME LIMITED DISCOUNTS. SO
FOR INSTANCE, FIRST MONTH FREE
OR FIRST TWO MONTHS FREE OF HOW
THOSE WOULD BE DISCLOSED IN THAT
UPFRONT TOTAL MONTHLY COST. SO
THIS AMENDMENT CLARIFIES THAT
THOSE TIME LIMITED DISCOUNTS,
FOR INSTANCE, SHOULD NOT BE
AVERAGED OVER THE YEAR FOR
MONTHLY COSTS. THEY SHOULD BE
NOT INCLUDED IN THE TOTAL
MONTHLY COST, BUT CLEARLY
DISCLOSED SEPARATELY. AND IT
ALSO CLARIFIES THAT UTILITY
CHARGES SHOULD BE ESTIMATED,
SIMILAR TO HOW VARIABLE FEES
WERE PROPOSED TO BE ESTIMATED
USING EITHER PAST INFORMATION OR
OTHER WAYS TO ESTIMATE THEM, AND
THOSE SHOULD BE INCLUDED IN THAT
TOTAL MONTHLY COST. AND FINALLY,
IT WAS LEFT SORT OF TO THE, TO
THE VIEWER TO DECIDE WHETHER THE
TOTAL MONTHLY COST SHOULD
INCLUDE THOSE OPTIONAL FEES. SO
AGAIN, IF THE TENANT HAS THE
ABILITY TO OPT IN, THAT WOULD
CHANGE THEIR TOTAL MONTHLY COST.
AND IT WAS UNCLEAR IN THE DRAFT
WHETHER OR NOT OPTIONAL FEES
SHOULD BE IN ADDITION TO BEING
DISCLOSED UPFRONT, ACTUALLY
ADDED IN TO THAT TOTAL MONTHLY
COST. SO THE AMENDMENT SPECIFIES
THAT AVERAGE SORRY, THAT
OPTIONAL FEES WOULD NOT BE
INCLUDED IN THE TOTAL MONTHLY
COST, BECAUSE THEY ARE ONLY IF
THE TENANT CHOOSES TO OPT IN. SO
I THINK THAT THAT ENCOMPASSES
THE VARIOUS PIECES OF THE
PUZZLE, BUT I'M HAPPY TO SPEAK
TO IT. IF FOLKS HAVE ANY
QUESTIONS.
-- THANK YOU SO MUCH. AND I'LL
PAUSE TO SEE IF THERE ARE
QUESTIONS FOR HB. AND I ACTUALLY
NEED TO DO MY JOB AND SAY I MOVE
TO AMEND COUNCIL BILL ONE, TWO,
ONE, TWO, FIVE, FOUR AS
PRESENTED ON AMENDMENT TWO,
VERSION TWO AS DISTRIBUTED VIA
EMAIL. IS THERE A SECOND?
-- SECOND.
-- IT HAS BEEN MOVED AND
SECONDED TO AMEND THE BILL. I DO
WANT TO CLARIFY, COLLEAGUES,
THAT A TECHNICAL CHANGE WAS MADE
FOR CLARIFICATION PURPOSES TO
AGENDA TWO AFTER THE AGENDA WAS
PUBLISHED, STATING THAT
DISCLOSURE UNDER THIS SECTION
7.2, 4.039 IS DISTINCT FROM
DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENTS. IN
CHAPTER 7.25, THE UPDATED
VERSION WAS EMAILED TO
COUNCILMEMBERS, 24 HOURS IN
ADVANCE OF THE MEETING, AND WE
WILL BE UPDATING THE AGENDA WITH
THE NEW CORRECTED VERSION AFTER
THIS MEETING., HAVING SAID THAT,
THE INTENT OF THIS AND THANK YOU
FOR THAT. HB IS TO PROVIDE
CLARITY THAT TENANTS AND TO BOTH
TENANTS AND LANDLORDS ABOUT THE
DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENTS OF THE
BILL AND IN PARTICULAR, TO MAKE
SURE THAT WHEN WE ARE DISCUSSING
THE TOTAL MONTHLY COST TO BE
PAID BY THE TENANT, THAT WE HAVE
CLARITY ACROSS THE BOARD ON WHAT
THAT IS TO INCLUDE, BECAUSE A
BIG PART OF THIS LEGISLATION IS
TO ENSURE THAT WE HAVE CLEAR AND
TRANSPARENT AND COMPARABLE FEES.
SO I BELIEVE THIS AMENDMENT
MOVES US CLOSER TO THAT. AND
THANK YOU TO THE STAKEHOLDERS
WHO PROVIDED THEIR INPUT ON THIS
AMENDMENT. ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS
ON AMENDMENT TWO? OKAY. WILL THE
CLERK PLEASE CALL THE ROLL ON
THE ADOPTION OF AMENDMENT TWO?
-- COUNCIL PRESIDENT
HOLLINGSWORTH. YES.
COUNCILMEMBER JUAREZ.
COUNCILMEMBER RINCK. YES. VICE
CHAIR. LIN. YES. CHAIR FOSTER.
YES, CHAIR, THERE ARE FIVE VOTES
IN FAVOR AND NONE OPPOSED.
-- OKAY. THE MOTION CARRIES., WE
WILL NOW MOVE ON TO AMENDMENT
THREE, AND I'M GOING TO FIRST
MOVE TO AMEND COUNCIL BILL ONE
TWO, ONE, TWO, FIVE FOUR AS
PRESENTED ON AMENDMENT THREE. IS
THERE A SECOND?
-- SECOND.
-- OKAY. IT HAS BEEN MOVED AND
SECONDED. HB PLEASE DESCRIBE
AMENDMENT THREE.
-- SURE. SO AMENDMENT THREE
RELATES TO AN EXISTING, AMOUNT
OF DISCRETION THAT IS AFFORDED
TO THE SEATTLE DEPARTMENT OF
CONSTRUCTION INSPECTIONS RELATED
TO VOLUNTARY COMPLIANCE. SO THE
BILL AND ASIDE FROM THE BILL,
EVEN EXISTING REGULATIONS, BUT
ALSO WITH THE PROPOSED BILL,
THERE'S A WIDE RUNWAY FOR SDCI
TO, TAKE ACTIONS BEFORE THEY
TAKE FORMAL ENFORCEMENT ACTION.
SO THERE'S ALREADY CODIFIED AN
ABILITY TO ISSUE A WARNING AND
TO WORK WITH LANDLORDS TO GET
INTO COMPLIANCE BEFORE GOING
DOWN THOSE FORMAL PATHS.
ENFORCEMENT WHERE THEY HAVE
CITATIONS AND PENALTIES, ET
CETERA.. SO THIS AMENDMENT
CODIFIES THAT DISCRETION THAT
THE DIRECTOR HAS IN
ADMINISTRATION AND ENFORCEMENT
TO TO BRING LANDLORDS INTO
COMPLIANCE, BUT ALSO GIVES
CLARITY TO TENANTS REGARDING
REIMBURSEMENT, WHICH WOULD
LIKELY BE EXPEDITED UNDER THIS
AMENDMENT. SO,, IT'S IMPORTANT
THAT THIS DISCRETION EXISTS
BECAUSE OF THE NEED TO BE SORT
OF EFFICIENT AND STRATEGIC WITH
RESOURCES. IF SDCI HAD TO PURSUE
FORMAL ENFORCEMENT IN EVERY
SINGLE COMPLAINT, IT WOULD
LIKELY WAY SLOW DOWN THEIR
ABILITY TO ENFORCE, PARTICULARLY
RELATED TO SORT OF BAD ACTORS.
AND SO UNDER THE EXISTING SORT
OF PRACTICE AS WELL AS UNDER THE
BILL, THEY DO HAVE THIS ABILITY
TO DECIDE WHEN TO ACTUALLY BEGIN
ENFORCEMENT. AND THEY ARE
DIRECTED IN THE BILL TO CREATE A
DIRECTOR'S ROLE REGARDING WHEN
THEY WILL INITIATE
INVESTIGATIONS. SO THAT'S REALLY
A WIDE OPEN AREA WHERE THEY,,
YOU KNOW, WILL PUBLISH SOMETHING
THAT GIVES CLARITY ON WHEN THEY
PURSUE INVESTIGATIONS BECAUSE
THEY SIMPLY WOULD NOT HAVE THE
RESOURCES TO DO IT IN EVERY
INSTANCE. SO THIS AMENDMENT
REALLY WRITES DOWN SOMETHING
THAT ALREADY EXISTS TODAY, AND
THAT IS PROPOSED TO CONTINUE
UNDER THE BILL WHERE PRIOR TO
PURSUING THOSE FORMAL AVENUES,
THE DIRECTOR SEEKS VOLUNTARY
COMPLIANCE. AND WHAT IT DOES IS
IT SPECIFIES THAT THAT SHALL
INCLUDE, AT A MINIMUM, FULL
REIMBURSEMENT TO TENANTS PLUS
INTEREST, WHICH IS CURRENTLY, I
THINK, THE PRACTICE, BUT IT'S
NOT WRITTEN DOWN. AND SO THERE
MIGHT BE A LACK OF CLARITY FOR
TENANTS AND LANDLORDS WITHOUT
THAT, IN, IN CODE. AND SO
THAT'S WHAT THE AMENDMENT DOES.
-- THANK YOU FOR THAT. AND I'LL
SPEAK TO THIS BRIEFLY. I KNOW WE
HEARD SOME QUESTIONS ABOUT THIS
EARLIER TODAY. AND I WANT TO
JUST ACTUALLY, BEFORE I SPEAK,
I'LL JUST SAY, CAN YOU JUST
REPEAT FOR US, THIS IS AN
EXISTING AUTHORITY THAT THE
DEPARTMENT ALREADY HAS.
-- YES. UNDER THE EXISTING
REGULATIONS AS WELL AS UNDER THE
PROPOSED REGULATIONS THAT ARE
TRANSMITTED AS PART OF THE
LEGISLATION. SO WHETHER OR NOT
THIS AMENDMENT GOES FORWARD,
THIS AUTHORITY EXISTS.
-- OKAY. THANK YOU FOR THAT. AND
ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WAS
REALLY IMPORTANT TO ME WAS TO BE
ABLE TO CLARIFY WHAT A TENANT IS
ENTITLED TO. IF THERE IS
VOLUNTARY EXCUSE ME, IF SDCI
SEEKS TO, OBTAIN VOLUNTARY
COMPLIANCE. SO CAN YOU SPEAK TO
THAT SECOND HALF OF THIS
AMENDMENT ONE MORE TIME? AND
WHAT WE'RE CLARIFYING THERE,
RIGHT?
-- SO A REIMBURSEMENT TO THE
TENANTS PLUS INTEREST FOR ANY
UNAUTHORIZED FEE OR CHARGES. AND
SO I THINK THE IDEA HERE IS THAT
IF YOU HAVE A SITUATION IN WHICH
A LANDLORD IS UNAWARE THAT THEY
HAVE BEEN IN VIOLATION, YOU
KNOW, SDCI TRIES TO WORK WITH
LANDLORDS TO FIRST MAKE SURE
THAT THEY ARE AWARE AND THEY DO
A LOT OF OUTREACH, YOU KNOW, TO,
TO TRY TO GET LANDLORDS IN THE
LOOP ON ALL REGULATIONS. BUT
THIS MAKES SURE THAT IT'S CLEAR
THAT THEY DO HAVE TO PAY THE
TENANTS BACK PLUS INTEREST IF
THEY DISCOVER THAT THEY HAVE
BEEN IN VIOLATION OF THE
CHAPTER. AND IF SDCI HAS NOT YET
PURSUED FORMAL ENFORCEMENT.
-- THANK YOU FOR THAT. AND WITH
THAT, I WANT TO SPEAK TO WHY I
THOUGHT IT WAS IMPORTANT TO
BRING THIS FORWARD. SO ONE IS HB
HAS ALREADY SAID THIS AMENDMENT
CODIFIES EXISTING DISCRETION AND
IT LIFTS IT UP IN THIS IN THIS
PIECE OF LEGISLATION, SO THAT WE
CAN CLARIFY, THE, WHAT SDCI IS
GOING TO SEEK WHEN THEY ARE
GOING THROUGH THE VOLUNTARY
COMPLIANCE PROCESS SO THAT WE
KNOW AND WE HAVE CLARITY FROM
THE DEPARTMENT WITH THEIR
EXISTING PRACTICE, AND THAT WE
HAVE TRANSPARENCY WITH THE
PUBLIC AROUND WHAT THAT EXISTING
PRACTICE IS. SO WITHOUT THIS
AMENDMENT, THAT PRACTICE WOULD
BE IN PLACE, BUT WE WOULD NOT
HAVE CLARIFIED AND CODIFIED WHAT
THE STANDARD IS THAT WE HAVE FOR
SDCI WHEN IT COMES TO RECOUPING
ANY OF THE FEES THAT TENANTS
HAVE INCORRECTLY PAID WHEN THEY
ARE GOING THROUGH VOLUNTARY
COMPLIANCE. SO THIS SAYS YOU ARE
ALLOWED TO CONTINUE TO DO
VOLUNTARY COMPLIANCE. AND HERE
IS A MINIMUM FOR THE DEPARTMENT
TO SEEK. WHEN THEY DO USE THE
VOLUNTARY COMPLIANCE STANDARD.
SO FROM MY PERSPECTIVE, THIS IS
REALLY IMPORTANT BECAUSE IT
GIVES THAT CLARITY AND IT ALLOWS
US TO UNDERSTAND AND HAVE SORT
OF A SHARED EXPECTATION ACROSS
THE DEPARTMENT AND THE PUBLIC
FOR WHEN THE DEPARTMENT DOES USE
THAT TOOL. SO WITH THAT, THAT IS
WHY I AM EXCITED TO BRING THIS
FORWARD. I ALSO WANT TO
APPRECIATE COUNCILMEMBER KETTLE
FOR WORKING WITH OUR OFFICE ON
THIS AMENDMENT AND COLLEAGUES.
I'M HAPPY TO SEE IF THERE'S
QUESTIONS THAT YOU HAVE.
COUNCILMEMBER RINCK YOU ARE
RECOGNIZED.
-- THANK YOU, CHAIR FOSTER, FOR
BRINGING THIS FORWARD AND TO
PROVIDING THAT CLARIFICATION. SO
JUST SO I'M CRYSTAL CLEAR.
SDCI. SDCI CURRENTLY HAS THE
DISCRETION TO BE ABLE TO
EXERCISE THIS. THIS IS ABOUT
CLARIFYING AND CODIFYING THAT
DISCRETION.
-- THAT'S CORRECT.
-- THANK YOU. THANK YOU FOR
CLARIFYING THAT POINT. THIS
ISN'T ABOUT EXPANDED DISCRETION,
BUT RATHER MAKING IT ABUNDANTLY
CLEAR. I APPRECIATE THAT AND
I'LL BE SUPPORTING TODAY. THANK
YOU.
-- THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER
RINCK. QUESTIONS FROM ANY OTHER
COLLEAGUES? OKAY. SEEING NO
QUESTIONS, WILL THE CLERK PLEASE
CALL THE ROLL ON ADOPTION OF
AMENDMENT THREE?
-- COUNCIL PRESIDENT.
HOLLINGSWORTH. YES.
COUNCILMEMBER JUAREZ.
COUNCILMEMBER RINCK.
-- YES.
-- VICE CHAIR. LIN. YES. CHAIR
FOSTER.
-- YES.
-- CHAIR. THERE ARE FIVE VOTES
IN FAVOR AND NONE OPPOSED.
-- THANK YOU. THE MOTION
CARRIES. AN AMENDMENT THREE IS
ADOPTED AND COUNCILMEMBER LIN
WOULD YOU LIKE TO MOVE YOUR
AMENDMENT BEFORE I HEAD OVER TO
HB?
-- YES, I WOULD LIKE TO MOVE
AMENDMENT FOUR. SECOND.
-- IT HAS BEEN MOVED AND
SECONDED TO AMEND THE BILL. HB
CAN YOU PLEASE DESCRIBE
AMENDMENT FOUR?
-- SURE. SO THIS AMENDMENT
PROVIDES TENANTS WITH A PATH TO
REIMBURSEMENT AND CERTAIN
DAMAGES FOR PROHIBITED FEE AND
SECURITY DEPOSIT VIOLATIONS,
WITHOUT FILING A PRIVATE RIGHT
OF ACTION AND INCURRING LEGAL
FEES. SO ESSENTIALLY, RIGHT NOW,
UNDER THE PRIVATE RIGHT OF
ACTION SECTION, YOU KNOW,
THERE'S A NUMBER OF
STIPULATIONS REGARDING WHAT THE
LANDLORD SHALL BE LIABLE IN A
CIVIL ACTION FOR. HOWEVER, THIS
AMENDMENT WOULD PROVIDE A PATH
TO, FOR THE LANDLORD TO CURE THE
VIOLATION WITHIN 30 DAYS OF
RECEIVING WRITTEN NOTICE. AND
THIS IS JUST FOR PROHIBITED FEES
AND UNLAWFULLY WITHHELD SECURITY
DEPOSITS, SO NOT INCLUDING OTHER
AREAS OF. CHAPTER 724
REGULATIONS THAT EXIST TODAY.
THERE ARE THERE ARE A NUMBER
THERE, AND IT WOULD REQUIRE THAT
THE LANDLORD, WITHIN 30 DAYS,
PAY THE TENANT BACK FOR FULL
REIMBURSEMENT OF ALL PROHIBITED
FEES OR UNLAWFULLY WITHHELD
SECURITY DEPOSITS CHARGED PLUS
INTEREST, AS WELL AS DOUBLE THE
AMOUNT OF THAT FEE OR SECURITY
DEPOSIT. AND IT WOULD STIPULATE
THAT IF THE TENANT IS PAID BACK
WITHIN THAT 30 DAY WINDOW AT
THAT SORT OF THREE TIMES LEVEL,
THE TENANT COULD NOT PURSUE
FURTHER REMEDIES UNDER THE
SECTIONS OF THE BILL. SO IT
PROVIDES SORT OF AN ALTERNATIVE
TO UTILIZING LEGAL
REPRESENTATION IN THE PRIVATE
RIGHT OF ACTION PATH.
-- THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER LIN,
YOU ARE RECOGNIZED.
-- THANK YOU SO MUCH,
COLLEAGUES., I THINK AS WE HEARD
EARLIER TODAY, PART OF THE ISSUE
IS A RIGHT IS ONLY AS POWERFUL
AS KIND OF THE ABILITY TO
ENFORCE IT. AND WE HEARD
CONCERNS AROUND THE ABILITY OF
SDCI TO, YOU KNOW, THEIR LIMITED
RESOURCES TO ENFORCE NEW LAWS. I
KNOW THERE'S CERTAINLY A GOAL
TO STAFF UP SDCI, BUT EVEN SO, I
THINK THEY THEY WILL HAVE
LIMITED CAPABILITY TO ADDRESS,
YOU KNOW, WHEN HALF OF OUR CITY
IS RENTERS, THERE'S A LOT OF
VIOLATIONS OUT THERE. AND SO,
YOU KNOW, EMPOWERING TENANTS TO
ACT ON THEIR OWN BEHALF TO GET
PROMPT RELIEF, WITHOUT HAVING TO
RELY UPON SDCI, WITHOUT HAVING
TO RELY UPON AN ATTORNEY., IS
ONE OF THE PRIMARY MOTIVATING
FACTORS HERE. THE OTHER IDEA IS
JUST THAT OFTENTIMES, SOMETIMES
ATTORNEYS ARE, ARE NECESSARY,
SOMETIMES LITIGATION IS NEEDED,
BUT SOMETIMES ATTORNEYS CAN JUST
ADD COSTS AND TIME. IT CAN, IT
CAN TAKE A LONG TIME TO GO TO
COURT TO GET RELIEF., SOME FOLKS
MIGHT NOT WANT TO HAVE THEIR
NAME IN COURT RECORDS AND MIGHT
NOT WANT TO HAVE TO GO TO COURT.
AND SO THE IDEA BEHIND THIS IS
TO GIVE TENANTS THE, THE ABILITY
TO, TO SEND A SIMPLE NOTICE TO
THEIR LANDLORD AND SAY, HEY, YOU
OVERCHARGED ME. REIMBURSE ME
PLUS INTEREST AND PLUS TWO
TIMES. AND IF YOU DO SO, THEN
WE'RE DONE. AND YOU KNOW, IF
YOU DO SO WITHIN 30 DAYS, WE'RE
DONE. I CAN MOVE ON WITH MY LIFE
IF I NEED TO MOVE OUT OF THE
AREA BECAUSE I'M, YOU KNOW, I
DON'T HAVE TO BE TIED UP IN
THIS LAWSUIT AND YOU DON'T HAVE
TO BE TIED UP IN A LAWSUIT FOR,
FOR A YEAR OR MORE., SO THAT IS,
IS THE MOTIVATING FACTOR. IT
ALSO GIVES LANDLORD A VERY
STRONG INCENTIVE TO, TO SETTLE
QUICKLY, TO BE RESPONSIVE, AND
HOPEFULLY PART OF THE IDEA
BEHIND THIS IS, IS, YOU KNOW, I
WOULD HOPE THAT IF, IF THIS
PASSES, THAT SDCI COULD COME UP
WITH A VERY SIMPLE FORM AND
GUIDANCE FOR TENANTS., WE DID
GET SOME FEEDBACK THAT, THAT
THERE MIGHT BE SOME WAYS TO
IMPROVE THIS EVEN MORE AND
CERTAINLY OPEN TO THAT., YOU
KNOW, WE WERE ONLY ABLE TO
CIRCULATE THIS, ON FRIDAY, SO WE
DIDN'T HAVE A TON OF TIME TO
GET ALL THE FEEDBACK THAT WE
WOULD HAVE LIKED, BUT WE DID GET
SOME POSITIVE FEEDBACK., IN
GENERAL, SOME SUPPORT, BUT ALSO
SOME SUGGESTIONS TO HOW TO
IMPROVE IT EVEN FURTHER.
CERTAINLY OPEN CONTINUE TO BE
OPEN TO THAT. AND WITH THAT,
CERTAINLY OPEN TO ANY QUESTIONS
OR COMMENTS. THANK YOU SO MUCH.
-- THANK YOU. COUNCILMEMBER
LIN., I SEE A HAND FROM
COUNCILMEMBER JUAREZ.
-- THANK YOU., FIRST OF ALL,
THANK YOU, CHAIR, FOR PUTTING
THIS FORWARD. I WAS HERE IN 2016
AND 2017 WHEN WE FIRST STARTED
PASSING THE TENANT RIGHTS ISSUES
IN LEGISLATION., SO I'M GOING TO
ADDRESS MY QUESTIONS TO HB.,
FIRST OF ALL, THANK YOU FOR THE
SUMMARY AND FISCAL NOTE AND
WALKING US THROUGH THE FIVE
COMPONENTS OF THIS LEGISLATION.,
ALL OF THEM ARE FINE AS FAR AS
I'M CONCERNED. IS I VOTED YES,
OBVIOUSLY, THE ONE THAT GAVE ME
THE MOST PAUSE IS AMENDMENT
FOUR. AND I'M GOING TO ASK SOME
QUESTIONS JUST SO I UNDERSTAND.
SO ON THE ENFORCEMENT PIECE. SO
IS IT FAIR? IS IT IS IT ARE WE
NOW ESTABLISHING SDCI? NOW FOR
THE FIRST TIME, THE RIGHT WITH
SUBPOENA POWER
-- I'M SORRY. ON AMENDMENT
FOUR, WE ARE NOT WEIGHING IN ON
ANYTHING RELATED TO SDCI POWERS.
AMENDMENT FOUR IS ONLY RELATED
TO A PRIVATE RIGHT OF ACTION
BETWEEN THE TENANT AND THE
LANDLORD.
-- OKAY, SO THE PRIVATE RIGHT OF
ACTION, I GUESS THE CONCERN I
HAVE IS ON THE, ON THE ON THE
DAMAGES PIECE. SO THEY HAVE 30
DAYS TO, TO, TO CURE. AND SO
WHEN I GO THROUGH THAT, I GUESS
MY CONCERN IS, AND I'M JUST
ASKING, EVERYONE GOES, GETS,
GETS UPSET. ON THE 30 DAYS TO
CURE. SO THE LANDLORD SAYS,
OKAY, OUR SEE, I SAYS I'M
PROHIBITED FEES. I GOT 30 DAYS
TO FIX THIS. AND WITHIN THOSE 30
DAYS, TENANT GETS REIMBURSED FOR
THOSE PROHIBITED FEES. AND THEN
EVEN WITHIN THE 30 DAYS, IF THE
LANDLORD IS GOING TO CURE, WE
STILL IMPOSE OR WILL BE IMPOSED
DOUBLE DAMAGES. CORRECT. SO
EXPLAIN THAT TO ME BECAUSE IT
SEEMS PUNITIVE IN NATURE. SO
I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND THAT.
-- RIGHT. SO AGAIN, THE CITY
WILL NOT IMPOSE ANYTHING. THIS
IS ONLY BETWEEN THE TENANT AND
THE LANDLORD. SO SEPARATELY,
SDCI COULD PURSUE AN
INVESTIGATION. BUT THIS IS JUST
BETWEEN THE TENANT AND THE
LANDLORD. AND THEY WOULD BE
LIABLE FOR THIS AMOUNT. AND SO
WHAT THIS ACTUALLY DOES IS
PROVIDES A MORE COST EFFECTIVE
ALTERNATIVE TO THE PRIVATE RIGHT
OF ACTION. BECAUSE AS
TRANSMITTED UNDER PRIVATE RIGHT
OF ACTION, THE LANDLORD IS
LIABLE FOR NOT ONLY THE DAMAGES
PLUS INTEREST AND DOUBLE THE
AMOUNT OF ANY OF THE FEE, BUT
ALSO DOUBLE THE PENALTY THAT
SDCI WOULD HAVE IMPOSED, AS WELL
AS REASONABLE ATTORNEY'S FEES.
SO AS TRANSMITTED, THEY ARE
ALREADY LIABLE FOR SIGNIFICANTLY
MORE THAN WHAT THIS AMENDMENT
IS, IS PROVIDING A SORT OF
ALTERNATIVE TO. SO JUST TO SAY
IT AGAIN, TO BE VERY CLEAR,
UNDER PRIVATE RIGHT OF ACTION AS
TRANSMITTED IN THE BILL, THE
LANDLORD IS LIABLE FOR THREE
TIMES THE FEE PLUS DOUBLE THE
PENALTY, WHICH COULD BE $750 OR
UP TO 1500 FOR SUBSEQUENT
VIOLATIONS. IN ADDITION TO
REASONABLE ATTORNEY'S FEES. SO
WHAT THIS AMENDMENT DOES IS SAY,
RATHER THAN GOING THE FULL ROUTE
OF, YOU KNOW, LAWYERING UP AND
INCURRING THAT LEVEL OF COST, IF
YOU'RE ABLE TO PAY THE TENANT
BACK AT THAT THREE TIMES LEVEL
WITHIN 30 DAYS, YOU ARE NO
LONGER LIABLE FOR DOUBLE THE
PENALTY, OR REASONABLE
ATTORNEY'S FEES.
-- OKAY. SO LET ME ASK YOU
QUICKLY ON THE QUESTION, AND
I'M LOOKING AT YOUR MEMO ON
PAGE THREE UNDER CIVIL PENALTIES
AND REMEDIES, AM I ON THE RIGHT
SECTION? OKAY
-- WELL, THAT WOULD NOT BE
RELATED TO PRIVATE RIGHT OF
ACTION.
-- OKAY, SO I GUESS I'M
CONFUSING THAT WITH I'M ACTUALLY
LOOKING AT THE AMENDMENT., CAN
YOU JUST WALK ME THROUGH IF WE
ARE ACTUALLY, CODIFYING THE
RIGHTS OR THE PRIVILEGES THAT
SDCI DIRECTORS ADMINISTRATION
HAS, OR I KNOW SOME OF THE OTHER
AMENDMENTS, WE WERE JUST
CODIFYING WHAT THEY'RE ALREADY
DOING IS THAT, IS THAT WHAT
WE'RE SEEING HERE?
-- NO. IN THIS CASE, WE'RE
PROVIDING A NEW AVENUE FOR
LANDLORDS AND TENANTS TO
BASICALLY RESOLVE THEIR
DIFFERENCES WITHOUT GOING
THROUGH FORMAL LITIGATION. SO
THERE ARE MANY PATHS TO
ENFORCEMENT THAT ARE IN THIS
ORDINANCE. THERE'S PRIVATE RIGHT
OF ACTION. THERE ARE CLASS
ACTION SUITS, AND THEN THERE ARE
SEVERAL PATHS THAT SDCI CAN
TAKE. SO THIS AMENDMENT IS ONLY
CONCERNED WITH THAT PRIVATE
RIGHT OF ACTION PATH. IT DOES
NOT TOUCH WHAT WAS TRANSMITTED
RELATED TO SDCI ENFORCEMENT. IT
ONLY TALKS ABOUT THE TENANT AND
THE LANDLORD IN A PRIVATE RIGHT
OF ACTION. SO THE THING IS THAT
WHETHER UNDER A CLASS ACTION
SUIT OR UNDER ANY OF THE OTHER
PATHS, THAT SDCI WOULD BE
INVOLVED IN, YOU KNOW, THEY
WOULD TAKE INTO ACCOUNT WHETHER
A TENANT HAD ALREADY BEEN PAID
BACK. SO YOU'RE NOT LOOKING AT A
SITUATION WHERE WE'RE GOING TO
BE PILING ON LOTS OF DIFFERENT
PENALTIES. WHAT WE WANT TO DO
THROUGHOUT ALL OF THESE
ENFORCEMENT MECHANISMS, I THINK
IT'S SAFE TO SAY, IS TO MAKE
THE TENANT WHOLE AND TO BRING
THE LANDLORD INTO COMPLIANCE AND
GENERALLY AS QUICKLY AS
POSSIBLE. SO WHETHER THAT
HAPPENS VIA A PRIVATE RIGHT OF
ACTION, IN WHICH CASE I BELIEVE
SDCI WOULD SORT OF SAY, WELL,
THAT ONE'S TAKEN CARE OF. WE'RE
NO LONGER GOING TO PURSUE
ENFORCEMENT BECAUSE THAT TENANT
HAS BEEN PAID BACK, OR WHETHER
IT'S TAKEN CARE OF VIA A FORMAL
CITATION OR A FORMAL
INVESTIGATION, A NOTICE OF
VIOLATION, AND ALL OF THESE
OTHER PATHWAYS. THE POINT IS TO,
AS SOON AS POSSIBLE, PAY THAT
TENANT BACK, PLUS THAT THREE
TIMES AT THAT THREE TIMES LEVEL.
AND IF IT, YOU KNOW, HAS RISEN
TO THAT LEVEL OF NEEDING AN
ORDER OF INVESTIGATIVE FINDINGS,
THEN, YOU KNOW, POTENTIALLY AT
THAT POINT, YOU'VE GOT $750 OR
1500 PER VIOLATION. AND IN THAT
CASE, JUST TO KEEP GOING DOWN
THIS PATH, THE DIRECTOR HAS THE
ABILITY TO WAIVE THOSE PENALTIES
FOR TIMELY REIMBURSEMENT TO THE
TENANT. SO I WOULD SAY THAT THIS
AMENDMENT IS REALLY IN LINE WITH
THE GENERAL ORDINANCE REGARDING
REALLY PRIORITIZING PAYMENT BACK
TO THE TENANT AT THAT THREE
TIMES LEVEL, WHICH I WOULD AGREE
IS SOMEWHAT PUNITIVE TO SAY, YOU
KNOW, LOOK, THE TENANT'S BEEN
PAID BACK AND THEN SOME, YOU
KNOW, WE DON'T NEED TO FURTHER
PENALIZE THAT LANDLORD
NECESSARILY.
-- AND WE DIDN'T DO THAT BEFORE
WITH THE PUNITIVE NATURE.
-- WELL, THE PRIVATE RIGHT OF
ACTION, SECTION OF CODE DOES
ALREADY EXIST. YES., BUT IT,
YES, IT DOES ALREADY EXIST AND
IT DID ALREADY HAVE DOUBLE THE
AMOUNT OF SECURITY DEPOSIT
UNLAWFULLY WITHHELD AS AN
EXAMPLE. SO THIS REALLY EXTENDS
THAT TO THIS NEW AREA OF FEE
REGULATION.
-- AND SO PART OF THE EDUCATION
PROCESS WOULD BE NOT ONLY FOR
THE TENANT, BUT FOR THE LANDLORD
TO SAY, THIS IS NEW, NOT LIKE
WHAT WE DID IN 16 AND 17. WE'RE
CODIFYING WHAT'S ALREADY THERE
AND WE'RE STRENGTHENING ON THE
DATA THAT WE NOW HAVE REGARDING
JUNK FEES. BUT, I JUST WANT TO
MAKE SURE THAT WE CAN WITHSTAND
A LEGAL CHALLENGE THAT A
LANDLORD, WHETHER THEY'RE
COMMERCIAL OR SMALLER, ARE ON
NOTICE. THIS IS WHAT THE
REQUIREMENTS ARE BECAUSE
THERE'S RETENTION REQUIREMENTS.
NOW THERE'S A SUBPOENA ISSUE.
NOW THERE'S ALL THESE OTHER
TOOLS WHICH, YOU KNOW, ARE GOOD
AND THEY STRENGTHEN IT. BUT I
THINK IN THE INTENT OF THIS
LEGISLATION, IF I CAN, MADAM
CHAIR, IS TO ENSURE THAT RENTERS
ARE TREATED FAIRLY AND HAVE
TRANSPARENCY AND FULL NOTICE OF
WHAT THEY'RE WHAT THEY'RE PAYING
FOR., AND ALSO TO BRING
LANDLORDS INTO COMPLIANCE TO
MAKE SURE THAT THESE THINGS ARE
ADDRESSED AND THAT THERE'S AN
ARENA WHERE WE CAN ADDRESS THESE
ISSUES WITHOUT HAVING TO GO TO
AN ADMINISTRATOR OR, MUNICIPAL
COURT.
-- RIGHT. AND THERE ARE INITIAL
OUTREACH COSTS THAT ARE
ANTICIPATED TO COME AS PART OF
BUDGET LEGISLATION, I THINK, TO
HELP WITH THAT RIGHT TO UPDATE
ALL OF THE LANDLORD RESOURCE
INFORMATION. AND, YOU KNOW, THEY
HOLD PERIODIC LANDLORD WORKSHOPS
AND THAT KIND OF THING TO TRY TO
GET THE WORD OUT ABOUT
EVERYTHING.
-- SO MY UNDERSTANDING IS ON THE
BUDGETARY REQUIREMENTS, WE WOULD
BE SEEKING THREE FTES TO BE ARE
WE ACTUALLY CALLING THEM
INVESTIGATORS THAT WE ALREADY
HAVE AT SDCI?,
-- I DON'T KNOW THE EXACT
TITLES. I KNOW THE SORT OF
CLASSIFICATION., BUT, YOU KNOW,
I THINK THEY WOULD HAVE THREE
SLIGHTLY DISTINCT TITLES. AND
YES, THOSE ARE ALL CONTAINED IN
THE FISCAL SUMMARY NOTE, BUT
THEY ARE NOT OF COURSE,
AUTHORIZED AS PART OF THIS
LEGISLATION BECAUSE THEY'LL COME
DURING BUDGET. BUT IT IS THE
IMPLICATION OF THIS LEGISLATION
IS THAT DURING BUDGET WILL BE
GETTING LEGISLATION TO ADD THREE
F T'S AND AS WELL AS ADDITIONAL
OUTREACH COSTS FOR THE FIRST
YEAR. AND THE EFFORTS, OF
COURSE, WOULD BE ONGOING TO PAY
FOR THE INCREASED LEVEL OF
ENFORCEMENT THAT SDCI
ANTICIPATES BASED ON THIS NEW
LEGISLATION.
-- SO YOU DID THE SUMMARY AND
FISCAL NOTE DID YOU ALSO DO THE
THE SUMMARY OF THE THE, THE, THE
CHARTS THAT WERE ATTACHED.
-- AND YES, JUST TO BE CLEAR, I
ACTUALLY DIDN'T DO THE SUMMARY
AND FISCAL NOTE THAT WAS
PROVIDED BY THE EXEC, BUT I DID
DO THE MEMO AND THE AND THE
ATTACHMENTS ONE AND TWO TO HELP
SORT OF EXPLAIN THE DIFFERENT
COMPONENTS.
-- OKAY. I'M SORRY, I'M GETTING
THAT. THIS IS I APOLOGIZE.
THAT'S ON ME. I WAS GETTING
YOUR SUMMARY OR YOUR MEMO DATED
JULY 14th, CONFUSED WITH THE ONE
THAT WE GOT FROM THE
ADMINISTRATOR WAS QUINN ON THAT
ONE AS WELL? OKAY, I APOLOGIZE.
SO THERE WAS, I WAS GETTING MY
NOTES CONFUSED ON, ON THEIR
ACTUAL CHARTS OF POSITIONS, FTE
COSTS, WHEN IT WOULD COME IN THE
BUDGET, WHEN THEY WOULD BE
ASKING FOR IT AND WHAT IT WOULD
THE IMPACTS, RIGHT?
-- THAT WAS ALL TRANSMITTED BY
THE EXECUTIVE.,
-- AND SO WHEN THEY TRANSMITTED
FROM THE EXECUTIVE, YOU HAD A
CHANCE TO, AND I'M SURE THE
CHAIR DID AS WELL. I'M JUST
GOING TO ASK FOR THE PUBLIC.
THE, I THINK IT'S, I JUST THINK
IT'S IMPORTANT TO NOTE FOR
PEOPLE TO LOOK AT ON THE RACE
AND SOCIAL JUSTICE INITIATIVE
IMPACTS. I THINK THAT THE DATA
THERE,, FOR THOSE WHO MAY NOT BE
IN COMPLETE AGREEMENT WITH THIS
LEGISLATION, CAN SEE THAT, I
THINK IT'S ON PAGE NINE THAT,
THE RACE AND SOCIAL JUSTICE
INITIATIVE IMPACTS ARE PRETTY
POWERFUL WITH THE DATA THAT
THEY'VE PROVIDED. SO WITH THAT,
I GUESS I SHOULD BE THANKING,
QUINN FOR THAT. RIGHT. ALL
RIGHT. THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR.
-- THANK YOU SO MUCH.
COUNCILMEMBER JUAREZ. AND I SEE
A HAND FROM COUNCILMEMBER LIN.
-- YEAH. THANK YOU. FOR, THOSE
GREAT QUESTIONS., COUNCILMEMBER
JUAREZ. I JUST WANTED TO
CLARIFY, SORT OF THE, THE
INTENT, WHICH WAS, TO, I DON'T
AND HHB JUST CLARIFY THAT THIS
IS NOT A NEW CAUSE OF ACTION.
CORRECT? THAT'S CORRECT., BUT I
DID WANT TO INCENTIVIZE
LANDLORDS TO RESOLVE THINGS
QUICKLY AND WITHOUT THE NEED FOR
FORMAL LEGAL ACTION WHEN
POSSIBLE. AND SO I JUST WANT TO
CLARIFY THAT, THAT THAT WAS THE
INTENT BEHIND THIS, GIVEN THE,
KIND OF NEW LANGUAGE THAT ARE
THE AMENDMENTS THAT WE'RE MAKING
TO PRIVATE RIGHTS OF ACTION., I
FELT LIKE THIS LINED UP, WITH
THOSE NEW AMENDMENTS, BUT ALSO
PROVIDED A STRONG INCENTIVE FOR
LANDLORDS TO, TO QUICKLY COME
INTO COMPLIANCE., THANK YOU.
-- THANK YOU SO MUCH.
COUNCILMEMBER LIN COLLEAGUES,
ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS OR
DISCUSSION ON THIS AMENDMENT?,
COUNCILMEMBER JUAREZ. IS THAT A
NEW HAND OR AN OLD HAND? SORRY
ABOUT THAT. NO. YOU'RE GREAT.
YOU'RE WONDERFUL. THANK YOU.
THAT'S ALL GOOD., I WILL JUST
SHARE A COUPLE OF QUICK
COMMENTS. I APPRECIATE YOU,
COUNCILMEMBER JUAREZ, FOR
BRINGING UP THE RACE AND SOCIAL
JUSTICE INFORMATION. I'LL JUST
READ IT IN CASE FOLKS ARE
CURIOUS ABOUT WHAT COUNCILMEMBER
JUAREZ IS REFERENCING. AND JUST
FROM THE REPORT THAT WE HAVE. SO
RENTAL HOUSING FEES FURTHER
EXACERBATE DISPARITIES,
INCLUDING CONSUMER HOUSING
TRENDS REPORT IN 2025 FROM
ZILLOW THAT FOUND THAT RENTERS
OF COLOR AT 67% AND AAPI AT 74%,
AND HISPANIC RENTERS AT 66%,
WERE MORE LIKELY TO REPORT
PAYING AT LEAST ONE FEE COMPARED
TO WHITE RENTERS AT 63% AND
RENTERS AGE 18 TO 29 WERE ALSO
SIGNIFICANTLY MORE LIKELY AT
82%, TO REPORT PAYING AT LEAST
ONE FEE COMPARED TO OTHER AGE
GROUPS. SO THERE'S MORE THERE,
BUT I WON'T. DEATH BY
POWERPOINT BY READING THE ENTIRE
REPORT. BUT THANK YOU FOR
CALLING THAT OUT. COUNCILMEMBER
JUAREZ. AND I WILL JUST SAY, IN
TERMS OF THIS AMENDMENT IN
PARTICULAR, I THINK IT'S
IMPORTANT. AND I APPRECIATE YOU,
COUNCILMEMBER LIN, FOR BRINGING
THIS FORWARD, BECAUSE I BELIEVE
THE SPIRIT AND THE GOAL OF THE
OVERALL LEGISLATION IS TO FIND
WAYS TO KEEP RENTERS WHOLE. AND
PART OF THAT ALSO, I THINK,
COMES TO OTHER FORMS OF TIME AND
EXPENSE, SUCH AS PURSUING
LAWSUITS. AND I THINK THIS
PROVIDES A WAY FOR RENTERS TO
SEEK REMEDIATION WHILE ALSO
PERHAPS SAVING TIME AND STILL
BEING ALIGNED WITH OTHER
COMPONENTS OF THE LEGISLATION.
SO I WILL BE SUPPORTING THIS
TODAY., WITH THAT., CLERK, CAN
YOU I'M JUST CHECKING FOR HANDS
BECAUSE I ALWAYS FORGET. CLERK
WILL YOU PLEASE CALL THE ROLL ON
AMENDMENT FOUR.
-- COUNCIL PRESIDENT.
HOLLINGSWORTH.
-- SORRY, AYE.
-- COUNCILMEMBER JUAREZ.
COUNCILMEMBER RINCK.
-- YES.
-- VICE CHAIR LIN.
-- YES.
-- CHAIR FOSTER.
-- YES.
-- CHAIR, THERE ARE FIVE VOTES
IN FAVOR AND NONE OPPOSED.
-- OKAY. THE MOTION CARRIES AN
AMENDMENT FOUR IS ADOPTED. THANK
YOU, HB WE REALLY APPRECIATE YOU
FOR WALKING THROUGH ALL THE
AMENDMENTS AND ALL THE WORK THAT
YOU DID ON THIS LEGISLATION OVER
THE LAST SEVERAL MONTHS. SO I
WANT TO EXPRESS MY APPRECIATION
TO YOU AND THE REST OF CENTRAL
STAFF., YOU ALL WORK INCREDIBLY
HARD AND WE JUST REALLY
APPRECIATE IT. SO THANK.
-- YOU, THANK YOU.,
-- ALL RIGHT. WITH THAT, WE ARE
ALL THROUGH AMENDMENTS. SO NOW
WE ARE ON TO THE SPEECHIFYING
PORTION BEFORE WE TAKE OUR
VOTE., I WANT TO SAY I'M REALLY
EXCITED TO BE VOTING ON THIS
LEGISLATION BEFORE US TODAY. AND
I WANT TO EXPRESS MY GRATITUDE
TO THE MAYOR AND HER TEAM,
ESPECIALLY KAREN, FOR YOUR WORK
ON THIS BILL OVER THE LAST
SEVERAL MONTHS, IT HAS BEEN NO
SMALL FEAT. AS WE SAW DURING OUR
FIRST COMMITTEE HEARING, THIS
BILL HAD OVER 30 MEMBERS SHOW UP
AND SPEAK IN FAVOR OF IT ON THE
FIRST TIME THAT IT WAS HEARD.
TODAY IS THE THIRD TIME THAT
WE'VE HAD IT IN COMMITTEE., AND
AS A MAJORITY RENTER CITY, WE
KNOW AND WE SEE THERE'S A STRONG
DESIRE FOR US TO ACT AND MAKE
OUR RENTAL MARKET MORE
TRANSPARENT AND PUT A STOP TO
EXCESSIVE RENTAL JUNK FEES IN
THE CITY., I REALLY APPRECIATE
ALL OF THE THOUGHTFUL
ENGAGEMENT. I WANT TO APPRECIATE
THE FOLKS FROM THE STATE HOUSE
STAY HEALTHY COALITION TENANTS,
WHO'S BEEN HERE, THE TENANTS
UNION, THE TRANSIT RIDERS UNION,
I'M FORGETTING OTHER PEOPLE,
BUT WE REALLY APPRECIATE YOU ALL
FOR SHOWING UP AND BEING SUCH A
CONSISTENT PRESENCE AND SHARING
YOUR SUPPORT, INCLUDING WE HEARD
FROM SEATTLE HUMANE AND GOT
GREEN AND OTHERS TODAY. AND
APPRECIATE ALL OF THE
STAKEHOLDER WORK THAT WAS DONE
BEFORE THIS WAS SENT TO US HERE
AT FULL COUNCIL., YOU KNOW,
IT'S REALLY MY BELIEF THAT
ENHANCING CONSUMER PROTECTIONS
IN OUR CITY IS ONE OF THE WAYS
THAT WE CAN MAKE IT EASIER FOR
RENTERS TO UNDERSTAND THE COST
OF HOUSING. ONE WAY THAT IT'S
EASIER FOR PEOPLE TO COMPARE AND
MAKE DECISIONS ABOUT WHERE THEY
WANT TO LIVE, AND THAT THROUGH
THAT COMPARISON, WE CAN SUPPORT
GREATER AFFORDABILITY AND
LIVABILITY FOR ALL OF OUR
RESIDENTS. AND I THINK THIS
LEGISLATION TAKES US A STEP
FURTHER IN THAT DIRECTION., I
THINK THIS IS A REALLY SMART WAY
TO ALLOW FOR COMPETITIVENESS AND
CLARITY AMONGST DIFFERENT KINDS
OF LANDLORDS, BECAUSE WE WILL
KNOW RENTERS WILL NO LONGER HAVE
TO WONDER WHETHER THE PRICE THEY
SEE ONLINE IS GOING TO BE THE
PRICE THEY ARE GOING TO PAY WHEN
THEY ARRIVE. AND THAT'S AN
IMPORTANT WAY OF MAKING SURE
THAT LIFE IS BETTER FOR RENTERS,
BUT ALSO THAT LANDLORDS OF
DIFFERENT SIZES ARE
COMMUNICATING THE SAME THING TO
THE PUBLIC., AND AS WE HEARD IN
THE LAST PART OF THIS
CONVERSATION, I BELIEVE WE'RE
ALLOWING FOR THE RIGHT KIND OF
ENFORCEMENT TOOLS TO ENSURE THAT
OUR LAWS ARE FOLLOWED., AND
LASTLY, I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE
THAT I THINK COUNCILMEMBER
JUAREZ ALREADY DID THIS THROUGH
SOME OF YOUR QUESTIONS. WE WILL
BE TAKING UP, WE EXPECT TO GET
LEGISLATION LATER ON THIS YEAR,
THAT TACKLES THE HOW TO PAY FOR
THE ENFORCEMENT COMPONENT. SO
WITH THAT, I WILL SAY, I AM
REALLY EXCITED TO BRING THIS
BILL TO A VOTE. SO I MOVE THAT
THE COMMITTEE RECOMMEND ADOPTION
OF COUNCIL BILL ONE, TWO, ONE,
TWO, FIVE FOUR, AS AMENDED. IS
THERE A SECOND?
-- SECOND.
-- IT IS MOVED AND SECONDED TO
RECOMMEND ADOPTION OF THE BILL.
ARE THERE ANY FURTHER COMMENTS?
OKAY. WILL THE CLERK PLEASE CALL
THE ROLL ON THE RECOMMENDATION
TO ADOPT COUNCIL BILL 121254 AS
AMENDED.
-- COUNCIL PRESIDENT
HOLLINGSWORTH. YES.
COUNCILMEMBER. JUAREZ. HI.
COUNCILMEMBER RINCK.
-- YES.
-- VICE CHAIR. LIN. YES. CHAIR
FOSTER.
-- YES.
-- THERE ARE FIVE VOTES IN FAVOR
AND NONE OPPOSED.
-- ALL RIGHT. THE MOTION CARRIES
AND THE COMMITTEE CHAIR.
-- [APPLAUSE] [APPLAUSE]
-- THE MOTION CARRIES THE
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION THAT
THE COUNCIL BILL BE ADOPTED, AS
AMENDED, WILL BE SENT TO THE
AUGUST 11th, 2026 CITY COUNCIL
MEETING. ARE THERE ANY COMMENTS
OR QUESTIONS FOR COMMITTEE
MEMBERS OKAY, THAT CONCLUDES THE
AUGUST 3rd, 2026 SPECIAL MEETING
OF THE HOUSING, ARTS AND CIVIL
RIGHTS COMMITTEE. OUR NEXT
SCHEDULED MEETING IS ON AUGUST
12th. THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR
ATTENDING. IT IS 3:21 P.M. AND
WE ARE ADJOURNE