Seattle City Council 6/10/2019

By | August 29, 2019

♪♪ ♪♪ -Good afternoon. Thank you
for being here on June 10th, the June 10, 2019,
City Council Meeting of this full
Seattle City Council. We’ll come to order. I’m Bruce Harrell,
president of the Council. Will the clerk
please call the roll? -O’Brien?
-Here. -Pacheco?
-Here. -Sawant?
-Here. -Bagshaw?
-Here. -González?
-Here. -Herbold?
-Here. -Juarez?
-Here. -Mosqueda?
-Present. -President Harrell?
-Here. -Nine present.
-Alright. If there’s no objection,
today’s introduction and referral calendar
will be adopted. Hearing no objection,
today’s introduction and referral calendar
is adopted. And similarly,
if there’s no objection, today’s agenda will be adopted. No changes there. Hearing no objection,
today’s agenda is adopted. The minutes of the May 28th
and June 3, 2019, special City Council meetings
have been reviewed, and if there’s no objection,
the minutes will be signed. Hearing no objection,
the minutes are signed. There you go, Madam Clerk. Presentations, I’m not aware of any presentations
this afternoon, so we’ll move into
public comment. At this time,
we’ll take public comment on items that appear
on today’s agenda, the introduction
and referral calendar, or our 2019 work program. And I’ll call you out in the
order with which you’ve signed. We’ll go for 2 minutes apiece. And we’ll start off
with David Hanes, followed by
Mark Taylor-Canfield. And so we’re going to try to put
both microphones in place, so, Mr. Taylor-Canfield,
if you don’t mind, you’ll use
this microphone up here as you start making your way
toward it when it’s the appropriate time. Go ahead, Mr. Hanes.
You have the floor, sir. -Thank you. You can tell it’s reelection
season for Democratic operatives
of the Northwest, co-opting trivial movements
for media reelection favors. And all the corrupt activists
and organizers and political operatives of Seattle’s social welfare
industry nonprofits are lining up —
-Excuse me. Stop the clock for one moment.
-Okay. Wait. Mr. Hanes, is there an agenda
item or specific work program — -Yes, sir. I’m sorry
if that went off the subject. You know, it seems like
it’s forgotten sometimes. But, okay. It’s related
to the expansion right now. Seattle is filled
with rock ‘n’ roll wannabes forever stuck
on drugs and alcohol acting like
keeping Seattle rundown, dilapidated preserved
is the only way to feel Seattle forever living in past. It would be a better negotiation
demand to the developer to tear down and rebuild
a modern, 21st-century Showbox that would be a preservation
of a music venue without the traffic driving by
at 21st-century volumes, creating, like, PTSD for
all the kids hanging out there waiting to get inside. And it would not preserve
another endangering, like, crappy building
that is totally unnecessary if you have, like,
a really wealthy developer just, you know, being forced
by all the design review and the great
pedestrian-friendly particulars that you have
for 21st-century redevelopment and create a more accommodating,
21st-century Showbox. But make the developer
do the whole thing, but you guys design
the whole thing. But preserving
another old building while all that traffic drives
through on those cobblestones is too much to bear. You guys got to do something
about that regardless. Thank you.
-Thank you. Following Mark Taylor-Canfield
will be Joan Singler on the middle mic. Yes, sir.
That’d be great, Mark. Thanks. -Hi. My name is
Mark Taylor-Canfield. I am a musician
and a journalist, and I moved to Seattle
because of the music scene here and because of places
like the Showbox. And some of you have heard
part of this song, but we have a new verse
for you today, and it goes like this. ♪♪ ♪ Yeah, we love the Showbox,
really love her today ♪ ♪ Yeah, we love the Showbox,
we really love her today ♪ ♪ You got to save the Showbox ♪ ♪ Don’t let them take
that lady away ♪ ♪ Seems like I been going
to the Showbox ♪ ♪ Since the day I was born ♪ ♪ Seems like I’m going
to the Showbox ♪ ♪ Since the day I was born ♪ ♪ Well, don’t you let them
tear it down ♪ ♪ Won’t you leave
that lady alone? ♪ ♪ We got to save the Showbox ♪ ♪ We got to save
the Showbox ♪ ♪ We got to save the Showbox ♪ ♪ We got to save
the Showbox ♪ ♪ We got to save the Showbox ♪ ♪ Don’t you let them
tear that lady down ♪ ♪♪ -[ Chuckles ] -Very good. Very good. Following Joan
will be Eugenia Woo. -This — This is on? Okay. I’m here representing
Friends of the Market. This is our vice president,
Carla Rickerson. And we’re the organization
that spearheaded the campaign to save the Market and wish to
convey our very strong support for the extension,
the six-month extension on the Pike Place Market
Historic District to include the Showbox. We believe that it is feasible
and appropriate to seriously consider
this expansion and to include
historic properties including the Showbox. This concept deserves
serious professional study and in-depth analysis, neither of which
appears to have been undertaken since the interim action
was taken by the City Council on August 13, 2018. Friends of the Market
are eager to assist and support this effort. Our board of directors
and membership include many individuals
who possess in-depth knowledge regarding the history,
delineation, regulation of the Pike Place
Market Historic District. We are very willing to
contribute to a thorough study that will fully identify
the feasibility and appropriateness
of this expansion. -Thank you. Following Eugenia will be
Jane Davies on the middle mic. -I’m actually Jane Davies.
I’m going to speak with Eugenia. -That works out.
Then following you two will be Elton Mason
on the middle mic. Go ahead.
-So, I’m Jane Davies. This is Eugenia Woo. We’re speaking on behalf
of Historic Seattle. We are asking for the Council
to pass the amendment to Ordinance 125650 to provide for
a six-month extension of the interim
boundary expansion of the Pike Place Market
Historical District. Section 4
of the original ordinance describes a work plan
to conduct a study to review the historic
significance of the Showbox and study its relationship
with the Pike Place Market, as well as conduct a SEPA review on the permanent expansion
of the Historical District. Our understanding
is that neither the study nor the SEPA review
has been completed, so it is appropriate
and imperative that the Council extend
the interim expansion in order to complete
the commitments that were outlined
in the original ordinance. -Thank you. And since the consultant
that the city hired is charged with looking at the historic
significance of the Showbox and its relation
to the Pike Place Market, just want to let you know
if you — I’m sure you already know, but last week, the Seattle
Landmark Preservation Board unanimously nominated —
It was a clear nomination of the Showbox for —
as a landmark. The designation hearing
is set for July 17th, and we’re confident
with this clear nomination that it will get designated. So, we also have been contacted by the consultant
as of last Friday and will be doing a stakeholder
interview this Thursday, and we look forward
to meeting with them and talking to them more about the historic significance
of the Showbox in relation to the Market
and also what all the ties are. The Showbox was originally built
as a public market in 1917, just 10 years after Pike Place
Market was established in 1907. So that connection
is very clear. And so just want to thank the
City Council for your time and efforts
on this important issue, and we ask that you
pass this extension. Thanks. -Thank you. Following Mr. Mason
will be Shannon Wells. -Hello. For the record,
my name is Elton Mason, owner of
Washington State Trucking. The comments I am here to make is in regards to the contracting
with the city of Seattle, contracts that come out
of FAS, SDOT, and whatnot, the problems have occurred
and what’s happened to my firm. And I believe that there — And I’m watching this
firsthand — there’s millions and millions
of our tax dollars being wasted, Millions. And I know
for a fact firsthand that this is going on. I am not going to name any names
out of FAS and out of divisions
across the street, but you do have my contact
information on the sign-up. You have my e-mail,
and you have my phone number, before this goes
to the next step. FAS has made some decisions
within my firm and has done some major damage
to my firm. I lost my capacity. I had to sell over 30 trucks. I lost my office that was here
in the city of Seattle. I mean, they’ve done
some major, major damage in some of the decisions that
they have made in contracting, in regards
to this inclusion plan with the contracts that are coming out
of the city of Seattle. I have —
Anyway, I can go on and on, but I think you know
where I’m going with this. But I really hope
somebody reaches out to me before this goes
to the next level. -Mr. Mason, if you do have the
time after the hearing today, after we conclude,
I’d like to speak with you. If you do not,
I will follow up with you based on your information. But I’d love to chat with you
after today’s hearing. I take it’s maybe an hour or so,
but if you have the time. -Be back. Thank you.
-Okay. Thank you, sir. Following Shannon will be — if I may call you Shannon — will be Kim Doyle, I think. Go ahead. -Hi. Good afternoon.
My name is Shannon Wells, and I’m speaking today on behalf
of Friends of the Showbox, which is a grassroots
community coalition dedicated to saving the Showbox. The Friends of the Showbox
strongly supports the six-month extension
of the ordinance that places the venue in the Pike Place Market
Historic District. I do have a copy
of the ordinance here, and as Historic Seattle
just mentioned, there is a work plan,
as you know, laid out in this ordinance. And so our concern is that there are a number of studies
that are listed here — the historic significance
of the theater, the relationship between
the theater and the Market, the SEPA review, looking at the Historic
District guidelines. So we’re concerned that none of that has been done
to this point. And if the city laid out
a 10-month plan to do the work, and it hasn’t even
started until now, that leaves about a month
for all of the work that was supposed to be done
in 10 months to be done now. So we feel that it’s rushed and that it won’t be
comprehensive and thorough. And as Eugenia mentioned, there was a unanimous vote
last week to nominate the Showbox
as an historic landmark. So I just want to reiterate that this is really important
to the city and the community, and so we just want a serious, comprehensive
analysis to take place, and that is why we are asking
for the six-month extension. Thank you.
-Thank you. Following Kim
will be Daniel Martin. -Hi. I’m Kim Doyle, and I came here today to ask you
to please vote for the extension so the city can complete
the mandated study. That’s it. Thank you. -Thank you. -Good afternoon.
My name is Daniel Martin. I’m privileged to serve as the President
of Seattle Pacific University. First, I would like
to thank Councilmember Bagshaw for your representation of
District 7. You will be missed. I’ve appreciated your
partnership and your leadership, not only thinking about items
within the district and the ways in which we can
be a better neighborhood and better neighbors, but
for broader Seattle, as well. I would simply
urge your approval of agenda item number 15. It’s simply an extension of
the comprehensive plan amendment that was approved in December. We’ve been partnering
with the city since 1891. What this would allow is simply for further conversations
to be ongoing between the University
and concerned community citizens and the industrial base there as we think about the best
possible use for this land for the benefit of all. So thank you so much. -Thank you. Next two speakers
are Dominic Vesquiel, Vesquiel, Dominic, and then we’ll go
to Ernie Dornfeld. -Hi, everyone. I’m Dom. I work at the Showbox. I’m asking you
to please extend the ordinance so we can have the comprehensive
study we deserve. Please help us preserve the heart of Seattle’s
thriving culture Music and entertainment
are integral to our city and and our society. We at the Showbox dearly want to continue providing
that entertainment and enjoying it ourselves
at our landmark home venue. Thank you. -Thank you. Following Ernie is Caroline Ann. -Hi. My name’s Ernie Dornfeld. I’m a board member
of Friends of the Market. I’d like to talk about
some reasons why we think this is really an important
thing to consider, the issue of adding the —
possibly adding the Showbox to the Pike Place Market
Historical District. First, it seems to me
that the Showbox and its use as a cultural venue is way more compatible
with the Market than a luxury high-rise
would be on that site. Second, although the Showbox
is being considered for landmark status,
that would not protect its use. Adding it to
the Historical District could preserve its use
for entertainment. And third, the Pike Place Market
is potentially threatened by development
all along 1st Avenue. Expanding the
Historical District, perhaps including the Showbox and extending along 1st Avenue
from Stewart to Union, could protect the Market
from incompatible development. Thank you. -Thank you. Just one second, Caroline. I’m going to call out
three speakers — Doug Conrad, Steve Gillespie,
and Christoph Doles. Doug, Steve, and Christoph
after Caroline Ann. Go ahead, please. -My name is Caroline Ann, and I am a music photographer
here in Seattle. I moved here 11 years ago
from the East Coast, reason being for the music
and for the cultural diversity that’s here in Seattle. I recently wrote an article
inInnocent Wordsmagazine, and I also would like
to quote the mayor. She has recently been quoted as
saying, “Seattle is thriving.” I feel that if we want
to keep Seattle thriving, we need to keep the doors
to the Showbox open. We need to keep these doors open
for our community, our cultural diversity, and the city
that we pride ourselves upon. I think we need to put community
before profit. This extension is needed. I believe that we are not only
protecting the community and our culture, we’re also
protecting the jobs of the people
that work at the Showbox. Thank you.
-Thank you. -Hi. My name is Doug Conrad. I’m a citizen of the city. And for the last 3 or 4 years,
I’ve come to Council on occasion and given testimony with respect
to some important issues concerning housing affordability
and homelessness. And I want to add
my voice of support to the committee
that just adopted the — or at least supported the
adoption of Resolution 31887. That’s the one that reads —
It’s a resolution adopting and approving
an application for surplus federal property
at Fort Lawton, including a redevelopment plan,
and it goes on. I want to make three points. The first is, one of the aspects
of the plan that I like is that it contributes
intentionally toward fair housing. And I think that’s
a very important, if you will, double win,
both for the fair housing and for the development
of affordable housing. I also want to congratulate
both the Council and several of its members for their strong support
of housing affordability. I think it really matters. I think the Fort Lawton
is an example where I would hope the Council and the city
and HUD and Habitat and the Catholic Housing
Authority will push to move with all deliberate
speed to get this done. My final point is
as you think about this, when HALA and the Mandatory
Housing Affordability levy was being developed, I thought that was
a very impressive document and an ambitious document. It pointed out that even
building 6,000 housing units, which was the plan, would only dent 30% of the need
over the proposed decade. 20,000 units needed.
A plan for 6,000. So this 238 units at Fort Lawton
that are proposed, three different sectors —
housing affordability, low-income housing,
vets included, it’s just a —
It’s an ambitious plan and as significant as it is, it’s like 2.4% of the need. And it’s been, in some sense,
depending on how you time it, 13 years in the making. That property was, if you will,
provided to the city for free. And I don’t gainsay the fact that it takes time
to do these things right. But having given testimony
on this issue and at a Office of Housing
meeting that they had up in the Fort Lawton area
a couple years ago, I thought it’d be
a done deal by now. Let’s get it done, please. -Thank you. -Good afternoon. Steve Gillespie
of Foster Pepper here on behalf of
Seattle Pacific University. I’m excited to be part
of a very packed agenda that has generated a lot of
civic engagement I’m here to talk about
a few blocks near the ship canal in north Queen Anne. We’ve been working
on this text amendment, and I urge your approval.
This is item 15. I want to thank you
for taking it up. We’ve been working on it
for several years. I think that
Councilmember Bagshaw and I first spoke about this
in January of 2017. And as President Martin said, this is implementing
the comprehensive plan amendment that you approved
in December of 2018. And it is not the end
of the conversation. This is the beginning of what will be
a robust public conversation about the appropriate use
of the land right adjacent
to Seattle Pacific University. Anything that the University
decides to propose is going to involve
quite a bit of public process, from project level permitting, meetings of our
advisory committee, on up all the way through a full
major institution master plan which all of you know
is a very, very robust years-long community
conversation that we are excited to have. But this vote is the first step that allows us
to ask the question of how this land should be used. So thank you very much
for your support. Councilmember Bagshaw,
thank you very much for your service to District 7. You are going to be
a tough act to follow. And thank you. -Thank you.
-Thank you. Following Christoph
will be Earnie Ashwood and then Misha Dumoi– -Dumois.
-Dumois? -Hello. My name is
Christoph Doles, and I’m a lifelong
Seattle resident. Around here, there’s no place
like the Showbox. It is the absolutely
best place acoustically and just its sheer beauty
to see shows. There is a good reason why basically everyone around
here loves the Showbox and bands from all over
the world and the country love the Showbox. Just in traveling,
wearing this shirt, you know, the last couple
of months and stuff, I’ve had — just at different
venues around the country, I’ve had people ask me
about that and — about what’s happening with it. And they said, “You simply
can’t let that happen. That’s where we play.
That’s the best — That’s someplace
we look forward to all around the country to play.” Let’s see. And also just the fact
that it would change the entire historical feel
of the Market. We can’t let that happen. The Market’s one of our most
treasured spots in the city where tourists flock to. Tourists want to flock to see
beautiful historic buildings like the Pike Place,
like the Showbox, and want to see shows
at the Showbox. And that’s a lot
of tourist revenue coming in. And we just can’t afford to lose
one of the last beacons in our city’s
long-standing title as the city of rock and that we just need
the proper time to do the due diligence
with the study. So I strongly urge you to vote to extend the study
for another six months and make sure we get the due
diligence that we were promised and that we get a fair shot. Thank you so much.
-Thank you. -Whew. Good afternoon,
everybody. Thank you guys so much for
taking the time out to hear us. We really, really appreciate it. My name’s Earnie. I represent a band called
The Complex Dialect that had the privilege of being
able to play at the Showbox. I also work at the Showbox. I have a lot of ties
into the Showbox. I’m not here to ask you guys
to make a decision regarding the actual
permanent extension. We’re just asking for more time, just based off of the concept
of having an informed decision. It’s been made very, very clear
from earlier testimonies that a lot of resources
for information have not really been tapped yet, and the start of actually
getting that information has just begun so recently, when the actual ordinance
was passed way back in August. We need more time so that way, you guys can have
the proper information to make an actual
informed decision. That’s the only thing
we’re really asking for today. Again, thank you so much
for your time. We appreciate you so much. Thank you.
-Thank you. Following Misha
will be Marva Semet. -Hi. Apologies to be redundant. This is something I said
very similar last week to a few of you,
but I’m going to say it again just for the benefit of
those of you that were not here. So, my name is Misha.
I’m a local artist and have been a theater
and venue employee in Seattle for close to 20 years. I’ve worked at
the Seattle Opera. I’ve worked at Benaroya Hall. I’ve worked at
5th Avenue Theatre. I also currently
work at the Showbox. So my love for Seattle theater
and venues runs pretty deep and for a very long time. So I just wanted
to say thank you for the continued efforts
that you’ve made towards helping us
to save the Showbox. Without this additional
six months, we could very well lose it. And there’s been countless
theaters in this town that we’ve already lost. The Music Box
was built in the ’20s. That was demolished completely. And I could give you
countless other examples, but I bet you when you look
at pictures of those theaters, you’ll think to yourself, “Gosh, I really wish
those were still here. I really wish they were part
of the downtown landscape.” But unfortunately, there’s just
no bringing them back. And the same goes
for the Showbox. I know it seems like,
process to process, you know, another six months, what’s another six months
going to do? But it could be the difference
between losing it and having it. So I urge you to make
a decision towards — leaning towards giving us
an additional six months to work on it. Thank you. -Thank you. -My name is Marva Semet, and I’m here to ask you
to postpone the vote for developing the last
remaining contiguous parcel of Discovery Park,
which is known as Fort Lawton. I’d like to paraphrase
a statement by Phil Vogelzang, the Friends of Discovery Park. The park represents many decades
of hard work and advocacy. We ask that all of you remain
committed to the ideas at first put forth by the likes
of Senator Henry Jackson, Bernie Whitebear,
Judge Don Voorhees, and Bob Kildall, to create and protect this place that is free from the noise
and the clamor of the city to provide its citizens a place
of refuge and solitude. Not only is the parcel adjacent
to the park, it is also located
within a few hundred feet of the riparian zone of
Salmon Creek and Kiwanis Ravine, where a small band
of great blue herons have been living and nesting for
literally thousands of years. They too are stakeholders
in this decision, and we ask that you
consider their fate. Also, I’d like
to paraphrase a statement by Thatcher Bailey from
the Seattle Parks Foundation. As the city strives
to meet its equity commitments, we cannot regard
access to green space and access to affordable housing
as competing goals. Piecemeal solutions such as
surrendering finite green space can never be recovered. To create room
for affordable housing would only lead to more serious
problems down the road. Thank you. -Thank you. The last three speakers
I have signed up — Rosalind Tan, Nick Setter,
Marty Kooister. -Kooistra.
-Kooistra. Rosalind, Nick, and Marty,
in that order. -Hi, everyone.
My name is Rosalind Tan. Thank you for the opportunity to be here
in front of all of you to speak on this topic
of Fort Lawton. And like what Marva has said, I
request for the decision to vote to be postponed. So, I’m speaking on behalf
of my husband and myself. So, if my husband was here,
this is what he would say. “I feel it’s inappropriate
to take a neighborhood with its own quiet character and dropping 600 more people
and their cars into a very small
residential space. Councilmember O’Brien,
I heard you on NPR saying — expounding the virtue
of up-zoning to allow for accessory dwelling
units — backyard cottages — as a way to increase density without greatly impacting the
character of the neighborhood. Why isn’t this same thinking
being applied here? Your plan will greatly change
this area, an area nowhere near places
of employment, shopping, or transportation for the people
you hope to house here.” My comments, my personal
comments, are as follows. So, a couple of questions. What are the reasons for pushing this Fort Lawton
project through? Is it because you have spent
the last 15 years on this and you think it’s about time
to get this going? Then I don’t think
it’s the right reason or a good enough reason. If it’s about helping
the homeless and affordable crisis
we are facing now? Then 237 units eight years later won’t help the situation
that we are facing today. If it’s about
getting this land for free, then I would like
to know how much the federal government
would allow this to go to an expansion
of Discovery Park and affordable housing
being built off-site — for example,
at the Interbay Armory, where the alternate plan is to build 2,680 units for up to 4,000 people. So the land may be free, but developing it
is not cost-effective. So I urge you
to please spend the money wisely like it’s your own.
-Thank you. -Thank you.
-Thank you. -Hello. My name is Nick Setten, and I’d like to speak
about the Showbox. Now, as you ought to be aware, the Pike Place Market
is a truly unique neighborhood. The only federally designated
historic district that owes its status due to a
public vote, it is today home to over 500
small and micro businesses, as well as a preschool,
a senior center, a food bank,
and a medical clinic. I have been a tour guide
and a historian in the Market for over 10 years and have
learned that above all else, the Market is
a fragile ecosystem. Your motion to add the Showbox
to the Historic District was an important step,
but in the interim, you have failed to follow
through with your promises to conduct studies on the impact of making piecemeal additions
to the district. Today, I urge you
to extend the ordinance simply so that you can buy more
time to conduct the outreach and studies you said
you would do in the first place. I will repeat that. You made promises
that were left unfulfilled. I have been a part
of the community working to be engaged in the
conversation around the Showbox, and I am imploring you to simply do the work
you said you would do. Vote to extend the ordinance. Vote to have
a responsible dialogue and seek to find compromise to authentically
and sustainably work to marry Seattle’s
passion for progress with the history and the culture that make this an exciting
and engaging place to live. Thank you for your time.
-Thank you. [ Cheers and applause ] Following —
Just one second, Marty — Following Marty is — Our last
speaker will be Aliesha Ruiz. Thank you.
-Good afternoon, councilmembers. Marty Kooistra. I work for the
Housing Development Consortium of Seattle-King County. I am speaking in favor today of moving ahead quickly
with the Fort Lawton project. 11 years ago, I was excited to bring Habitat for Humanity’s
work to that area. It has been
a long time in coming. We are right now today at least 156,000 affordable
homes short in King County. In order to make
that number palatable, we’re talking about
how to build 44,000 in the next five years. So it’s not a matter of
should we or should we not. It’s a matter of how much,
including Interbay and every other possible
location that we can build. And unfortunately that means
that we all have to learn to adapt to a society
that’s going to embrace density, density done right. Talking about Fort Lawton being
designed after years of work by partners in the Office
of Housing and others as a true community. Yes, there’s other work
that’s going to need to be done, including transportation,
schools, all of that. But it is a unique opportunity
that we have before us, and I would encourage you to
move forward with all due haste and please encourage
your partners, as well, to develop it out quickly. Let’s make it happen.
Thank you. -Thank you. -Hello. My name is Aliesha Ruiz. I’m here today representing
the Master Builders Association of King and Snohomish County. We all recognize that
affordable housing — We are in a crisis situation with the shortage
of affordable housing. Therefore, the Master
Builders Association fully support the Fort Lawton
redevelopment plan and urge the city
to approve it quickly. Obviously, after years
of discussion, planning with stakeholders,
public review, litigation, and debate, it is time to adopt
and implement the plan to create affordable housing
at Fort Lawton. Thank you. -Thank you. Okay, that will conclude
our public comment section. Let’s move to payment
of the bills. -Council Bill 119538, appropriating money
to pay certain claims and ordering
the payment thereof. -I move to pass
Council Bill 119538. -Seconded. -It’s been moved and seconded
that the bill pass. Are there any further comments? Please call the roll
on the passage of the bill. -O’Brien?
-Aye. -Pacheco? Sawant?
-Aye. -Bagshaw?
-Aye. -González?
-Aye. -Herbold?
-Aye. -Juarez?
-Aye. -Mosqueda?
-Aye. -President Harrell?
-Aye. -Eight in favor, none opposed. -The bill passes,
and the chair will sign it. I was going to ask for an encore
from Mark Taylor-Canfield before we got into our agenda, but I think I’ll just
keep plowing on. That was good stuff,
there, Mark. Please read
the first agenda item. -The report of Civil Rights,
Utilities, Economic Development, and Arts Committee, agenda
item 1, Appointment 1345, appointment of
Robert Wonsung Lee as Director, Office
of Economic Development. The Committee recommends
the appointment be confirmed. -Councilmember Herbold. -Thank you. So, today,
I am really excited to advance the confirmation for Acting Director Bobby Lee for the Office
of Economic Development. Acting Director Lee has been
really helpful and thorough in this confirmation process, completing what I found to be
and I believe when compared to others,
a really rigorous questionnaire submitted by the Council and joining us
for two confirmation hearings in the Civil Rights, Utilities,
Economic Development, and Arts Committee. Really want to extend my thanks
to Director Lee for sticking through the process and thank you
to Council colleagues for your participation. Director Lee brings
years of experience in the public and private
sectors where he’s worked on
youth workforce initiatives, community and economic
development efforts that have prioritized equity
in building pathways to economic opportunity
for communities of color, building sustainability for small and
long-standing businesses similar to our work
with legacy businesses, and served also
as a city councilperson for the city of Eugene. So he understands
our role, as well. Acting Director Lee’s
most recent role before coming to Seattle was director of economic
development in Portland. Before that, he served
Oregon Governor Kate Brown working on economic and community
development challenges. He has received numerous
letters of support throughout the process, including former colleagues
and electeds in Oregon, the president of the Portland
chapter of the NAACP, and leaders from important
community-based organizations. In addition,
just want to highlight Director Lee’s commitment to working on priority issues that this Council
has identified, and he’s already begun engaging in the neighborhood businesses
throughout the city. He has come to South Park
twice already in his short time and met
with businesses out there. I do have an amendment I’d like
to make to the appointment as it relates specifically
to the expectations letter. -Please do.
-Thank you. I move to amend appointment 1345 to add the Council Letter
of Expectations for Mr. Lee. -Okay, we’re going to vote
on just the amendment. Did you want to say more
about the amendment or — I think it’s sort of
self-explanatory. So, just the amendment vote. All those in favor of
the amendment, please vote aye. -Aye.
-Aye. -Opposed? The ayes have it. The legislation is amended. -Great. And so those are my comments in support of this confirmation and — -Sure. Before we move forward
and ask for a vote, are there any other colleagues who would like to make
any comments or questions? Councilmember Bagshaw.
-Thank you. Well, I am very pleased, Bobby, that you’re going
to be joining us. I really appreciated
your positive energy. And I think, moving forward, you’ve got some people
that preceded you that I really appreciated
working with, so I think it’s going to be
a wonderful partnership. And I do want to acknowledge
what Councilmember Herbold said. We received many, many letters
of support, unsolicited letters that came in
talking about your strengths and the experience you had as
a city councilmember in Eugene, as was mentioned,
and the number of — We understand
you went to graduate school with our own Greg Doss, so we figure that you got
a good thumbs-up there, as well. So I want to acknowledge
that I really welcome you, welcome working with you, and am very glad that the mayor
put your recommendation forward. -Any other comments
from any of our colleagues? Councilmember Mosqueda? -Thank you, Mr. President. And I want to thank you,
as well, Mr. Lee, for your direction that you would like
to take the department. I just want to echo some
of the things that we’ve heard especially from front-line
workers, from union members. They’ve been very supportive of the direction that you would
like to bring to the department. I am also really excited about
the commitment that you bring to women- and minority-owned
small businesses, the work you’ve done in Portland
with the Portland Mercado the example in which
we want to create so that as we’re creating
new buildings, as we’re creating density, we do, as you heard
from one of the testifiers, density done right, which means smaller shops
on the first and second floor, and that we do the outreach to connect those
small-business owners with the opportunities
to have sites there so that they can
begin their business and that it’s affordable and that the process
gets broken down. And I just want to make a plug. So, every time we create
opportunities for small businesses to thrive, we also need to create
those opportunities for childcare facilities to grow so that our businesses
and workers can have a place for those kiddos and families
and workers to be successful. And I love your enthusiasm
around that image, and I love what you’ve done
in Portland. Really excited
about the front-line workers also supporting you,
and I’ll be an enthusiastic yes. -Thank you,
Councilmember Mosqueda. Any other further comments
from any of our colleagues? I’ll just say very quickly that I’ve enjoyed the time
we’ve spent together and your vision for
the department and the city. I love the sort of fierce
competitiveness you have for small businesses
and for high-performance, but then also sort of
a quiet humility about your style of leadership. So I do expect great things. And I did approve
the expectation letter. But what a treasure to have you as part of our city
government now. So I look forward
to supporting you strongly. Okay. So, with that, Councilmember Herbold,
should I call for a vote, or did you want to close with
any other remarks? -The only other remarks
I would like to close with are a recognition that the mayor’s Small Business
Advisory Commission had deferred my request
or my offer for them to submit questions because they had already
met with the — Early on in the — What’s the word
I’m looking for — the process to identify
an appointment, they had already met
with Mr. Lee and were really excited
about working with him. I want to just highlight
real quickly some of the specific
expectations that the Council have — grow and strengthen
the local business community through the provision
of direct services. Workforce development
is an important priority, specifically
the city’s investments in workforce development
initiatives that support
the career advancement of low-income
and underemployed job-seekers. Economic resilience, measuring the city’s
overall economic health via analysis of key indicators, economic development leadership, participating in regional
economic development workgroups and policy meetings. Neighborhood
business districts — working with business owners
in our business districts to identify, evaluate,
and address emerging needs in these business districts. Legacy businesses —
developing and implementing a legacy business nomination
and designation program with the goal of facilitating
and finalizing a designation in each district
by the end of this year. And then, finally,
and really importantly, shepherding the conversation or participating in the
shepherding of the conversation around the home
for the Film + Music Division that was formerly housed in the
Office of Economic Development. We’re not quite sure
where it’s going to go but there is an effort partnered
with the Arts Office to engage with the arts and film
and music community to talk about where the right
home for Film + Music is. I think we have a shared belief that there’s so much more
that Seattle could be doing to support the film
and music industry, and I am excited
that Director Lee has that on his list of priorities,
as well as ours. That’s all for me.
-Okay. And, Councilmember Herbold,
I want to thank you for doing such a thorough job
on this confirmation. Thank you. Job well done. Thank you. Makes our job
a little easier, here. Okay, with that, those in favor of confirming
the appointment of Mr. Lee as amended, please vote aye. -Aye.
-Aye. -Those opposed, vote no. The motion carries
and appointment is confirmed. And we will suspend the rules, and we’d love to hear
a few words from you, Mr. Lee. Please come forward,
and congratulations. -Well, thank you very much. Is this on? Is this on?
-Yes, it is. Yes. -Okay. Thank you very much.
I’m truly humbled. I’m so excited to be in Seattle. I finally made it. [ Laughter ] What’s a challenging part
for many urban economies is that we’re about
to transition into a new economy
called a network economy. And there are strength and
weaknesses in the new economy. And so a part of our job
in our office is to help you navigate
those opportunities and make sure that we build an
inclusive economy for everyone. With that, I’ll leave it there. Thank you very much. -Thank you, Mr. Lee. Please read
the next agenda item. -Agenda item 2,
Council Bill 119504, relating to the Pike Place
Market Historical District amending ordinance 125650 to extend its effective date
by six months. The Committee recommends
the bill pass, with Councilmembers Herbold,
Sawant, and O’Brien in favor in abstention with
Councilmember Pacheco. -Councilmember Herbold.
-Thank you. So, this council bill amends ordinance 125650 to extend its effective date
by six months. The bill it is amending
established an interim expansion of the Pike Place Market
Historic District last August. The legislation will allow
the Department of Neighborhoods some additional time
to complete work that this Council asked DON
to do last August so that the effect, again,
is just to simply extend the legislation we already
voted on by six months. The central staff memo
accompanying this legislation specifies that the Department
of Neighborhoods expects their consultant will complete
much of the work needed to develop a preliminary
recommendation by the end of June. If the recommendation
is for a permanent expansion, SEPA review would follow
that recommendation. We had a public hearing
last Tuesday. A lot of folks came out
to testify in support of the legislation. Folks speaking in favor
of the legislation really did a great job
of speaking to why in their perspective
the market should be looked at as part of a permanent
future expansion for the Showbox to be within
the market boundaries. The points
that they spoke to were that the market was established
in 1909, the Showbox building opened up
about 10 years later in 1919. It was a public market. Folks noted the fact that
there is a commercial synergy between both the market
and the Showbox. Many visitors go to both places. Each year
for the last several years, Seattle has had a record number
of visitors, and so tourism is an important
industry in Seattle. One of the comments that came up
in the public hearing was from businesses of people
who had moved to Seattle because of the culture and who
have since started a business. Folks also spoke
to the physical synergy between the look
of the buildings and the appropriateness
of the Showbox to be considered as part of the
market because of that, as well. The Department of Neighborhoods is working to implement
ordinance 126560, which calls for a review
of the historic significance of the Showbox theater to study the relationship
between the Showbox theater and the Pike Place market,
and to consider amendments to the Pike Place Market
historical design, district design guidelines
related to the Showbox theater. There also is a part of this
ordinance that calls for them to draft legislation, conduct
outreach to stakeholders, and conduct state
Environmental Policy Act review on the permanent expansion
of the historic district as appropriate. There may be some confusion
about the scope of what the executive
is doing right now. The Department of Neighborhoods
will clarify that the current scope
of the study includes an analysis
on whether or not to permanently extend
the Market District to cover the Showbox property, and in order
to make a recommendation on whether or not to expand
the district to cover that one property, they need to put look at
a broader area. And in this case, they are looking at
First Avenue properties to better understand
the historical context as it relates to the Showbox. Essentially,
to analyze the Showbox property, you have to analyze
the historical connection of the adjacent areas. We have heard from folks who, during our earlier deliberations
back in August, had not taken a position. We heard
from some of them today, and we also received a letter
last week from Friends of the Market, the
Pike Place Market Foundation, Historic Seattle,
Friends of Historic Belltown, the Fischer Studio Building, and Rise Up Belltown
and Friends of the Showbox. I may have mentioned them twice
because they are awesome. There’s been a question of potential lease expiration
in January 2024. If this property becomes part of
the Market Historic District, the change of use would require
a certificate of approval from the Pike Place Market
Historical Commission, so that’s just a little bit
of additional context about how the recent news
from the owner on their plans for the building would impact future decisions
around the district boundaries. -Thank you,
Councilmember Herbold. Councilmember Pacheco, then we will open it up
for comments and questions. Councilmember Pacheco. -I hear and appreciate
the nostalgia and sentiments that brought
some of you out today to support saving the Showbox, and I believe this conversation
highlights a need for better tools to preserve
the cultural resources we have in our city. That said,
I do not believe that this tool, expanding the Pike Place Market
Historic District, is the right way to go about
preserving the Showbox. As with any policy decision,
there are major trade-offs associated with preserving
the Showbox. When we use
a blunt policy instrument like the Historic District
as our tool, we are making housing
the cost of saving the Showbox. That is housing that
the city desperately needs. In the midst of a housing crisis which is rooted
in a shortage of housing, we need to be building
more houses of all types. This action takes away
the opportunity to build 442 new units
of housing that we need. Even more importantly,
under MHA, all new development must contribute
to affordable housing. By closing the door
to redevelop on this site, we are turning down
up to $5 million in affordable-housing payments that could have been required
under MHA. As the chair of the council’s Planning, Land Use,
& Zoning Committee, I am a firm believer that
we should be embracing density and building more housing
in walkable neighborhoods, particularly close to transit
and light-rail stations. I also serve on the
Puget Sound Regional Council, where we are challenged with
Vision 2050, as our region
is expected to grow with 1.8 million new residents
and 1.2 million new jobs. As we confront climate change,
congestion, and unaffordability, building housing near transit
and jobs is what will allow so many
Seattleites like myself to live without a car. As someone who has advocated
for greater density in my own district, particularly
in the U District, where new light-rail stations
are opening, it is
intellectually inconsistent to opposing a new development
so close to light rail. Let me be clear — I am not
opposed to saving the Showbox, but I cannot in good faith
support saving the Showbox in a way that places the burden
on families trying to afford a place
to call home in Seattle. [ Laughter ] As a city, we need to move away
from a conversation that sets up a false choice
between creating new housing and preserving cultural spaces. Instead of pitting these two things we need
against each other, we should be having
a conversation that promotes both housing
culture. I wasn’t on the council
last year when this temporary boundary
expansion was established, but if I had been,
I would have voted no. I believe that the council
could have and should have taken more time
to identify a solution that would preserve the Showbox
and created more housing. If we had worked
with the developer to identify a solution
that works for all sides, we could have found a way
to preserve the Showbox and have 442 units of housing
that were proposed. As someone who was just at
the Showbox on Friday, I don’t think
that it is contradictory to want to preserve
the history of that place and recognize that it could use
some upgrades. For example, we all know
that the Showbox is on the city’s list of
unreinforced masonry buildings, meaning that it poses
a serious danger to people in the area
in the event of an earthquake. This fact alone should tell us that freezing the Showbox
in time is not a safe
or responsible option. I will be voting no today
because I believe that saving the Showbox
in this fashion is leading us down
the wrong path as a city and because I am hopeful
that it is not too late to pursue the options that
allow us to preserve culture while also building housing. If I can make one final note, I hope that as we have
this conversation, we can do so in a way that is
respectful to all of us. At the public hearing last week,
I was very concerned to hear one individual
compare himself as a Showbox fan to a Native American and called
the Showbox his reservation. I was even more concerned that the crowd
applauded that statement. That sort of comparison
is unacceptable in my mind, and we should not
be condoning it. -Thank you,
Councilmember Pacheco. Any other comments?
Councilmember Juarez? -I’ll just be brief. I just want to share
that we have a point of order, Council President. We just had an hour
of public comment about people supporting
or saving the Showbox, and during that time, nobody was
jeered or made noises. And Councilmember Pacheco
deserves to have you be respectful and to listen
because that’s what we’re doing. So I’m going to ask
that you do that and that this is not a rally. Thank you. -Thank you, Councilmember
Juarez, for those comments, and I will take that
under advisement. Any other comments, questions? Councilmember Sawant,
I think you, or you, Councilmember Mosqueda. I just want
to figure that one out. I’ll just defer to your
side-by-side there. -Thank you Mr. President. First, I really applaud
Councilmember Pacheco in terms of your concerns
around affordable housing and housing in general, and I want to make some comments
about housing and I think the crux
that we’re at with wanting to create
affordable housing, more housing in general
in the city, and preserve cultural hubs
throughout Seattle. I will be voting yes again
on this legislation to make sure
that we have additional time to consider
the request in front of us, but I want to be very clear
about something. We voted yes last year. We voted yes in the budget
to give funding to the department
to complete the study. The study did not begin until
January of this year, so if there is frustration,
I want folks to know what this council did in August versus what actually happened
beginning in January and to direct those frustrations
accordingly. I think it is also
very important to know that we here on Council
have taken a number of steps to ensure that there is access
to both cultural hubs and promoting access to housing
throughout the city and that it does not have to be
an either/or. One of the issues that
we had been working on last year prior to the passage
was making sure that if there was
the opportunity to preserve the Showbox as is
and then build housing above it, that all of those options
were tirelessly pursued before moving forward,
and unfortunately, we don’t have that option
in front of us. But I am supportive of giving us
a little bit additional time so that we can see
if there is opportunities that do present themselves
to protect this cultural hub. But I think in the future,
we want to make sure that there is not a distinction between cultural hubs
versus housing. It should be both and. There is also
I think an important element that Councilmember Pacheco
has elevated and Councilmember Juarez
that I appreciate your underscoring
of the need for respect because we do want to make sure that we’re not pitting ourselves
against each other in this city when it comes to residential,
cultural, and business displacement. That is a very real and
pressing issue around Seattle, especially, though,
in communities of color, and as we are facing
the challenge of looking at displacement
across our city, one of the bigger
longer-term impacts that I’m going to be looking at is to make sure
that we have both and. Both housing,
both affordable housing and the ability to create
and preserve cultural hubs. It’s really important for us to weigh
these equity implications as we take actions to preserve
important community spaces like the Showbox and so many others
that have come before us and also think about
how we can build housing around these centers so that
more people can walk to work, that can afford to be artists
in the city, can go down the street
or down elevator to their place of employment or the place where
they’re playing a show. So I hope
that we keep that in mind and that also as we think about
the opportunities to both preserve cultural space,
we take the same level of energy that we have seen today and
throughout the last 10 months and we really do apply that
to creating greater density like some of the comments
that were made around creating density
at Fort Lawton. We know there’s tremendous
opposition sometimes, and having your energy, harnessing that energy,
and focusing it, as well, in terms of creating
affordable housing as much as we are
creating cultural hubs I think can be both and, and that is what I will be
looking forward to in the longer-term policy
solutions and conversations. Thank you, Mr. President. -Thank you,
Councilmember Mosqueda. Councilmember Sawant? -I wanted to thank
all the activists and music lovers
who are here again today, and I know many of you were here
at the public hearing last week and many, many more of you have
been fighting for the Showbox. And I have been honored
to stand alongside you all who have made the hope of
saving the Showbox a reality, although obviously,
we are not done. I also wanted to take a moment
to congratulate the Save the Showbox movement, especially
the Showbox employees, the Friends of the Showbox,
and Historic Seattle in overcoming a major hurdle and winning the landmark status
nomination last week, and we are looking forward to a
really positive outcome on that, as well, even though
we are all very clear that doesn’t preserve the
music-venue use of the building. The victory we won last summer, expanding
the Pike Place boundary, Historic District boundary,
to cover the Showbox would never have been possible
without this movement, without the over 180,000 people
who signed the online petition, without the hundreds of you all
who packed council chambers demanding the Showbox
not be destroyed to make way for unaffordable
luxury apartments, without the hundreds
of local musicians and artists raising their voice on behalf
of their community and forcing the council to act, we would not have had
any chance of winning. Indeed,
the Pike Place Market itself would not be standing today
if it were not for a movement decades ago similar to this
and probably larger in scale because of
what they were up against. It’s also a critical component
for the movement to have its own
elected representatives who will always stand with and
fight alongside the movement, never betraying it, and my office was proud
to play that role and we will continue,
my staff and I will continue, standing with the movement
every step of the way. I also want to again thank
Councilmember O’Brien, who supported my ordinance
last August from the get-go and Councilmember Herbold,
who brought forward this bill today,
which I think is important. Those who were there last year
will recall how at every opportunity,
many Councilmembers would say, “What is the rush? Why is someone’s office pushing
for this boundary expansion to apply so soon? Why is fast-tracking
the legislation necessary?” The reality is that
if we had done it their way by believing that deals
can be struck with wealthy land owners
or corporate developers, then we would not be here. People likely know about the
lawsuit filed against the city by Roger Forbes, the building
owner of the Showbox. When the judge
reviewing the case threw out significant portions
of the lawsuit, we heard
this was due to our movement demanding no delay in action, so judicial outcomes
also are influenced by what we say
out in this world on the streets and how strong our movement is. When we passed our legislation
last August, we knew we had won interim
protections and we knew we would have to come back
this spring and summer, so here we are. I will be voting yes, of course, on today’s proposed
six-month extension of the interim expansion,
and I call on Councilmembers to respect the demands
of the movement and do the same. But really,
as Shannon Wells said, it should not
have come to this today because the mayor’s office
and her department had more than enough time
to ensure the necessary studies could have been conducted
in 10 months. Okay, it didn’t happen,
but this is what happens when the immediate pressure
of the movement is absent. So it’s important
that we keep in mind after today that if we have one-
to six-month extension, it does not let us,
the movement, off the hook. We have to make sure
that all of the studies that were promised
in the work plan are carried out
in a timely fashion, and that will only happen
if we remain vigilant and vocal. And we want to make sure that
in the next month especially, we have enough pressure
on the mayor’s office for the survey to be completed
on neighborhood impacts for the city departments because it can be done
in that timeline. We cannot — we simply cannot —
rely on the behind-the-scenes deals
and negotiations with attorneys, developers,
and corporate landlords. We want the initial
interim protection purely for the strength of the movement
and we should not waver. Regardless of what else we hear,
we should not waver because we know
that behind-the-scenes deals is not the way to go for now. For now, let’s win the six-month
timeline extension and keep the pressure
on city departments who report to the mayor’s office and make sure the studies
are completed. I wanted to thank those who have been fundamental
to this struggle, the employees of the Showbox,
the Friends of the Showbox, Historic Seattle
central staff members, Liz, who’s here,
who helped us tremendously with getting
the legislation ready, the community organizers
in my office, some of whom are here today, Jay Middleton, who launched
the online petition, and Seattle’s vast community
of artists and musicians, some of whom are also
employees of the Showbox, but I also wanted to mention
Smokey Brights, Ben Gibbard, Soul, SassyBlack, Dude York,
Spirit Award, Ruler, many of whom also performed
at the free concert we had last summer
on the plaza outside. Thank you all so much, and then, in closing,
I will say, as Earnie Ashwood said
last August, “If you are right here
in chambers, this is not about culture. It is not a question
of music versus housing. This is not about music
versus affordable housing. This is about culture
and housing for everybody versus profits for the few,”
and as Earnie said, he asked elected officials,
“You have to pick a side,” you know,
decide which side you’re on. And I will also say that making
this about affordable housing in my view is either naive,
you don’t know the facts, or it’s disingenuous
of elected officials because we know it’s not about
affordable housing. If elected officials are concerned
about affordable housing, then those who repealed
the Amazon tax should not have done that, and if you want
to support affordable housing, then let’s fight
for rent control and to expand
social housing massively by taxing Amazon
and big business. Let’s keep fighting. [ Applause ] -Councilmember González. -Thank you, Council President. I will make this quick ’cause
I know we’re on agenda item two of very a long agenda for today,
but I just wanted to say that consistent with my vote
in August of 2018, I intend to continue
to maintain my same position. So I’m going to vote yes
on this bill. However,
I wanted to give some caution and some additional rationale
for that. So I don’t think
there is a justification for me at this point to modify my vote
on what I see as a technical amendment
to allow some time for the departments
to continue doing the evaluation that we originally
asked them to do. We haven’t modified
the substance of the evaluation and analysis and study
that we originally asked the departments to do
back in August of 2018. This is an opportunity
for the city council to provide the executive
additional time to be able
to complete that work. Again, nothing substantive
has changed in terms of the work that we’re
asking the executive to do. This is just about finding
an additional amount of time to allow to do this, so I see this amendment
to this bill as technical in nature
and not substantive in terms of
a final long-term solution for this particular
parcel of land, which leads me
to my second point, which is a caution
to my colleagues that I am concerned about
the direction of looking at expanding the scope
of evaluation for the alleged purposes
of evaluating the true historic and architectural district
nature of this space. I am cautious of the fact
that the expansion of the scope may lead to further limiting
development capacity along First Avenue utilizing
this historic resources tool as the mechanism to do that,
and we have seen in the mandatory housing
affordability context and in other spaces
that often times, historic resources as a tool
is being weaponized to prevent additional density
and affordable housing coming into
particular neighborhoods that should be taking on
the burden and responsibility of additional
development capacity for purposes of housing
our families and low-income members
of the community. So I am going to vote yes
for this bill today with the caution that
that doesn’t necessarily mean that I would support
a final bill if that final bill
signals in my mind a move towards a scope
of study area that would
diminish significantly development capacity
along First Avenue, again, under the auspices
of preservation, and I just really think
we need to be very careful about evaluating
specific historic resources and how that might implicate
policy positions — clear policy positions —
that the city council has taken in other areas
with regard to up zoning and allowing
additional development capacity for purposes of increasing
real dollars available to us to construct affordable housing
either in this particular neighborhood
or in other neighborhoods around the city of Seattle. And when we look at the maps of where our development
is happening as it relates to
affordable-housing developments, a significant majority of those
developments are occurring right here in downtown
in District 7. So when we know that
our inclusionary zoning, incentive zoning programs
require that downtown developers contribute the most amount
of money under our mandatory
housing affordability program, I have serious concerns about
a broad-stroke approach here that may compromise
and diminish the great efforts that I think the city council
has taken in the space
of affordable housing as it relates
to a broader swath of land along First Avenue. -Thank you,
Councilmember González. Any other comments or questions? I’m gonna say a few. Would you like to close debate
after I say a few? Just a few things. I’m gonna support
the legislation. Councilmember Herbold, thanks for having
a committee meeting on it and bringing it
to our attention, and we were sort of monitoring
the deadline of our first legislation. I want to thank the advocates
for coming out. Your voice is heard, meaningful,
and thanks for the song. That was beautiful. This concept of picking a side,
to me, is nonsense. For me, it’s not about
picking a side. It’s about listening to people. When you pick a side,
you’re drawing a line, and you’re on one side
or the other. To me, that’s not how we
get things done in this city. We listen, and we try to understand and try
to come up with a good outcome. I think many of you
have presented a very clear picture
of what we can preserve and what we should try
to preserve. Councilmember Pacheco,
I want to thank you for taking a bold stance
on what you believe in, and you weren’t part
of the long discussion we had that got us to this point, but I want to applaud you
for voting your conscience, which I always think is noble. Not listening to anyone else
but trying to hear others but trying to vote
what you think is right. So thank you, sir. And last,
I want to say this notion about behind-the-scene deals. I want to address that. So my take on it is the city did
not do its behind-the-scene work as feverishly
as I was hoping they did when we passed this legislation. I was hoping that
behind-the-scenes work was really done so
we didn’t have to get here where we are today. We all know it’s no big secret that we’re in litigation
on this matter. If you didn’t know, I’m sorry to
let that secret out of the bag, but we are in litigation
on this matter. And my hope is that perhaps
parties can work together and we can come up with
a win-win, a win that preserves
our great music venue and allows these
talented musicians to do what they do so well and that we again
look at the value of the market and the beauty of the market
and housing issues and come up with some win-wins, and whether that is
behind-the-scenes or here in city hall,
I care less, but I just want to get
that kind of work done. But for me,
it’s not about picking a side. It’s about working together
as a community and getting some things done, so hopefully
within the next six months, as this legislation presents,
we will get this work done. I just want to thank
all of my colleagues for this robust discussion. I’d ask
that Councilmember Herbold close the debate, and then we will vote
and see where the chips fall. -Thank you. I just want to close out
with some comments some of you heard before
during the public hearing highlighting the work
of the arts office as it relates to the need
to act with urgency to preserve our cultural spaces. A report out of the arts office,
the cultural space report, identifies that the value of
cultural spaces and activities are quantifiable. They drive economic growth
and urban development. Blocks in Seattle
with cultural spaces have significantly higher
walk scores, they have more businesses open
at 10:00 p.m. on Fridays, and they have twice as many
outdoor café seating permits, pointing to
the economic-development value. They go on to say that the arts
ecosystem that we have today thrives in a rich network
of cultural spaces that were able to flourish
because during periods of greater affordability
in Seattle, without the spaces to support
this cultural life, without the presence of arts and cultural organizations
in our neighborhoods, this ecosystem
can’t be sustained at times of less affordability,
like the times we are in now. Vulnerable communities
are the canaries in the coal mines
of displacement. They are disappearing
from the cultural landscape, and some of the first
to disappear, as we have heard, are communities of color and the arts and culture
organizations that reflect them whose presence help create
the very land value on which those cranes
are now building. I think that’s a good point
to end on. -Okay. Thank you,
Councilmember Herbold, and with that, we are going to
vote on Council Bill 119504. So, clerk, please call the roll
on the passage of the bill. -O’Brien.
-Aye. -Pacheco.
-No. -Sawant.
-Aye. -Bagshaw.
-Aye. -González.
-Aye. -Herbold.
-Aye. -Juarez.
-Aye. -Mosqueda.
-Aye. -President Harrell.
-Aye. -Eight in favor, one opposed. -Bill passed, Senate. No clap on that one? [ Laughs ] [ Cheers and applause ] Okay. Please read
the next agenda item. -Report of the Housing,
Health, Energy, and Workers’ Rights Committee
item 3, council vote 119507
relating to fair housing, establishing
a one-year prohibition on use of rental housing
bidding platforms, amending section 7.24.020
of the Seattle municipal code and adding a new section,
7.24.090, to the Seattle municipal code. Committee recommends
the bill pass. -Councilmember Mosqueda? -Thank you, Mr. President. So onto rental protections, because I’m neither naive
nor ready to wait, we’re going to change policy
and we’re going to make sure that it’s informed by our
community partners at the table. We have worked on
a one-year prohibition on rent-bidding technologies,
so for folks who aren’t aware, this is like eBay
for rental units. Nobody wants to see
their rental unit go on eBay and the cost
of their housing skyrocket, but what we heard immediately
after getting elected was that there was a number of people, especially in the
University of Washington area, students specifically who had
seen these eBay-like platforms escalate the cost of housing
in their neighborhoods. And our intent was to create
a one-year prohibition on these
rent-bidding technologies in order to provide time
to determine whether or not these platforms are in violation
of our fair-housing laws and to analyze how
they may impact housing costs or cause greater inequities
in our access to affordable housing
and housing throughout the city, creating potentially
disproportionate impacts on our communities, especially communities of color
and lower-income communities. And what we’ve seen
over the last year through the Office of Housing,
in coordination with the Office of Civil Rights and the Department
of Constructions and Inspection, is that they have been
working diligently — on time, I will add,
thank you very much — to the mayor’s three departments who have been producing a report
for us. In July, they will provide a
study to help us better analyze and understand
this new technology, its impacts on equitable access
to housing, and what long-term regulations
may be necessary. Given the pace at which
new technologies — and right here, we’ve seen
a number of them crop up right in our own backyard — can come online, can be
ingrained in our communities and ingrained in our systems, we really just waned
to hit the “pause” button. Let us have a little bit of time
to see how these rent-bidding technologies or eBay-like systems
for rental units actually affect our commitment
to fair housing, whether or not
they have an impact on the rental-housing market and whether
there is implications for our commitment to protecting our population’s access
to fair-housing laws. So the report will be presented,
as I said, on time in July of this year. What we’d like to do
with the Council’s support today is to add
an additional 12 months. Once we receive that report back
from the three departments, we will then have the
opportunity to work with tenants and the community at large to develop potential
policy solutions and conduct a robust
engagement process to actually talk about what
to do about the technology. We have seen from other cities that they have not put
this pause in place, and the consequence has been
limited access to units throughout their cities and increase in the cost
of affordable units and with an effort to try to be
proactive and get ahead of it, we’re very excited to be able
to put forward in front of you a unanimous vote
from the Housing Committee that looked at requesting
that 12-month extension so that we can create
the appropriate and informed decision on
this longer-term regulation for rent-bidding platforms. Thank you, Mr. President. -Thank you. Any other questions or comments
on the legislation before we vote? Councilmember Bagshaw. -Councilmember Mosqueda, thank
you for bringing this forward and for your leadership on it, and I certainly will be voting
for this today. At the committee the other day, I asked the question because
I have been hearing from both renters
as well as property owners, how is our study going
along the lines of the first in time
registration? Because what
I am concerned about is that people who are at
their computers during the day, that they get a first shot at
a rental unit that comes open and somebody
who is working outside and away from a computer
may find themselves delayed and frankly behind the 8-ball in
terms of getting on those lists. And is this something
that we can continue to look at or will it be part of this
12-month study, or could we make it such? -Thank you for the question,
Councilmember. I am looking down the way here
at folks who are working on the first in time legislation
previously. I think that
that’s part of the question that hey will be answering
for us in July. How has this tool impacted
that ability? If you are the first one
to put your application in, you have the qualifications,
you have the funding, you should have access
to that rental unit. Unfortunately, with the way in which the platforms
were working before, on our stay on this technology,
the cost was escalating, so those folks who were first
in time were getting outbid. So I think your question
is exactly the type of question we hope that
the July report will answer. -Thank you. Any other questions or comments
before we vote? I think we’re good. Okay, please call the roll
on the passage of the bill. -O’Brien.
-Aye. -Pacheco.
-Aye. -Sawant.
-Aye. -Bagshaw.
-Aye. -González.
-Aye. -Herbold.
-Aye. -Juarez.
-Aye. -Mosqueda.
-Aye. -President Harrell.
-Aye. -Nine in favor, none opposed. -The bill passes,
and she will sign it. Please read items 4 through 6,
and you could read a shorter title of any of those,
if you like. -Resolution 31887,
adopting and approving an application
for surplus property at Fort Lawton,
including a redevelopment plan. The Committee recommends the resolution be adopted
as amended. Council bill 119535 related to the Fort Lawton redevelopment
plan application. Committee recommends
the bill pass. Council bill 119510, relating to
land use and zoning. The committee
recommends the bill pass. -Okay, all of these items
are interrelated. That’s why we read them into
the record together, so I’d ask
Councilmember Mosqueda? Is it Mosqueda? -Yeah.
-Yes, okay. Councilmember Mosqueda
to describe them all, and then we’ll vote
individually, if that works for you. -That would be great. Thank you, Mr. President. I’m really excited about today, and thank you for giving us
a little bit extra time to describe these three pieces
of legislation, as they all fold together. This is really
an incredible opportunity for us to celebrate the culmination
after 15 years. This is about a community vision
for affordable housing to be developed at Fort Lawton
that’s taken community engagement, planning,
and advocacy, advocacy, as I mentioned,
for 15 years that is now going to create
a variety of homes, including homes for seniors and veterans
experiencing homelessness, affordable rental homes
for families and individuals, affordable home-ownership
opportunities for low-income buyers,
and with housing costs soaring and displacement crisis
at very high levels, as we just talked about,
there’s an intense need for these homes to be built
now more than ever, and as we do so,
we’ve talked about as we create greater density
in the city, one of the most important things
that we can do is also preserve and
expand access to green space. Of the Fort Lawton land
that we’re talking about, 67% of the site
will be dedicated to parks and open spaces complementing
the natural beauty of the recreational space that is right next door
at the Discovery Park. This is wildlife habitat
at Discovery Park, an area
that we all love to enjoy, and Councilmember Bagshaw has
a district that will not be touched by the development
by Fort Lawton, so it will be complementary
and it will butt up to the existing land
at Discovery Park. And this Fort Lawton housing
will be a complement for the neighborhood. And by creating affordable homes
in a very high-cost area of our city, Fort Lawton will further expand
our commitment to exactly what you were just
asking about, our commitment to fair housing, creating greater inclusion
and advanced opportunities by opening access
to more families to be able to live in a very
high-cost area of the city that has been previously
out of reach for very low-income communities, especially for communities
of color and low-wage workers. So I want to underscore today
this is a win-win. It’s a huge opportunity
and it’s a rare opportunity to gain access to a significant
portion of public land from the Federal Government
at no cost. At no cost if it is used
to build affordable housing and services,
especially for homeless. It is a win-win for Seattle’s
highly competitive retail — I’m sorry, highly competitive
real-estate market, and over the course
of several evening hearings and over the last few years, and especially five
public hearings at the Housing, Health, Energy,
and Workers’ Rights Committee just this year,
we have heard from community an interest in doing
a couple of things. Number one is expanding access
to bus services in the neighborhood
and increasing school capacity. We heard from SDOT
and folks from Metro that they will engage
in a process for looking at the frequency
at which buses should come and how to potentially add stops
or routes to the area over time. We’ve heard the desire
for increased school capacity and actual school buildings
for teaching. What we’ve heard from
Seattle Public Schools to date is that they will engage
in that process of looking at additional facilities
for classrooms, but the most pressing issue that Seattle Public Schools
has right now is the need
for more play fields, and that’s exactly
what we’re creating here. We’re also creating more space
for wildlife habitat. As you heard I think from some
of the folks who presented today and in previous committees,
we’ve heard the desire to make sure that
there’s more space opened up to wildlife habitat and that we reduce our
surface parking lot streets. In today’s package, we have
a really great amendment that came directly from the coalition that was
working with Fort Lawton and in the neighborhood that they brought
to our attention the desire to reduce the surface
lot parking space by at least 1/3
and to work with communities so that we could create
more public space, especially for wildlife habitat including the blue heron
population. So I’m really excited
about the proposed package that you have in front of you. The amount that of the work
that has gone into making these three pieces
of legislation that you just heard described
come together is really important. And, Mr. President, if I might,
I think there’s a few details as it comes to housing
that I’d like to underscore for the community.
-That’d be very helpful. Thank you,
Councilmember Mosqueda. -So, there’s about five buckets
that are critically important. Number one, homes for seniors. This is 85 supportive
housing units for seniors, including veterans who’ve
experienced homelessness. On-site, there will be housing
case management, residential counselors, and
housing stability plans created so that we’re really not just
creating a door and a roof, but we’re creating the ability
for folks to get stabilized thanks to the support
of services in partnership
with Catholic Housing Services and United Indians
of All Tribes. This is not just
creating a house, but it’s truly creating
a stable home for folks. Again, that land will be
at zero cost. The second bucket
is for individual- and family-size rental units. These are 100 one-, two-,
and three-bedroom apartments for renters earning up to 60%
of the area median income. So you can imagine
this is greater space for families to grow and thrive, opportunity for community space
for those tenants there, so it’s not just going
to be homes and units. It will be actual
community space. And this housing is being
developed by Catholic Housing Services. The land is coming at
an extremely discounted price. The third bucket is
home-ownership opportunities. And having been a person who
just went through the process of trying to become
a first-time homebuyer, it is very cumbersome. It is very confusing,
and it is very stressful. If we’re going to create equity
in the city, and by equity, I mean
racial justice equity, economic equity, we need
to also create the ability for folks to buy
their own first place so that they can create
greater equity in their pockets and their bank accounts so that people can get out
of generational poverty without universal guaranteed
retirement security. Often, the ability
to own your own place is one way to pass on wealth
to future generations and to get out
of generational poverty. As we create home ownership
opportunities, especially for our
low-income communities, this is one way
for us to achieve our commitment to equity. And this will create
52 three-bedroom town homes and row homes
for low-income buyers, low-income buyers between
$64,000 to $86,000 a year for a 2- or 5-person household. So that’s our missing
middle housing. That’s our low-income,
middle-income housing to create greater self-help so that people
can create sweat equity and create opportunity to have true equity
in their pocketbooks. Thanks to the folks
at Habitat for Humanity for working on this portion. And again, the land
for this type of housing will come at zero cost. Further, we have included
into the requirements the requirement
for green building standards, which will be required
for all of these new homes at Fort Lawton. And finally, as we heard before, it’s important to preserve
access to green space and public play areas, so 60% of the 34-acre site will be maintained
for parks and related uses. That’s 13 acres
for passive recreation, 6 acres for two multipurpose
fields and surface parking lots, 5 acres for forest land incorporated into
Discovery Park, and the existing building
where they have the park’s maintenance
facility’s parking lot will be reduced now by 1/3. Again, this land will be at zero
cost for the open public spaces. So, Mr. President, with that, I just want to say
a few thank-yous, if I might, and — Perhaps I should hold
those thank-yous until other folks have a chance
to say a few words. -Thank you,
Councilmember Mosqueda. Councilmember Bagshaw.
-Thank you. Councilmember Mosqueda just said about 90% of what
I was planning to say. So this is going to be
very abbreviated. But I do want to acknowledge
our neighbors from Magnolia. Thank you for coming again. And I tried to get
your questions answered at the committee
and having people address them. And I have been involved in this for way more than
the last couple years, the five committees
that we’ve had on Fort Lawton. I want to acknowledge
Steve Walker, thank you, and Emily Alvarado, Traci Ratzliff from
our Council Central Staff that have worked
so hard on this. But truly, we are getting
6 acres more of active sports fields, That’s something
that we negotiated with the Seattle Public Schools. There’s going to be
60% more of this land that’s going into parks. We’re not taking more
of Discovery Park. Fort Lawton
is asphalted right now. We’re going to be turning that
into housing, and a great portion of it
is going to go into parks, as Councilmember Mosqueda said. The whole idea
that it could be an either/or, and as I mentioned
at the committee meeting, just the day before
that committee meeting, I’m hearing from folks
that are saying, “Well, look, we’ve got
a really good idea. Let’s not do it in Fort Lawton, and let’s put it
down in Interbay.” Well, frankly, we are going
to have to be looking for space all across the city
and all across our region to even begin
to scratch the surface on the amount of affordable
housing that we need. And it strikes me
that, yes, after 15 years, this Fort Lawton plan is one
that we have negotiated with the neighbors,
with the neighborhood, and I’m very pleased that
we’re moving forward with it. And I respect the fact that
people say there’s change. You bet there’s change. Seattle is changing everywhere. And no neighborhood is really
to be separated from this. We need to incorporate, hear
the voices, and be inclusive. And I believe
that in this particular case, over 15 years,
that we have done that. I also want to acknowledge Marty
Kooistra, who was here earlier. I think he’s left. But Habitat for Humanity
is giving people the opportunity for home ownership. And we know that that’s really
the step forward for so many families. So, I’m very happy
to be joining you in this, Councilmember Mosqueda. Thank you for bringing it
through to your committee And also, I want to acknowledge the United Indians
of All Tribes, Catholic Housing Services, and all those
who are helping us get here and bring this across
the finish line. -Thank you,
Councilmember Bagshaw. Any other questions or comments before we turn it back
to Councilmember Mosqueda? Okay, Councilmember Sawant. -Thank you, President Harrell. I want to start by acknowledging that we are on the indigenous
land of the Duwamish people, and I am specifically
acknowledging that because we are discussing
in this item and the next two items the disposition of Fort Lawton. As everybody knows, in 1970, courageous activists from the
United Tribes of All Indians occupied the military base
on Fort Lawton to demand it be returned
as indigenous land. And it was through that struggle that the Daybreak Star Center
was won. In other words, the result of a resolute demonstration
of civil disobedience. Once again we proving that
when we fight, we can win. And it was a big victory even though the movement
did not win all the demands that they had. Today we are voting on approving
a plan to transfer ownership of Fort Lawton from the federal
government to the city and to approve a plan to build
some affordable housing there. I will of course be voting
in favor of these items because I support building these
237 units of affordable housing on Fort Lawton
as rapidly as possible. And to build more,
there will require a new environmental impact
statement which could take years. So I support these agenda items
today. However, I think we also need to
be honest that this has been for years, not necessarily by the current
counsel here but in general, has been a monumental
missed opportunity that could have allowed us
to build far, far more affordable housing than
we now have in our hands. When former mayor Ed Murray
had city departments conduct the IES for
the Fort Lawton redevelopment, they studied
different alternatives, but the maximum affordable
housing they studied was 237 homes, which makes that
our legal maximum at this stage. The mayor made that decision without consulting
members of the public. I am sure that
after today’s vote, there will be
numerous press releases from the political establishment doubting this Fort Lawton
redevelopment plan as a triumph. And absolutely
we should celebrate every affordable home
that gets built, but I think there is a danger
that that triumphalism is such an exaggeration
that it does not — it belies the bitter realities
that we face in terms of our
affordable housing crisis. For comparison, Fort Lawton will have 237
affordable homes on 34 acres. In comparison, affordable
housing activists on Forest Hill in District 3 successfully won
Sound Transit property to be used to build
affordable housing on a parcel of Madison Street. That one parcel will have
over 300 units, more than all of the 34 acres
of Fort Lawton. My staff calculated the ratio, and the Forest Hill
affordable housing product will have over 100 times as much
affordable housing as Fort Lawton,
relative to its area. Similarly, the north lot
affordable housing redevelopment of the Pacific Hospital PDA will have more affordable
housing than all of Fort Lawton. Similarly, the FAME
affordable housing project in the central area
near Pratt Park will more than Fort Lawton. The list goes on. And all of those properties
are on single parcels, not on the vast 34 acres
that Fort Lawton sits on. So I will be voting
in favor of this plan because I want every affordable
home that we can get, but my message is for
affordable housing activists that we should not let up
for one second in demanding as massive
a possible expansion of social housing in Seattle because as we have
these tiny projects heralded with a lot of fanfare, they are actually falling far,
far short of what is needed. To truly address the affordable
housing crisis in Seattle, we will have to tax big business
and the super rich to raise the funds
that will be necessary to build social housing
on the scale that it is needed. That is in the many thousands
every year, not in the hundreds. And we also need rent control to stop the continued
hemorrhaging of existing affordable housing. Thank you.
-Thank you, Councilor Sawant. Councilmember González, please. -Thank you, Council President. I just wanted to echo my thanks
for everybody who has been working on
this issue for so long. I think one person who was left
off the thank you list is the great Kenny Pittman,
who just retired last week. He has been instrumental
along the way for continuing to advance
the relationship between us
and the federal government to allow an opportunity for us
to even be having these conversations around using the
surplus property in this manner. And I just wanted to underscore that when you read
about the efforts, the 13-plus-year efforts
around Fort Lawton, it’s striking to me that when
the city initially proposed development in this manner
on Fort Lawton, that was in 2008,
and the original proposal actually proposed 415 units
of affordable housing. We’re now down to
about 50% of that. Part of that is because of
construction costs and because of other realities
related to the process. And I think it’s really
unfortunate that we are now here over a decade later
in a situation where we have half the amount
of housing units we could have had in 2008
had we been able to proceed as we wanted immediately
before the recession. So I think this is, while we aren’t getting the full
capacity of housing units that I think all of us
would really truly want to see in this uniquely situated
neighborhood, I think it’s important for us to
acknowledge the work that has been done to allow us to
be in a position now to accept the over 200-plus
units of affordable housing that will certainly
meet the needs of many families
in the city of Seattle. So really want to thank
Councilmember Mosqueda for bringing us
across the finish line and Councilmember Bagshaw for your dedicated service
to District 7, too. Being in a position where
you’re finally seeing this over the finish line
must feel pretty tremendous. So congratulations to you
as well. -Thank you,
Councilmember González. Councilmember Juarez. -I will be a little bit brief, and I’ll probably
be showing my age here, but some of us
were there in 1973 when we took over Daybreak Star, and we didn’t actually have
the movement, but we did it, and we got it done. I wanted to thank the CEO,
Michael Tulee, who just walked in who is
the CEO of United Indians and also my cousin. Always involved in
Indian country and the struggle for
Native American people. But I want to add that this goes
further back than 2008. Back in 2000,
when we were trying to build the people’s lodge, which would
have included housing units, a cultural
center, an elder center, and more low-income housing, and medical services for not
only native and urban people but other people who would
require those services, those neighborhoods fought — I was on the board
for almost 30 years with United Indians and worked
with Bernie Whitebear, and I was also legal counsel
for 15 years. Those neighborhoods fought us
tooth and nail for 13 years. So the historical perspective
is this. Well, since 1973,
our efforts that we did in 2000, what we tried to do in 2008,
I am proud to sit here today and thank Councilmember Mosqueda
and Councilmember Bagshaw that we kept at it. That our compass was clear about what we want to do
with that property. You’ve heard me say this before, sometimes just because
you chant “When do we want?
We want it now,” that’s not how the world works. You have to
keep marching forward and clear in what you need to do
for the community. And sometimes you don’t
get everything you want, but you get to that point where
you can actually take a vision and have it transferred
into brick and mortar. So I want to thank
Councilmember Mosqueda and Kenny Pittman and again Councilmember Bagshaw for being relentless
and working in the district, and Michael Tulee
and the other CEOs that have walked before him,
that we worked hard on this. And Michael Reichert at
Catholic Community Services, Liz Tail at Cowlitz. I could go on and on. This has been
a piece of property that the tribes have
worked on for many decades. So I’ll leave it at that.
Thank you. -Thank you,
Councilmember Juarez. Councilmember Mosqueda. -All right. Well, thank you
very much, Mr. President. And you’re damn right
we’re gonna send out a press release after this, because this has been
15 years in the making. And that does not make anybody
establishment, but that means we’re celebrating
small components that, together, woven together,
will actually help create more affordable housing
throughout the city. We’re sending out
a press release because we’re literally
demilitarizing a parcel of property
that was publicly owned that should be
put to the public’s use so that it can be used
for the public’s good, not a military base. We are absolutely celebrating
the fact that we’re creating
affordable housing for seniors and for vets. We’re creating apartments
that will be one, two, and three bedrooms so that more families
can live in the city. We’re creating first-time
home-ownership options, and we’re preserving
60% of former military land now for parks and public spaces. Yes, we are celebrating. And yes, we also know that
this is one small tool in a very large toolkit
that we need to address the crisis
of housing. And every single one of those
opportunities that we can to build on public land,
we will take advantage of it. Last year, the first piece of
isolation that I passed was making sure
that every parcel of publicly owned property that
is not being used to the highest and best use that
we’ve determined is surplus and no longer needed
by the city, we should preserve
that public land and stop plugging budget holes and actually build
affordable housing. This is an extension
of that commitment. On every parcel of land, we should be working
to create housing and community services and the ability for more people
to live in the city so that more working families
can have the chance to grow, live, and thrive in the city, so that more seniors
have a place to call home and don’t get displaced, so that vets who are
sleeping homeless on our street have a place to call home. That’s what we’re celebrating
today. I’m incredibly proud to be
working with our colleagues to get this over the finish line
after 15 years in the making, after five committee hearings
this year, after the opportunity
to work with those who wanted more space
for the blue heron, to get rid of
surface parking streets. We are going to celebrate this, and then we will keep working
and organizing. We also know that when we reduce
the cost of housing by building on public land, we make it more affordable
by 15%. That is a smart use
of the public’s dollar. This is the smart use
of public land. We also making smart investments for future generations
and for our elders. Thank you. Thank you to everyone who helped
to make this day possible. I am looking at Director Walker
and his team. Emily Alvarado, thank you
to the Office of Housing. Thank you to the folks
United Indians of All Tribes for being there from the very
beginning to help advocate for turning this military land
into better public space. Take you to our partners at
Catholic Community Services, at Habitat for Humanity, at the Housing Development
Consortium, and so many others from
the housing world who have been advocating
for this for so long. And thank you to our team. Traci Ratzliff and Ketil Freeman
from Central Staff for your ongoing tenacious work
on this along with Kenny Pittman, who Councilmember González
mentioned earlier. He retired last week. He got to see this
over the finish line, so we are so happy
that he was able to celebrate that committee vote, and we wish him the best
in his retirement. Finally, thank you to my staff, Erin House,
who has been working on this over the last few months to
really make sure that we had all of our I’s dotted
and T’s crossed. And we won’t give up. We know that we need
additional housing, and we also hear you in terms of
the need for more transit and potentially schools
in the future. And we’ll be there to work
with you to do that analysis. So yes, look for that press
release because it is coming. And congratulations to every one
at our colleagues for all of your work
and the community at large for your tenacious work to
turn this parcel into housing. -Thank you,
Councilmember Mosqueda. I think that’s a good cue
to vote. We’re going to vote on
three pieces of legislation. We’re going to take them
individually. We will do the resolution first. And so those in favor of
adopting the resolution, that resolution’s 31887,
please vote aye. Aye.
-Aye. -Opposed, vote no. The motion carries,
the resolution is adopted, and the chair will sign it. On Council Bill 119535, please call the roll
on the passage of the bill. -O’Brien.
-Aye. -Pacheco.
-Aye. -Sawant.
-Aye. -Bagshaw.
-Aye. -González.
-Aye. -Herbold.
-Aye. -Juarez.
-Aye. -Mosqueda.
-Aye. -President Harrell.
-Aye. -I got distracted by
Councilmember O’Brien’s loud aye and almost forgot
to say aye myself. -The bill passes,
and the chair will sign it. And regarding
Council Bill 119510, please call the roll
on the passage of the bill. -O’Brien.
-[ Quietly ] Aye. [ Laughter ]
Better? -Pacheco.
-Aye. -Sawant.
-Aye. -Bagshaw.
-Aye. -González.
-Aye. -Herbold.
-Aye. -Juarez.
-Aye. -Mosqueda.
-Aye. -President Harrell.
-Aye. -Nine in favor, none opposed. -The bill passes,
and the chair will sign it. Please read the next
agenda item, number seven. -Agenda item 7,
appointment 01355, appointment of
Mikhaila B. Gonzales as member, City Light Review Panel,
for a term to April 11, 2020. The committee recommends
the appointment be confirmed. -Councilmember Mosqueda. -Thank you, Mr. President. I’m still reeling from our
excitement around Fort Lawton. I’m ready. We are very excited
about the appointment of Mikhaila Gonzales to the
Seattle City Light Review Panel. This Review Panel position
has been open for a while, so we want to thank the Seattle
City Light Review Panel for their ongoing work as
we worked to fill this position. Mikhaila is a project manager
at Spark Northwest. She leads access to solar
programs in Spark Northwest and supports solar plus state
energy strategy work across Oregon and Washington. Also, she serves on the Emerald
City’s Executive Committee and the Seattle Environmental
Justice Committee, 100% renewable energy work. We’re really excited not just
about her qualifications and her experience and her leadership
that she brings to the panel but also the work that
she’s going to bring in and the diversity of opinions
as we work to create greater diversity and
representation on the board. It’s really exciting
she wants to serve in this role, and I appreciate Ms. Gonzales’s
commitment to making sure Seattle City Light’s
strategic plan and our efforts
that we initiated in my committee last year to right size our commercial and
residential rates for customers ends up in the right spot. So thank you to her
and the entire panel for their ongoing work
on this effort. -Very good.
Any questions or comments? If not, those in favor of
confirming the appointment, please vote aye.
-Aye. -Those opposed vote no. The motion carries and
the appointment is confirmed. Please read the next
agenda item. -Agenda item 8,
appointment 01283, appointment of
Rachael L. Steward as member, Capitol Hill Housing Improvement
Program governing council, for a term to March 31, 2022. The committee recommends
the appointment be confirmed. -Councilmember Mosqueda. -Thank you, Mr. President. I’m excited to bring forth
this appointment to have Rachael Steward serve on the Capitol Hill
Housing Governing Council. This is an opportunity
for Rachael to help us bring her commitment forward
that she’s had on the community services group at the Seattle Housing
Authority. She is a former deputy director at the Center for
Community Engagement at Seattle University.
And Rachael joined Capitol Hill Housing Community
Development Committee in 2016 as a non-board
community representative. She has an MPA in nonprofit
and community-driven development from Kentucky State University and a certificate in leadership
from Seattle University. -Very good.
Any questions or comments? If not, those in favor of
confirming the appointment, please vote aye.
-Aye. -Those opposed, vote no. The motion carries, and
the appointment is confirmed. Please read items 9 through 12. -Agenda items 9 through 12, appointments 01356
through 01359. Appointments and reappointment
of Kellan Bulman, Michiko Starks, Shawn Weeks,
and Thomas J. Kelly as member, Joint Apprenticeship
Training Committee, for a term
to December 31, 2021. The committee recommends
the appointments be confirmed. -Councilmember Mosqueda. -Thank you very much,
Mr. President. I’ll talk about
all of these appointees in one comment together. These appointees to the Seattle Joint Apprenticeship
Training Committee really compromise
the type of experience and commitment we need to ensure
that journey-level workers and Seattle City light
apprenticeship coordinators and management personnel
have ongoing attention to how we are getting folks into these apprenticeship
training opportunities. And we had a great conversation
in committee about the ways in which the Joint Apprenticeship
Training Committee, which oversees the apprenticeship
training standards offered through Seattle’s City
Lights apprenticeship program, can help us with some of our
commitments in the city to diversifying the workforce, ensuring greater placement of
positions within our city, good-paying job positions, and also as the city is dealing
with I would say a high number of individuals
who will be retiring soon, trying to identify ways in which
we can scale up our recruitment and outreach to especially
diverse communities — women, people of color — to get into these
good living-wage jobs, union positions
for the most part, and very excited about their
interest in serving and the I think willingness
in which they showed they’d love to come back
to talk with us in September about some of these initial
ideas with their appointments. I’m very hopeful about
how we can maintain and reach more of our goals. -Very good. Any other questions or comments? If not, those in favor of
confirming the appointment, please vote aye.
-Aye. -Those opposed, vote no. The motion carries
and appointment is confirmed. Please read the report of the Planning, Land Use,
and Zoning Committee. -The report of the Planning,
Land Use, and Zoning Committee agenda item 13,
Council Bill 119505, relating to land use and zoning,
amending sections 23.41.010 and 23.41.012 of the Seattle
Municipal Code to remove the Ballard Municipal Center
Master Plan Area Guidelines and to adopt the Ballard
Neighborhood Design Guidelines, and to delete reference to the Ballard Municipal Center
Master Plan Area Guidelines. The committee recommends
both passes amended. -Councilmember Pacheco. -So, this legislation adopts new design guidelines for
the Ballard neighborhood. These new guidelines
are the result of years of community work, including 24 community meetings,
5 open houses, online surveys, and community
group conversations. The Ballard community set about
to update these guidelines in response to the significant
growth to the neighborhood seen in recent years
as well as the MHA rezones that the council adopted
recently. The new guidelines also apply to a much broader area
within the neighborhood, defining seven character areas and recognizing
the unique design attributes and distinct features of each. I want to thank everybody
from the community who took the time
to craft these new guidelines. -Thank you,
Councilmember Pacheco. Any questions or comments? Councilmember O’Brien. -I want to just briefly add, thank you,
Councilmember Pacheco, for your work on this, and I really want to
emphasize the gratitude towards community members that we have been working
on this for so long. It’s not very often
that a land-use decision comes before us with
almost no controversy at all. But I think it speaks to a lot
of really deep work that’s based in
community outreach by some of the leaders on that. -Thank you. Okay, if there are
no other comments, please call the roll
on the passage of the bill. -O’Brien.
-Aye. -Pacheco.
-Aye. -Sawant.
-Aye. -Bagshaw.
-Aye. -González.
-Aye. -Herbold.
-Aye. -Juarez.
-Aye. -Mosqueda.
-Aye. -President Harrell.
-Aye. -Nine in favor, none opposed. -The bill passes,
and the chair will sign it. Please read the next
agenda item. -Agenda item 14,
Council Bill 119506, relating to land use and zoning,
amending section 23.41.010 of the Seattle Municipal Code
to approve the Capitol Hill Neighborhood
Design Guidelines, 2019. The committee recommends
the bill pass as amended. -Councilmember Pacheco. -So, this legislation adopts
new design guidelines for the Capitol Hill
neighborhood. The development
of these guidelines began in response to changes
in the neighborhood, including the opening of the new
Capitol Hill light rail station, the establishment of
the Capitol Hill EcoDistrict and the Arts District, as well as the recent
MHA zoning changes. The design guidelines were
developed with the help of a community working group that held monthly meetings
for over a year. Community involvement also
included walking tours, open houses, and online surveys. Some of the priorities
spelled out in these new design guidelines include reinforcing walkability
and natural features, encouraging development
to reflect local values and the LGBTQ community, and integrating major
institution development into the surrounding community. I want to thank again
all the community members who took out
the time of their lives to work on these
design guidelines. -Thank you,
Councilmember Pacheco. Any other questions or comments? If not, please call the roll
on the passage of the bill. -O’Brien.
-Aye. -Pacheco.
-Aye. -Sawant.
-Aye. -Bagshaw.
-Aye. -González.
-Aye. -Herbold.
-Aye. -Juarez.
-Aye. -Mosqueda.
-Aye. -President Harrell.
-Aye. -Nine in favor, none opposed. -The bill passes,
and the chair will sign it. Please read
agenda item number 15. -Agenda item 15,
Council Bill 119489, relating to land use and zoning, allowing limited expansion
of Major Institution uses in a portion of
Industrial General 1 and 2 zones and Industrial Buffer zones
near Seattle Pacific University, and amending sections 23.50.012
and 23.69.024 of the Seattle Municipal Code. The committee recommends
the bill passed. -Councilmember Pacheco. -As you may all remember
that last December, the council adopted an amendment
to the comprehensive plan aimed at allowing SPU to apply
for a slightly expanded Major Institution master plan that would incorporate
several nearby parcels that are zoned for
industrial use. This legislation implements that
comprehensive plan amendment by amending
the Seattle Municipal Code to allow for
the limited expansion of Major Institution uses in these specific
industrial parcels near SPU. In order for SPU to actually
expand their master plan to include this area, they will need to
begin the process of creating a new master plan
which would ultimately come back to the council
for final approval. I would like to thank SPU, who worked with
the surrounding community to secure their support,
including the support of people who have spent decades
defending industrial land. -Thank you,
Councilmember Pacheco. Any questions or comments
before we vote? Councilmember Bagshaw.
-Thank you. I want to acknowledge
Dr. Martin. Thank you for being here. And my buddy Steve Gillespie, who we’ve been working on this
for a long time. I want to recognize and say thank you for the good
work that you’ve been doing with the outreach
to your community. That has made a huge difference. And I went back and looked at
this about six months ago. We got letters from both
Eugene Wasserman and Suzie Burke,
both of whom said they didn’t have an issue
with this going forward, which is great because those would be the two
that would be — if they were gonna be concerned,
we’d be hearing about it. So thank you for that. And I understand that
this is the second step in a three-part process
that we move through here. And then I think Mr. Gillespie
mentioned to me earlier that we will go through
a full-blown MUP and really get focused on
what the designs might be. But this point is just moving us
forward another step. I want to acknowledge how much
work you’ve already done. So thank you very much. -Any other comments? I’ll just say, President Martin,
thank you for being here. Thank you for your commitment
to our youth, well, everyone who wants to be
educated to our region. I don’t make it a habit
to thank attorneys here, but thank you for being here. I don’t want to start
that precedent here, but what a great
academic institution. We’re honored by your presence. Okay, with that, please call
roll on the passage of the bill. -O’Brien.
-Aye. -Pacheco.
-Aye. -Sawant.
-Aye. -Bagshaw.
-Aye. -González.
-Aye. -Herbold.
-Aye. -Juarez.
-Aye. -Mosqueda.
-Aye. -President Harrell.
-Aye. -Nine in favor, none opposed. -The bill passes,
and the chair will sign it. -And they’ve waited through
the entire meeting, two hours to be here. -Okay. Please read items 16 through 21. -Agenda items 16 through 21, appointments 01360
through 01365, appointment of Benjamin William
de Rubertis as Chair, Seattle Design Commission,
for a term to February 29, 2020, appointments of
Amalia Leighton Cody, Vinita Sidhu, Elaine Wine,
Brianna S. Holan, and Richard F. Krochalis
as members, Seattle Design Commission,
for a term to February 28, 2021. The committee recommends that
these appointments be confirmed. -Councilmember Pacheco. -Benjamin William de Rubertis is
the director of design with Flad Architects in Seattle
and is being — -[ Sneezes ]
-Bless you. And being nominated by the mayor to serve as the new Chair
of the Design Commission. Amalia Leighton Cody
is the director of the Seattle office
of Toole Design and a past Chair of
the Seattle Planning Commission. Vinita Sidhu is principal
at Site Workshop, a landscape architecture firm
based in Seattle. Elaine Wine is the development
manager at Seneca Group and has experience serving on
the Landmark Board. -Brianna Holan is
the project development manager for Gemdale USA and a re-appointment
to the Design Commission. And Richard Krochalis served as
the regional administrator of the Federal Transit
Administration’s Region 10 office in Seattle and is a former director
of the city’s old Department of Design,
Construction, and Land Use. He is a re-appointment
to the Design Commission. -Thank you very much,
Councilmember Pacheco. Any questions or comments
on these appointments? We’re going to vote for them
all at once. If not, those in favor of
confirming the appointments, please vote aye.
-Aye. -Those opposed, vote no. The appointments are confirmed. The motion carries.
Appointments are confirmed. Please read the next
agenda item. -The report of the
Sustainability and Transportation Committee,
agenda item 22, appointment 01354, appointment of Andres Arjona
as member, Seattle Pedestrian
Advisory Board, for a term to March 31, 2020. The committee recommends
the appointment be confirmed. Councilmember O’Brien. -Thank you.
Andres will be a great addition to the Pedestrian
Advisory Board. He’s got a master’s in urban planning, land use,
and transportation. He was also an appointed member of the Stakeholder
Advisory Group for the Sound Transit Three, the leadership group process
that we just completed. A resident of D-4,
and I think he served well, and look forward to him on
the Pedestrian Advisory Board. -Thank you,
Councilmember O’Brien. Any questions or comments? Those in favor of confirming the
appointment, please Vote aye. -Aye.
-Those opposed, vote no. The motion carries, and
the appointment is confirmed. We’re gonna move to
other business. And, Councilmember O’Brien,
you wanted to say some remarks about
a return to Puget Sound. Please describe it
in open session. -Thank you.
So, colleagues, I’m circulating a letter and asking your support
to sign on. This is a letter
to the Lummi Nation in support of freeing Tokitae and returning her
to the Puget Sound. I’ll read just a couple
little excerpts out the letter that you should have
or have had in front of you. “We know the Lummi believe,
as their ancestors did, that the orca are part of
their cultural patrimony, are a kinship relation, and
consider families to be sacred. As such, it is
their sacred obligation to bring Tokitae home, as she is an ambassadress
of the Salish Sea. Moreover, as the orca are
fighting for their survival, the Lummi people
are acting boldly based on their inherent rights
and their sacred obligation to help them as part of their
overall Salish Sea campaign. The following words from
your Sacred Sea website resonated with us.” And so this is quoting
from the website. “We have been called
to bring Tokitae home. We realize that Tokitae’s story
is important, but she is even more important as an ambassador
for the Salish Sea. Blackfish are apex predators and thus are key indicators
of their ecosystem’s health. If we are to provide effectively
for Tokitae and her family, we must restore the salmon runs
and vitality of the Salish Sea.” The peoples, cultures,
and ecosystems of the Salish Sea are all connected, and they have long
suffered the violences and stresses of colonialism. It is our task to work across
cultures and borders to heal the ecosystems,
the economies, and communities of all those who
now call this place home.” -Thank you,
Councilmember O’Brien. It’s been passed,
and we’ve signed it. Thank you for preparing that
and for your work on this issue. Okay, we’re gonna move
to other business. Is there any other business
to come before the council? Councilmember Juarez. -I would like to be excused
from city council and briefing on June 17th. -So move to state that
Councilmember Juarez be excused on June 17th. Any comments? All those in favor say aye.
-Aye. -Opposed? The ayes have it. Councilmember Mosqueda. -Thank you, Mr. President. I’d also like to request to be
excused from full council and briefing on June 17th
to attend a family reunion. -Move to state that
Councilmember Mosqueda be excused on June 17th. Any comments? All those in favor say aye.
-Ayes. -Opposed?
The ayes have it. Any other business to come
before the council? If not, we stand adjourned. Everyone have a great
rest of the afternoon.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *