Seattle City Council Finance & Neighborhoods Committee 9112019

Thank you.

Good afternoon, everyone, and welcome to the Finance and Neighborhoods Committee.

Today is September 11th, 2019. I want to recognize that this is the 18th anniversary since 2011, as our 9-11 in 2001 occurred.

And I want to recognize our firefighters and first responders today.

I had the honor of meeting with them earlier this morning.

to recognize the fact that every fire station was acknowledging the deaths of the first responders in New York City 18 years ago.

I just want to express my thanks to all of our first responders who are so helpful to all of us every day.

I'm Sally Bagshaw.

If I didn't mention that I'm chair of this committee and we are very pleased today We've got a number of items on the agenda, but I want to acknowledge My good friend speaker Frank chop who is here to be talking about about a major project that he has been working on with us, frankly, for a number of years at Magnuson Park.

That will be, I think, our sixth item on the agenda.

But I just want to acknowledge the fact that he's done so much work, he and his staff.

And I also want to say to all of my tree friends who are here today, the resolution I am very hopeful will be passed today.

The work plan will be established by the mayor's office.

So just know that we have all heard you.

We're going to do our very best to get that out today and the work plan will be established later this year after budget.

So with that, if I can say I'm going to approve the agenda.

I have no co-council members here with me today.

So the agenda is going to be approved without objection and we'd like to move on to our 14 items.

The first four items we have are with our youth commission appointments, and I hope they're all here.

And I would like to invite you to come up to the table with your sponsor, our youth commissioners.

And I just want for the people who are here and for our audience who may be watching, The youth commission is one of the most important commissions in my mind that we have in the city and in the last 10 years since I've been on this council we have invited youth commissioners to join many of our individual commissions and in some ways that it's one of the strongest best additions that we have made in our city.

You will be amazed at these people, these young people who are with us today and their accomplishments and what they do.

It's just amazing to me that you're able to do what you do in school, still stay in school with all of your extracurriculars, your sports activities.

I'm going to be interested to hear what your plans are for the future.

So are there three here?

Do we have a...

Okay.

Okay.

Very good.

Then we'll move forward with public comment.

And again, for all of you who are here wanting to save our trees, please know that you have our full support.

I believe the resolution will be passed today.

So as you're stepping up to the microphone, please understand that it is a timing issue, not a lack of will.

So Steve Zemke from our Forestry Commission, Carolyn Rodenberg, and Martha Baskin, if the three of you would get lined up and ready to speak.

Steve Zemke, I'm speaking today as Chair of TREPAC, not for the Urban Forestry Commission.

They will probably actually be coming to this meeting a little bit later when you have that discussion.

Do you want to say that we appreciate the work you've done.

Do you want to say though that we've been through this process before and so put for all those who are going to be dealing with this next year that DPD in 2010 and 2012 were asked to do the same thing.

And we're repeating that same process.

What happened then was they said they listened to comments from the public.

They said there are people for permits, for replacement, et cetera.

There are people against it.

And basically, when we had talked to one of those people involved recently, on the Urban Forestry Commission, the response was, well, we listened, but we didn't agree.

And so the concern is for all the people on the council that this has to be an open process, that it has to be one where public comments are actually out there, not as it was done last time, where summaries were given with exactly what I said.

There are people for this, there are people against it.

The DPD at that time made the determinations basically ignoring giving weight to different public comment.

I hope this process has changed.

We need to realize that DCI is also the one that we have provisions like SMC 2511090 saying developers are supposed to replace all trees removed.

They're 24 inches and larger and all exceptional trees, but that has not been there since 2001, but it has not been happening because you ask two questions.

Where are the trees?

And if developers didn't plant them, who paid for it?

Certainly DCI, the city did not pay for them.

So we urge that this draft that we move forward also would urge that you involve the Urban Forestry Commission in a stronger sense that we've offered to discuss the draft we've had and we've not really gotten response we hope in moving forward.

that you bring the commission into that process as they're supposed to be under the ordinance setting up the Urban Forestry Commission.

The Urban Forestry Commission is there to advise the mayor and the city council prior to the legislation being introduced.

Again, thanks for your effort and get this done.

Great.

Thank you, Steve.

Carolyn, Martha, and then Woody Wheeler.

I want to thank you for all the effort that you are making.

I really appreciate it.

We found something about six weeks ago on Nextdoor, also on Angie's List, where they are suggesting to people that they cut down trees that are nuisances.

This tree is an exceptional tree in this photo.

It's big enough to be an exceptional tree.

We're doing our best to, you know, make Angie's List aware of this.

But Angie's List is actually supporting an illegal act here.

We are concerned about the timing.

I think the resolution is great, and thank you.

But the timing, more and more of these things are happening.

We're seeing more and more out of state.

companies here and what we'd like to ask is while we are waiting, if we could have a council mandate or an executive order that certifies the tree cutting companies now, so that trees are protected between now and when the ordinance comes into effect.

Because otherwise, the number of exceptional trees are gonna be way down and we can't replace them.

It takes decades for an exceptional tree to become that.

So that's what I'd like to ask.

If there's something that can be done to protect trees now while we're waiting for the ordinance to be into place.

That's what I'd like to request.

Thank you very much.

I appreciate that suggestion.

Martha Woody, then Jessica Dixon.

Thank you, Councilmember Baxhaw.

Thank you for leading this.

There have been many people who have gone in your steps ahead, and yet we don't have a strong tree ordinance.

And as anyone knows, whether they're a homeowner or a renter, trees are being raised and cut to the ground rapidly.

And I will then second what Steve and Jessica are saying, that the urgency for a tree ordinance is now.

We are very concerned about waiting until 2020. A lead researcher with the U.S.

Forest Service, David Nowak, whittles down 30 years of studying the economic value of forests to this.

If you can only plant one tree, plant it in a city.

In the current drive for density, the role of trees is being lost and not adequately assessed.

Build, build, build should not mean raise every tree in sight.

Yet without a strong tree ordinance, that is what is happening.

The city is losing thousands of mature trees at a time when it needs their inherent raw green new deal that they offer.

Trees are for everyone, for homeowners, for renters like myself, for low-income and high-tech workers alike.

I'm here to urge you to pass a new updated tree protection ordinance today.

I'm also concerned that the resolution is being introduced, the resolution has been introduced, it is my understanding, to have the Seattle Department of Construction and Inspection lead the tree regulation update.

DCI derives part of its income from permit fees, which appears to be a conflict of interest.

in a city that prides itself on meeting Paris climate goals, tree protection and inspection would be better served by the Office of Sustainability and Environment.

Thank you so much.

Thank you.

Thank you.

I appreciate that, and I'll make sure that our OSCE office is participating in this every step of the way.

Woody Wheeler, Jessica Dixon, and then Joshua Morris.

And by the way, thanks to all of you for writing in a way that I can see who's stepping up.

It's unusual and refreshing.

Thank you, Councilmember Bagshaw.

We should adopt the Urban Forestry Commission's June 2019 draft tree and urban forest protection now.

Delaying would mean many more trees lost and a larger urban heat island of hardscape created here in Seattle.

Climate change is on our front doorstep.

A smart way to address it would be to preserve our tallest, most mature trees so that they can continue to provide free ecological services.

In the words of Seattle's own 2013 Urban Forest Stewardship Plan, we should, and I quote, preserve existing trees because it takes decades for most trees to reach their ultimate size.

Trees already growing in Seattle generally provide immediate and ongoing benefits that cannot be matched by small or young replacement trees.

Focus especially on evergreen trees here in the evergreen state because they maintain their canopy during the rainy season and are active year round.

Evergreens can better attenuate rainfall, absorb carbon dioxide, and reduce air pollutants.

Trees are also linked to longer lifespans, lower levels of stress, better air quality, and lower rates of cardiac diseases.

They can save energy by reducing the need for air conditioning by as much as 30% and for heating by as much as 50%.

People least able to afford heating and air conditioning are impacted the most by climate change.

It can be a life or death situation for some, especially during extreme heat.

Finally, trees improve mental health and physical health.

And I'll end on this quote from the New York Restoration Project, a nonprofit focusing on disadvantaged neighborhoods.

Quote, there is almost no public health, crime, or environmental quality metric that you can look at that isn't made better by the presence of trees.

Trees are infrastructure, and they are the cheapest way cities can make a difference in the life of residents.

Thank you.

Thank you very much.

Jessica, Joshua, and is it June, Blue Spruce?

Hi.

Thank you for taking my comments.

In May of 2018, The Guardian ran an article, U.S.

Cities Losing 36 Million Trees a Year Researchers Find.

We know that urban forests moderate climate and reduce carbon emissions, improve air quality, that properly placed around buildings, trees can save energy by reducing the need for heating and cooling.

The estimated loss of these benefits, including carbon storage, pollution reduction, and altered energy use, is valued in this study at $96 million a year.

And yet, according to this article, U.S. cities, Seattle included, are losing 36 million trees a year.

Scientists warn of environmental threats rising from this trend, and they are likely to continue unless policies are altered.

So it's beyond disappointing that once again after years of promising to act on this issue, the City is delaying action on adopting an effective tree ordinance.

The resolution considered today declares the City Council and the Mayor's intent to consider strategies to protect trees and increase the City's tree canopy cover, but there's no timeline.

Is it next year?

Is it five years from now?

We are a coalition of many neighborhoods and organizations dedicated to the livability of our city and the health of the natural environment.

And we are advocating for supporting and protecting the quality of life for all of our city's communities.

Rather than starting over, we urge the Council to review and adopt the Urban Forestry Commission's June 2019 draft Tree and Urban Forest Protection Ordinance.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Just as one correction, there is a timeline in the resolution, and the timeline is early spring, and all of the things that you have mentioned in terms of bringing the Urban Forestry, the Office of Sustainability and Environment, having the A real outreach to the public is in the plan.

We're trying to take and build on what the Portland model and Vancouver, BC have done.

So please know that timelines are real, the mayor is committed, and I believe that this is going to work, especially if all of you stay committed.

I'm going to copy the names on this and to give them to the people that will be leading the charge on it.

So I want to say thank you.

Joshua?

June Blue Spruce, which I love.

I think you're the last to speak on trees, and then we'll have three speakers on Sandpoint.

Hello, Council Members.

I'm speaking here today as Urban Conservation Manager at Seattle Audubon.

Seattle Audubon leads a local community in appreciating, understanding, and protecting birds.

On behalf of our 4,000 members, I'd like to thank you, Council Member Bagshaw, and the Mayor for your work toward improving tree protections in Seattle.

The resolution of intent considered on today's agenda is an appreciated step forward in the process of updating and enforcing Seattle's Tree Protection Ordinance.

Maintaining the trees we have now is the most important thing we can do for our urban forest.

We're not doing that.

The city's 2016 tree canopy assessment reported a 2% decline over an eight-year study period.

If correct, that's over 1,200 acres of trees lost from our neighborhoods.

If the city is serious about reaching its canopy goal of 30% by 2037, it must first halt, then reverse the trend of loss.

Stronger tree protections will help slow that loss.

Seattle Audubon cares because urban trees are good for people, birds, and the economy.

A healthy, equitably distributed urban forest provides tangible benefits to the most vulnerable members of our community.

It buffers us against the impacts of climate change and extreme weather events.

It increases property values and spending at local businesses, and it supports wildlife.

Seattle Audubon volunteers have documented over 200 species of birds within the city limits.

Over half of these rely on trees at some point in their life cycle.

Some species, like pileated woodpeckers, aren't seen once canopy cover dips below 20%.

Our conservation vision is a Seattle where people and birds thrive.

Neither people nor birds can thrive without a healthy, protected urban forest.

When it comes to protecting trees, Seattle is behind the curve.

Cities like Portland are doing a better job.

Vancouver, B.C.

is doing a better job.

Sammamish and other Pacific Northwest cities are doing better jobs.

Seattle must do a better job.

We know our current ordinance is ineffective.

We don't need more technical analyses to tell us that.

What we need is executive and council staff collaborating with the Urban Forestry Commission on meaningful tree protections, which would include expanding exceptional tree definitions, establishing a permitting mechanism and a fee-in-lieu mechanism, tracking tree loss and replacement, and other things.

Thank you for your continuing work on this and for working with the Urban Forestry Commission on strengthening our tree protections.

Thank you for coming up.

And I also just want to acknowledge Joshua and thank those in Audubon for your support on saving our Seattle Times Park that I believe was finalized, either finalized or virtually so, last week to protect and preserve it.

And it was the only bird corridor that our friends had between Denny Park and Capitol Hill.

So you were important in that.

Thank you.

Are you Miss Blue Spruce?

I am.

Thank you.

I love trees.

I'm a member of the Tree Keepers Alliance and I also live in Columbia City in Southeast Seattle, which you know has a lower percentage of tree canopy than other areas of the city.

I really appreciate your efforts to shepherd this through the council process and I appreciate also that the resolution adheres to the recommendations of the Urban Forestry Commission My problem is with the timeline.

We are losing significant and exceptional trees in great numbers every day, endangering our health and the urban ecosystem.

The only people who can stop this are the city council and the mayor.

We need you to act as quickly as possible.

I'll give you an example.

A couple of blocks from my home was a double lot.

The owner sold one of the lots to a developer.

It's like the typical 30 by 100 foot lot, 3,000 square feet.

It had eight trees near the back boundary of the lot, all of them over six inches in diameter at breast height, several of them over 18 inches, so approaching exceptional status.

Because they were at the boundary of the lot, the developer could have preserved most or all of them and still built a perfectly spacious home, but instead they chose to scrape the lot to clear cut it to the consternation of all the neighbors.

This would have been illegal if the tree protection ordinance had been in effect at the time.

I love trees and I also have asthma.

I had pneumonia this year.

The more trees are cut in my neighborhood, the worse my health will be and that of my neighbors.

Please pass the tree protection ordinance as expeditiously as possible.

If it can't be passed this year, which I would like to see it passed this year, please take some of the measures that Carolyn suggested.

And also I'm concerned because you have been the champion and you're leaving the council.

How can we be sure that someone else will champion this work?

Thank you.

Thank you very much.

And the answer to that question is ask the candidates who are running and make sure they will.

And I mean that very seriously.

I've already been out pounding on them.

So let them know how important it is to you, too.

OK, we're moving on to our Sandpoint.

We have Melinda Nichols, Peter Guzman, and Ruth Blah to talk about Sandpoint.

Do you all want to speak to it?

It's good.

Please, just give us your name as you stand up.

Hi, my name is Melinda Nichols, and I want to thank you for allowing us to be here today.

I have been on the Lehigh board for 22 years and have been working on tiny house builds for a long time.

We are celebrating this small house build, this cottage build.

It's such a wonderful project.

One of the best things about it I'm a carpenter, and I taught pre-apprenticeship for many years.

And we are working with colleges and pre-apprentices all over the state to build each one of these houses.

This is going to help the students.

Instead of something that isn't real, they're going to build a real house.

That real house is going to make them proud.

It's going to make them feel like they've accomplished something to help someone else.

It'll also connect them with low-income and homeless people, which is very important as well.

We have organizations like ANU, Youth Build, Tulalip Tarot, Sawhorse Revolution.

We have 20 different programs that are intending to build these.

And we also have support by the unions in our city and our county.

They're encouraging us to do this.

This is one of the few kind of programs that we have both labor and management, enthusiastic because we need more people in the construction industry.

We need more apprentices.

It's a very well-paying career, and we're really excited to be a part of that.

So we really appreciate the vision of this build.

Not only are we going to help low-income and homeless people, we're going to help our students have a better career for their future.

And we hope this isn't the only time we do this, but that this innovative, creative program will be one that we'll be able to continue in the future.

Great.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Melinda, thank you for being on the board.

Thank you.

Thank you.

I can hardly wait till we get to talk about this project in a few minutes.

Peter and then Ruth.

Yes.

Good afternoon, Chair Bagshaw.

My name is Peter Guzman.

I am with the State Board for Community and Technical Colleges.

Our state agency provides support for our 34 community and technical colleges, many of which provide apprenticeship, pre-apprenticeship, and other work-based learning programs in the construction management field and construction trades.

I come here in support of the Sandpoint Resolution, and I'm going to tell you why.

Earlier this year during the 2019 legislative session, Our agency supported and grossed substitute Senate Bill 5383 concerning tiny houses, which, among other things, allows for organizations like Lehigh to contract with school districts or institutions of higher ed, like the State Board for Community and Technical Colleges, to have students enrolled in our construction or construction management courses to be able to work in building these tiny houses.

Without regard to public works prevailing wage, and we're within the guidelines of prevailing wage.

We have the ability to have our students work in constructing these tiny houses, which allows them to build the skills, as Melinda indicated, that are necessary for our future workforce in the construction and building trades occupations.

And at the same time, it allows for our students to see the value of building these tiny homes for homeless populations.

So it's a win-win for us.

We get the skill sets that our students get when building the homes.

But at the same time, they see that the worth and the end product of the tiny home is for something that's going towards a good cause.

And so it's something that makes them feel good.

So we are here at the community and technical college system to support this project and any other tiny house initiative that is developed in our beautiful state of Washington.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you for all your work.

Anybody would like to speak after Ruth?

Anybody didn't get a chance to sign up?

Who wishes they had?

OK, please go ahead.

Hi.

I'm Ruth Blau.

I'm the manager of the Seattle Conservation Corps.

The Conservation Corps is a work training program for homeless adults that operates through the Seattle Parks and Recreation Department.

And we're located in Magnuson Park.

We're also a state-recognized pre-apprenticeship program.

We are involved in this project on a couple of different levels.

We're hoping to participate in the construction since pre-apprentices are going to be given some of the opportunities to do the construction.

The graduates of the core are designated to be able to be the residents of this cottage.

This is a beautiful opportunity for someone to get some permanent affordable housing once they've landed a job and they've stabilized their life.

So we're just very excited about this project and appreciating your support.

That's great.

Thank you very much.

And I'm a huge supporter.

of our Seattle Conservation Corps.

And I was thrilled when I heard that we'll have an opportunity not only to build, but perhaps be residents of it.

Allison, thank you for getting us organized here with public comments.

So do you want to read in the next items?

Yes.

Would you mind if I read in one through four together?

That'd be excellent.

Thank you.

And thank you for all our candidates here coming today.

Item number one, appointment 01405, appointment of Nipfeli Marie Gonzalez as a member of the Seattle Youth Commission for a term to August 31st, 2021. Item number three, appointment number 01407. I'm sorry, I skipped item number two.

Appointment number 01406, appointment of Denani Hassan as a member of the Seattle Youth Commission for a term to August 31st, 2021. Item number three, appointment number 01407, appointment of Parisa Harvey as a member of the Seattle Youth Commission for a term to August 31st, 2021. And finally, item number four, appointment.

number 01408, appointment of Kevin Jackson-Hugh as a member of the Seattle Youth Commission for a term to August 31st, 2021.

Excellent.

Thank you.

Do you have a sponsor?

Any sponsoring department?

Okay, you're going to lead it?

Great.

Amy, thank you.

Yes.

Thank you, everyone.

My name is Amy Huang, and I'm the staff liaison for the Seattle Youth Commission.

The Seattle Youth Commission is housed under the Department of Neighborhoods under the Civic Engagement and Leadership Development Division.

There are 15 body youth commissioners, the ages 13 through 19, and they must live or go to school within the Seattle jurisdiction.

Today we are appointing the process of four new youth commissioners.

There is one, Nicole Gonzalez, that is not available to attend today, so I will read a small bio about her.

Nicole is currently a 10th grader at Cleveland High School, a Running Start student and part of the Seattle Youth Climate Action Network.

Nicole is passionate about environmental justice and wants to raise awareness and education around the environmental harm and social injustices happening in the Duwamish River and in the Port of Seattle region.

Nicole is also a peer leader for the service board.

Great, thank you.

I think what we'll do is move on to 2, 3, and 4, and then we'll come back and ask any additional questions.

So Amy, do you want to introduce Dhanani?

Yes.

Dhanani will be representing District 2 today.

Dhanani, would you like to do some introduction about yourself?

All right.

Have him pull the microphone close, too.

And Dhanani, welcome.

Thank you.

I am a 10th grader attending Franklin High School and is a part of the University Washington Upward Bound Program.

My parents are immigrants from Ethiopia and I was born in Kenya.

My personal experience makes me very passionate about serving underrepresented communities and ensuring youth voices are a part of the city decision-making process.

I am interested in neighborhood public safety and creating more college preparation and leadership development programs for youth.

Very nice.

Danani, I'm very thankful that you're here and that you're willing to spend your time with the city of Seattle.

Can you tell me one or two things that you would like to accomplish while you're on the commission?

I would like to make a lot more programs that allow people in my neighborhood and neighborhoods like mine college preparation courses and SATs, testing areas, and helping with how much it costs.

Thank you for that and that vision.

And as was mentioned by someone in the audience, I'm not going to be with you after the 1st of January, but I really want to encourage that council members want to hear from you.

And so if there's anything that happens while you're a commissioner, you or your entire commission can contact any one of us.

on City Council, and we would really like to be able to support your efforts.

So thank you for that.

Our next person here, item number three, is Parissa Harvey.

Welcome.

And did you want to read, Amy?

Yes.

And Parissa will be representing District 7. Parissa is now attending University Prep.

I will also let Parissa, if you wanted to introduce her by herself.

Great.

And do make sure that this comes close to you, Parisa.

Bring this close to you.

Yeah, and then make sure here are the little green lights on the stem.

Do you see?

It is.

OK, very good.

So my name is Parisa, and I'm a sophomore at UPrep.

And I'm really excited to be part of the Youth Commission and work on environmental justice issues, gun violence, mental health issues, and also sexual and girls' health issues, specifically like the pink tax.

Well done.

We're proud of you.

So I'll ask you the same question I asked Anani.

If at the end of your term in August of 2021, you could have accomplished one or two things, what would that be?

I think the first thing that I definitely want to make sure I'd accomplish would be making sure the city of Seattle remains environmentally conscious and works towards its 2020 goals and ensuring initiatives like the Green New Deal are passed at a citywide level.

And then I'd also want to make sure that mental health issues are addressed through school curriculum, forefront, and suicide prevention, things like that.

Great.

So we will encourage you to come back.

We frequently have public comment during budget.

We will have two public hearings.

If the commissioners individually or collectively want to come and address the council, we will certainly encourage that.

Thank you.

So we have one more.

Would you like to talk to us?

And I will have to say Kevin Jackson, who that I read through your information, and I just wondered how you ever have any time to study.

And I know you're doing well in school at the same time.

And bring this to you.

Should I talk now?

Please.

OK, cool.

All right, well, yeah.

My name is Kevin, who I am a senior at West Seattle High School.

And I do want to talk to everyone over here.

Thank you very much for doing what you're doing for us and for saving the trees.

It just amazes me how much you think about us just being here, hearing you talk about students and how much you want us to have a future.

And I want to say thank you for that.

All right.

Also, yeah.

Titles I have is that I am the overall president at my school.

I am a pod leader at a non-profit known as One World Now, where I have given speeches.

And yeah, newly appointed as part of the Seattle Youth Committee.

And, well, well.

Questions.

Well, I'm going to also just jump in here.

Among the fact that you're a student body president as an 11th grader and a peer leader, and you've been working to develop relationships with international students, then the list gets started.

That you volunteer at your local church, your local food banks.

You serve as a volunteer physical therapist at a disability center in Everett.

And you have been working very hard on educational achievement gap, promoting opportunities for underserved youth.

And in your spare time, you play tennis and the track team.

And I still don't understand how you get the great average that you do.

But congratulations on all your good work.

What would you like to see and accomplish during your year and a half term?

The thing I am the most concerned about, the thing I care most about is youth empowerment and giving youth the opportunities to make their voices heard in our community and in government here.

I mean, there are so many issues going on in our society right now, like mental health, climate change.

safety, right?

And everybody, I think youth really need to have a voice on these things, right?

Because, you know, even though we are on the committee, we can't do everything, right?

And it's really our job to go out and encourage our peers, our people in our community, to step up, make their voices heard in their communities.

And not just in government, but everywhere, and that's something that I want to try and work towards.

Very nice.

Colleagues, and thank you, Councilmember Gonzales and Councilmember Mosqueda for joining us.

Do either of you have any questions?

Amy, anything else that you would like to add?

I'm just really honored and privileged to even staff the Seattle Youth Commission, and I'm eager and inspired for the next term.

Thank you very much.

Really?

Well, I appreciate it so much.

Well, do we need to go through each of them individually, or can we take them all four at a time?

I will hit okay well I move that the committee pass appointment zero one Hold on one moment here.

0 1 4 0 5. And so it's been moved and seconded to approve our first candidate.

All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

None opposed.

No abstentions.

So our first candidate who is not with us today.

But Neftali is her and she goes by Nicole.

Great, so we will recommend that she be approved for the commission.

The second appointment is Denani Hassan and he is appointment number 01405 and I will move that we pass.

All right.

01001406. Second.

All those in favor, say aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

No abstentions.

Thank you very much.

We look forward to working with you.

Parisa Harvey, you are appointment number 01407. And I will move her appointment.

second those in favor say aye aye none opposed and we have no abstentions so that one will move forward to the full council as well and appointment number four is Kevin Jackson who thank you all so much for coming he is appointment number 0 1 4 0 8 and I will move to pass.

Second.

All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

None opposed, no abstentions.

So all four of your candidates and recommendations and thanks.

I think two of you are from the mayor and two of you are from council.

Appreciate the fact that you're willing to serve and it'll be a great opportunity for you and us as well.

OK.

Anything else that we need to do on these four?

All right.

Thank you so much.

We will move to item number five.

And if I can ask our presenters to come up to the table.

Please do.

Council Bill 119626 an ordinance relating to city employment commonly referred to as a second quarter 2019 employment ordinance.

Very good.

Sarah as you two are getting settled in.

Can you start introductions here, please?

Butler Seattle Department of Human Resources policy and legislation advisor very good Lisa Gardner of Seattle Department of Human Resources Compensation program manager great.

Thank you Sarah and Lisa And I appreciate the fact that we have had an opportunity to go through all of these positions Sarah Maybe you could present just what we're doing here, and why?

And we will try to be as succinct as possible because I know that we do this regularly

Sure.

So this legislation has three sections.

The first two sections change civil service status for 12 employees.

11 are moving to exempt and one is returning to civil service coverage.

The SHR director is forwarding these positions for counsel because he determined that the duties of the positions meet the exemption criteria.

which is having a high degree of responsiveness or accountability, a confidential or fiduciary relationship with the appointing authority, or positions that support the court's ability to be a third branch of government.

The last section adjusts salary ranges for the work training enrollee tier two.

There was a compression issue that was created back in 2016 when minimum wage rolled in and this is fixing that.

Very good.

Lisa, do you have anything you would like to add?

One thing I had asked you yesterday is to discuss the fact that these have all been reviewed and discussed with the local unions that will affect these positions.

That's correct.

They go through an initial job analysis, and then that's followed by a multiple signature chain to review if these meet the threshold defined in the municipal code, and from that, The information is provided to labor relations who inform the union.

And employees in these positions, any employees that are affected, they do have appeal rights that are granted, starting with a possible reconsideration, and then should they choose not to reconsider or ask for an appeal, then they have return rights through the city processes.

Great.

And I'm sorry that Teresa Mosqueda had just stepped out because I wanted her specifically to hear that, that the unions had been involved and that any individual who steps back has provided the same seniority and rights back to the first opportunity to return to the job.

Do you want to discuss the budget implications on this?

So this does not seek any more budget appropriation.

Costs will be absorbed by departments.

Very good.

Thank you.

Any further questions on this?

You asked the only question I would have asked.

Okay, so this is Council Bill 119626, and I'd like to move that the committee pass this council bill.

Second.

All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

None opposed.

And we don't have any abstentions, so unless you two have anything else to add, this is passed and we'll move on to full council next Monday.

Good.

Thank you.

Thank you very much, Sarah and Lisa, I appreciate it.

Okay, shall we read in item number six?

Yes.

Item number six, Council Bill 119641, an ordinance relating to property at Sandpoint authorizing an amendment to the amended and restated lease between the Sandpoint Community Connections LLC and the city authorized by ordinance 122459 as amended by ordinance 123195 and ordinance 125366.

Good.

Thank you.

And as everybody's getting settled in here, why don't you move around to the end?

I'm also going to invite our good friend, Speaker Frank Chopp, to come join us since this has been a project.

Former is accurate, but he's speaker to me.

Sally?

There's actually an ordinance and a resolution.

Can I read them both in?

That'd be great.

Thank you very much.

It did.

It changed yesterday.

Got republished.

I could get you a new version.

Item number 7, Resolution 31905, a resolution amending the Physical Development Management Plan for Sandpoint as adopted by Resolution 29429 and amended by Resolution 30063.

Very good.

Thank you for that.

So we will take the first item.

This, as Allison appropriately said, we have the resolution and an ordinance.

And I think we'll just dive in.

Is it going?

to be you, you.

And okay, Emily, congratulations.

We are delighted at your appointment.

This is terrific.

I know we go through a process, but we're feeling pretty sanguine about this.

So you want to kick us off, Tracy?

Or would you like introductions?

Please.

Emily Alvarado, Office of Housing.

We know you all.

I'm so sorry.

Okay.

Hello, Elsa Kings, Office of Housing.

I see you, Elsa.

Sharon Lee, Low Income Housing Institute.

Melinda Nichols, Low Income Housing Institute Board.

Very nice to have you back.

Thank you.

Frank.

Nice, Tracy.

Tracy Rasliff, Council Senator.

Thank you very much.

Okay, Emily, you're on.

Okay, so we are excited to talk to you today about the lease of parcel nine at Sandpoint Property for the future development of really what is an innovative project of an affordable cottage housing.

And as Allison said, there are two actions today on this issue.

I will go into the property description in a second, but just to describe the two actions.

First is related to amending an existing lease that's currently between the Office of Housing and Solid Ground to make that between the Office of Housing and Lehigh.

And the second action is to amend the Sandpoint Physical Development Management Plan to make it consistent with the Sandpoint Overlay District that was adopted by Council in 2012. So a little bit of background, the property description as you see the map here of the lease that we're going to be discussing on Northeast 65th.

And this is parcel 9 at Sandpoint.

It is currently under the jurisdiction of the Office of Housing.

It is used by SPU as a stormwater retention facility.

Sorry for that formatting.

Isn't it great?

I like the background D.

Duh.

So a little bit of background on this very long process at Sandpoint.

In 1993, there was a BRAC initiated process to transfer the property to the city as the local redevelopment authority for homeless housing.

That was finalized in 1996. In 1997, Formally, the U.S.

Navy deeded the land to the city.

In 1998, we executed a ground lease with the Sandpoint Housing Community Association, later the Sandpoint Community Connections, also known as Solid Ground.

We have been back to council throughout the years with many changes to the lease because any change to the lease does require council action.

This is an exciting opportunity to use a piece of generally unused property out at Sandpoint without any city subsidy to create affordable cottage housing.

Lehigh was awarded a Department of Commerce $3 million grant on innovative methods to end homelessness, to create Sandpoint Cottage Community.

And all we need to do is take action to avail that property that then gets developed with other resources.

So I'm going to turn it over to Sharon to talk a little bit about the project.

Great.

Please.

So the proposal is to build 22 to 25 studio and one-bedroom cottages.

And each of the cottages will include a kitchen, bathroom, sleeping, dining, bedroom.

So it's a complete self-contained cottage.

And if you look at the site plan, it includes a playground, gardens, a shared common house.

Permanent supportive housing, specifically for low wage workers who are exiting homelessness.

So our agreement with the Department of Commerce is that we're going to serve a combination of families, singles, couples, veterans.

And what's unique about this, this is permanent housing.

It's not transitional.

It's permanent housing.

And the income goes up to 40% of the area median income.

And one reason we're doing this is specifically because if you look at the wages, the minimum wage, so if a person is employed full time at minimum wage, and including people who are with the Conservation Corps, then they're at more like 40% of the area median income.

They're exceeding 30%, you know, at the area median income.

Meaning that a lot of housing that's targeted to people 30% and below, they may not be eligible for.

So this is capturing a sort of underrepresented population of working people who have modest incomes, minimum wage incomes.

And what's sort of special about this that's different than many Lehigh-funded projects is that there is zero city money.

So we are not requesting yet.

No.

We're not requesting anything that, as budget chair, I ever heard.

So thank you.

So thanks to the capital budget and the legislature, there's a $3 million King County Innovative Grant.

that was awarded.

And Key Bank Foundation has also awarded $250,000.

And NeighborWorks America has also awarded some foundation funding.

So we are moving ahead with zero public funding from the city for capital or operations.

And then we've been holding community meetings.

And if you look at the next slide, So we are very appreciative of Solid Ground releasing this site for us.

And we also want to thank Councilmember Bagshaw and Mosqueda for this special meeting.

I know it was hard to schedule.

You know what?

Actually, we have a lot going on, but this is such a high priority for all of us.

I'm thrilled that we're here today and that we can actually move forward with this and recognize the work that's gone on.

You know, we thank you for being here.

Well, thank you.

And then the Office of Housing and the law department and our attorney have worked really hard to work on a term sheet.

And so what we're going to do is enter into a 30-year lease with Office of Housing.

And then there will be opportunities for 10-year renewals after that.

And then we...

also want to make use of the construction, maybe Melinda, if you want to say that again, restate that because Council Member Mosqueda wasn't here, the use of apprentices and students.

It's been a wonderful project so far.

We have an excellent person who is helping us design and build and we are meeting with the apprenticeship and pre-apprenticeship programs.

They're talking about what's the best way to build this.

So we are creating with our architect a wonderful design.

We're also working with the apprentices and pre-apprentices and our college students to talk about why are we doing this?

What is their role going to be?

And it is one of the more exciting kinds of projects that we have ever had.

So we should have a really wonderful plan for a 300 square foot house.

It may be one that we would want to share with other people and utilize in the future because it's going to be extremely efficient and a very valuably built house.

Since we're on this question, somebody asked me, what do we expect the useful life of these buildings to be?

OK, well, our answer to that is we expect them to last 100 years.

Of course, you do.

Yeah.

Because you're going to maintain them so well.

Well, they're going to be built to code, and they're going to be built following the Evergreen standard in terms of sustainability.

And so we see it as not much different than the Longford, Fremont bungalows, cottages that are built to last.

We have a nifty design.

We want to make sure you have a copy of it.

So we're part of the Tiny House National Movement, where people can live in small spaces, but it's gonna be very durable, very comfortable, but it's gonna be, the square footage would be modest.

And the goal here, I don't know if you know about this goal, but the goal is to deliver each cottage at less than $150,000 per cottage, which is half the cost of the traditional multifamily.

apartment unit.

And the difference here, of course, is that these are on land.

They are going to accommodate one or two people.

It's going to take more space because we're going linearly rather than up.

That said, anything that we can do to get more people housed, and this is the kind of thing that we have all been talking about.

We know it's a step up from the little shacks, the tiny homes, the places that have no running water inside, but for us to be able to say, yep, these things are going to work for people, and that people are going to be able to get inside with a roof, with the dignity of having their own little kitchenette plus a bathroom.

I think it's a wonderful model, and my hat is totally off to all of you.

Yes, because the land is zoned residential, low-rise residential.

So we think that this is possibly a national model, a statewide model.

So there's many communities that have public land, low-density property, where something like this can happen.

And everyone's been very concerned about the high cost of affordable housing.

So this could be a model.

And you've just cut it in half.

You've just cut each unit in half by doing this.

Ruth, can I ask you a question?

I am just such a strong advocate for these apprenticeship programs.

I love the fact that you as a woman carpenter are out here leading this charge as well.

Is there anything that we need to do in order to increase the number of either pre-apprentices or the pre-apprentice or the apprenticeship programs to free people up to be working on these projects?

That's a wonderful question.

The RPAC organization, which the City of Seattle has, that has pre-apprenticeship all over, is already interested in this.

We have presentations there.

So we are combining with all of our...

King County and the City of Seattle is one of the most effective pre-apprenticeship programs for construction in the United States.

We've been doing it longer than almost anyone else.

So we are reaching out.

to different organizations for their encouragement.

We've given speeches at the Washington State Apprenticeship and Training Council.

They've been supportive as well.

So we recognize that this is a bigger picture and that our apprentices and our pre-apprentices will be really doing a lot of help to help with this.

And also to point out with pre-apprenticeship, that's a diversity training program.

I bet it is.

It has women, it has people of color.

It also has everyone in it, but the majority of the population and are also prisoners who are going to go into construction.

This is a wonderful project for them.

So if I could just go through a few of the details, the terms of the lease, and then I will go through the substance of the resolution change.

Very good.

We'll sit here quietly while you do that.

Just to go through those details.

And I'll turn it over to Elsa, one of our fabulous underwriters at the Office of Housing, to talk through what the lease terms include.

Good.

Thank you.

Thank you, Emily.

So as previously mentioned, the current lease is with Solid Ground.

And what this action will allow us to do is to remove that parcel from that ground lease and enter into a lease with Lehigh for the purpose of this project.

The lease will be a 30-year lease with three 10-year extensions.

Some of the terms of the lease will be that Lehigh will construct the project as proposed.

The cottages will serve low-income homeless individuals or families, and the cottages will continue to be in good habitable condition at the time of each renewal.

I have a question if I may.

When we start going through leases, it can be an hour to get through two pages.

I promise it's not going to be an hour.

This is like a page and a quarter, so I can't justify two hours worth of questioning.

I did want to ask a quick question about the folks who will be able to access this, because there's a distinction here.

So this slide shows that it'll serve low income I've heard it described a couple of ways that it'll serve low income individuals and people experiencing homelessness.

And so I just wanna get an understanding of whether it's both populations or one or the other, and if it includes low income individuals, how we're defining low income, because I don't see that level of specificity in the lease terms.

Great question.

So for the purpose of the Sandpoint redevelopment plan, when the BRAC does its process, that really looks at homeless housing.

Our Office of Housing does not have a specific definition of what counts as homeless, but we typically count it as a pretty broad population, including folks who are at risk of homelessness.

As Sharon mentioned, these are for them, cottages that are serving folks at or below 40% of area median income.

We do not anticipate this is a population that's coming from coordinated entry, for example, with very high needs, but ranging in that at risk of homelessness or exiting homelessness population.

So Frank Chopp has been very helpful.

He's contacted the Conservation Corps and Fair Start.

There are many people who are homeless who are in job training programs and career training programs.

And once they get a full-time job at the minimum wage, they are no longer eligible for homeless housing at 30% AMI.

So people will be exiting homelessness and they will largely be, these are the incomes.

They will have incomes between, well, up to $31,000 for a single person and $35,440 for a two-person household.

and $39,880 for a three-person household.

So we're going to be using the Office of Housing income limits.

And our commitment to the Department of Commerce is 40% area median income in terms of affordability.

OK.

So when we say homeless individuals, we're not talking about the chronically homeless, for example.

Well, there may have been some chronic long-term homeless who have entered job training.

But for the most part, we are talking about people who are ready to transition.

Right, ready to transition.

They could be exiting a job training program.

They could be employed elsewhere.

We have actually a lot of people, because they're in a tiny house, they now have employment.

And then we're looking for permanent housing.

And then as well as the Seattle Conservation Corps, graduates of the Conservation Corps.

So this does not have services funding that would require a particular referral system like coordinated entry, which gives more flexibility to the agency to identify potential residents consistent with the regulatory agreements set by commerce for that area median income and our expectations for serving that population as related to the Sandpoint plan.

But it's likely not pulling off of a coordinated entry list.

How are you going to prioritize?

I would imagine, let's just say these are built and they're built by next summer and we're ready to go.

These are going to be coveted places to live.

How do you prioritize?

Thank you for inviting me up here.

This is the first time I've ever been up here.

I'm feeling very emotional now.

The basic idea is to work for Sowsing.

And if you were homeless, you'd want to probably get a training, get a job.

So we work with the Conservation Corps that the city operates and has done for many years.

And also Fair Start, so they both have endorsed this effort so that their folks who get into those programs can have a place to live that they can afford to be close to where they work.

Some of the Conservation Corps members actually do the work at Magnuson Park to maintain the park and other public works.

And then Fair Start also is a training program that after they go through that program, they get placed in a job.

But again, a lot of those jobs are in downtown Seattle, where they can't afford to live.

So this is intent to make it affordable.

And once they're in, they're obviously not homeless anymore.

But can I add a couple other comments, by the way?

This is a pilot project to get this thing so we save some money on these projects.

Because the apartment buildings right now, the traditional apartment buildings, are too damn expensive.

And so this is a pilot.

Can I say?

Can I say damn here?

I'm new at this, you know.

But the cost of housing is like $330,000.

Sharon says we're going to do this for less than that in the pilot project, but we want to extend this around the state.

I've got mayors in other cities, including Aberdeen, who called up and said, look, I had to basically move an encampment along the river in Aberdeen, and I'd like to have someplace decent for those folks to live.

And so we are doing this in other parts of the state.

I've been in contact by people in Yakima, Spokane, Pierce County, as well as Aberdeen.

So I think this is a model.

And once we get it going more, we hope to drive down the cost per unit, because part of the initial cost is doing the training program with the community colleges.

And we very, very much appreciate the connection with the union apprenticeships, but the colleges, that's critical.

I also should say that This is all carrying out a plan approved by the City Council with John Drago as the chair in 1997. This is the last piece of that plan.

The prior piece was building 9, which we just finished, which was a huge love fest out there.

148 units of workforce housing.

plus early learning center and all this other stuff.

So it's just great.

And one last thing is I attended all the community meetings.

We had three community meetings because David Mosley said, you go out and talk to the community.

It was great.

I loved it.

So he said, you know, we did pretty well at building nine.

So this is pretty good too.

And literally one of them said, can they move in?

But we want to make sure this is tied to programs.

whose intent is to train people, get them into jobs, and then we need to have a place for them to live.

So we're going to focus on those two programs to start.

But thank you very much for this.

I really appreciate it.

Representative Chopp, you have been the hero for many of these projects, and I'm very grateful to you.

Councilmember Muscat, I know you've got a regional council meeting that you need to attend.

What would you like to add?

Well, let me just start with a thank you to you again.

You've been a great partner in helping us make sure that some of these critical components related to housing get through committee this year.

And so thank you for including this in your agenda.

I am so excited that this is a robust opportunity for us to hear from the speaker, the incredible partners that he has brought to the table, and the Office of Housing.

I think that this is another great example where we have taken surplus public property that's underutilized and have turned it into a true public benefit.

And it is really an opportunity for us to live our words and our values every day.

The speaker has done a tremendous job, a heroic effort at the state level to give us the tools so that we have more opportunities in our tool belt to build on public land.

And when we build on public land, we know we're saving money.

We're saving money for the city and for the state.

And we're also saving lives by giving folks a place to live.

So the partnership that you heard about from Lehigh, I think, is a really great example of us trying to take to scale programs that we know to be effective.

and also to meet people where they're at.

People are getting out of homelessness because they're getting stably housed and because we've helped define them employment opportunities that are meaningful.

And speaking of employment opportunities, we're providing employment opportunities for folks to build this affordable housing and to really incorporate labor standards.

At one point, you know, 10 years ago, I can remember when affordable housing and building construction trades in, you know, sometimes it was water and And then lastly, I think as we look at Sandpoint in the neighborhood.

I want to thank you know the speaker and former speaker and Your team I know Tony's here and Alec and Marissa Chavez and our team Aaron house has been working on trying to figure out How do we make this possible?

and the vision that you articulated to us in earlier meetings the way that these homes look is It is not a roof or a door that you're offering folks.

It's truly a home and a place to get stabilized and really excited about the ability to support this and to also support any other cities if we can to lead by example yet again in showing what it looks like to bring these Models to scale and it's just one more addition to the long list of housing options You all have both authorized at the state level that you've helped to carry out and that this city has funded in the past so I think it's a win-win-win a win for workers who are building these buildings a win for the individuals and workers who will be living in these new homes and And a win for the city because I think this is showing us, showing how we can be more efficient and a win for the state as well who's been helping to lift up these options and for us to be able to move forward is really great.

So I appreciate all the community engagement you've done and that the executive has encouraged those conversations but you all really carried it out and that's time intensive so thank you.

And I couldn't get away from this table without saying how excited we are.

that Emily Alvarado is here as the pending director for Office of Housing and that this has been something that you've been very supportive of.

So thank you for that leadership as well.

Great.

Three quick things.

Mr. Guzman, when you spoke, I was reminded of how important and how much of a bipartisan effort this has been.

A number of years ago, I got a call from Mike Armstrong, then representative from Wenatchee, that said, we're bringing the colleges and some high school programs actually together.

And there was a competition in Olympia where they were building some tiny homes.

And I don't know how that went, but he called me and said, hey, do you want them?

And I said, are you really?

And I think there's one I called Sharon and said, there are a dozen tiny homes in Olympia that if we can get them, or if we can get transportation, we can have them.

And thanks to some of our friends in the Teamsters.

And I think Boeing stepped up with some trucks.

And I just want to acknowledge that was several years ago, but it was very meaningful.

And thank you for that.

I really appreciate it.

Also, for our tree friends who are in the audience, It's really important to me that as we're putting in these homes and we do have some pea patches and public gardens that we don't forget that we need to have the appropriate trees around them just for all of the reasons that we're talking about.

Oh, thank you.

I frankly wasn't doing that just to get your applause.

We mean that very sincerely.

And Magnuson Park is so beautiful, but if we can just pay attention to that, make sure we plant the right tree, right place, it'll just make this that much more beautiful and acceptable in the community.

anything else my colleagues because I would like to move forward with this we have a tidy up piece of legislation that accompanies this but did you have something like me to briefly describe the resolution which is the second piece of legislation you're taking action on this just for you might as well thank you point and then

Then we can vote on both of them without having it interrupted.

The first one is the change of the lease from Solid Ground to Lehigh.

And the second one, there are presently two documents that describe the development plan at Sandpoint.

One is that Sandpoint physical development management plan that was sent to the federal government in 1996. But in 2012, City Council adopted a Sandpoint overlay district, and that is what has more recently governed the way in which units are counted for implementation of the plan.

And this is to amend the old management plan to bring it consistent with more recent council action in 2012.

Is there anything in that that we need to be focusing on?

No, this is a very small amendment.

OK.

Anything else?

It's a cleanup.

It's really a cleanup.

OK.

So colleagues, if you're comfortable, if any more questions, if you're ready to go, then I'm going to be.

I'm being asked questions.

I'm answering the questions.

Yes, I am.

I am ready to go.

So I would like to move the committee pass Council Bill 119641, which is this lease that will allow these homes to move forward.

Second.

All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

None opposed.

No abstention.

Thank you.

It's great.

And Representative Chopp, thank you again.

Well, thanks.

Thank you.

Alusan as well.

Also, Reg Alusan is next.

Come on, everybody.

This is Resolution 31905, and I move the committee pass this resolution.

Second.

All those in favor, say aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

No, and no abstentions.

Can I vote?

Please, yeah, go ahead.

We have a courtesy vote down there.

Don't confuse them.

So our ordinance and resolution both have passed.

We will move forward with both of them for full council on Monday.

And again, Sharon Lee, thank you for all the work you're doing.

Thank you very much.

Appreciate all of you coming.

Okay, next items, read them in.

Thank you.

Item number eight, Council Bill 119643, an ordinance relating to real property located at Mercer Street and Second Avenue North, authorizing the Director of Housing to grant a lease of the real property to Plymouth Housing Group or its affiliate or designee.

Great, so this is the case site.

Case site, we've been moving on.

I know Council Member Mosqueda, you've got a regional council to attend.

Leave everything here, we'll pick it up.

Thank you.

Thank you again for all of your work this fall and everything that you included in your agenda.

And I just want to say, if I may, on the case site, while I can't stay, this is something that we're really excited about, especially because of the labor standards language that we got into the case site resolution last year.

And a lot of the labor community is really looking at the K-site as a great test example for how we can make high labor standards work with our commitment to affordable housing.

So I just want to say, again, thank you to the Office of Housing for their inclusion of that language.

And we will be looking forward to seeing more from that report out.

I'm excited about it as well because it gives our union colleagues and friends the opportunity to shine.

And I love that, because they buy in, they're part of it, and we look at the quality of work when it's done, and people are just thrilled with this real partnership between our nonprofits, our Office of Housing, and the labor partners.

Okay, so we have some new people at the table, if we can have introductions.

Emily Alvarado, Office of Housing.

John Torrance with Plymouth Housing.

to Emporum with Plymouth Housing.

Nice.

Well, John and Tim from Plymouth, we thank you for your work.

And I know that Paul and I have been working on this thing now for how many years?

And Emily, we're really excited about it.

So do you want to kick it off?

I will kick it off.

So we are moving legislation for a lease of the K-Site property to Plymouth Housing Group for the development of affordable housing and cultural space.

A reminder, this is wonderful property located in Uptown.

It formerly was property owned by Seattle Center.

Following a significant process that was the Uptown Rezone in October 2017, there was a resolution passed by council that transferred the jurisdiction of this property from Seattle Center to the Office of Housing to work with Office of Arts and Culture to have a co-located space in the community providing both affordable housing with a focus on serving homeless and formerly homeless folks and an arts and cultural space on the ground floor.

In 2018, we concluded an RFP that was a competitive process.

And through that process, the Office of Housing selected and awarded funds to Plymouth Housing Group to produce the project that they will describe right now.

Great.

Thank you, Emily.

I'm just going to say a few things and then turn it over to John to go over the details.

But the first thing is really thanks to Emily and her team.

Office of Housing really did the legwork on building community support for a homeless project in an amazing community that we otherwise wouldn't be able to afford property in.

So we're really grateful for that, and we're grateful to be the provider of all these public benefits.

So Emily mentioned them.

Homeless housing, 20% of the units will be for folks coming right out of homelessness.

The rest of the units, as John will talk about, are part of our Moving On program.

And that's folks that are already stably housed in permanent supportive housing, both at Plymouth and our other partners across the city at DSC, Catholic Housing Services, and others that are stable and don't need as many supports.

So what that means for the city and other funders is it's cheaper to operate, essentially.

So lowering our operating costs substantially with a model like this and also freeing up those rooms and other buildings for folks to come off the streets and come out of homelessness.

So we're really excited about that goal, as well as arts and cultural space.

We're really excited to provide that for the community with a longtime partner of Plymouth.

Our tenant will be Path of Art.

And if you're familiar with them, they provide art and community events for many of our population, folks that are experiencing homelessness or lower income.

And then finally, Council Member Mosqueda mentioned this before she left, but the Community Workforce Agreement, we're excited to be a pilot project for that.

We're also, yeah, so we're learning a lot.

We're excited to work on that program and provide living wages for the workers.

But the other comment I wanted to point out is just really excited about the recent passage that the council did on the adjust for inflation so that the folks working at Plymouth and DSC and other places that work in the buildings, many of them with master's degrees, social workers, will also have a living wage.

So John, do you want to talk more about that?

Yes, Tim, I think you did a great job of covering the majority here, but we're incredibly excited to be moving forward with this project.

We're working towards a late December closing on the financing and beginning construction in early January of 2020 with a 14-month timeframe for construction.

We're working with BN Builders as our general contractor, a union contractor.

who is just as excited as we are for the Community Workforce Agreement.

Additionally, we've been working with Path with Art.

They've been a long-term partner of Plymouth in providing arts education and access to individuals who are experiencing or have experienced homelessness.

And we feel that this is going to be a wonderful opportunity for them to not only Provide a beautiful space on the ground floor floor along Mercer here, but to also increase their capacity as their organization as well and As Tim mentioned these 72 units for individuals transitioning out of permanent supportive housing we feel that this does in a It has a double benefit in that not only are we providing less supportive housing for individuals who don't need the high need supportive housing and permanent supportive housing, we are then opening up those beds to then move people off of the street and off of the coordinated entry waiting list into permanent supportive housing.

So that is exciting for us as well.

So if I'd just like to acknowledge the work that you've done with outreach in Uptown as well.

Thank you.

Debbie Frostow and many of the folks that are in the Uptown Alliance, we know that the K-Site was incredibly important to them.

And they were just absolutely insistent that we have the kind of low-income housing, permanent supportive housing, your move-on spaces.

And then you were able to get agreement around Path with Art and that.

Is that kind of like what's going on up at 12th Avenue with that?

And it was another, I think...

12th Avenue Arts.

Yes, 12th Avenue Arts, but I think they're working with Bellwether Housing.

Anyway, what I appreciate is the fact that people who are living there are able to participate, but the community is able to use the community space, and that's something that you all have worked hard to make sure happens.

I think this is a wonderful addition, and we have a cultural overlay.

in Uptown as well, where they're really trying to emphasize art, music, whether it's performing arts or visual arts.

And this is a wonderful addition, and I'm really proud that we've gotten this far.

So I'm going to turn to Tom to describe the lease terms.

I was going to say, can we have the details, please?

We're going to have a technical piece of describing the lease terms.

But just a reminder that this is one of the incredible opportunities where we have public land.

We're achieving multiple public benefits, and yet we're going to continue to hold the land in public ownership while doing a long-term lease.

Hi.

As with the Sandpoint lease, it'll be a 99-year lease, $1 per year.

Of course, the building will require approval from the Office of Housing and SBCI for permitting and all that.

They will have to get their financing put together, work with their construction lender and their tax credit investor to facilitate all the funds necessary to close and construct the building.

As Emily said, the Office of Housing provided funding in this project as part of the RFP, so that will bring with it our standard set of loan documents and the regulatory requirements that they satisfy for that funding 50 years with extensions, that will be the standard for our funding that we put in place there.

Do you have more illustrations about what's expected?

I see this one on slide three.

Maybe go back one.

So is that the final design or what are we looking at there?

We're looking at what is getting close to the final design.

You know, it's, we took this to the Uptown community, especially the Land Use Review Committee with the Uptown Alliance.

We had originally had a lighter building.

They wanted something a little bit darker than a kind of silver color.

It's not as dark as this.

The colors don't never play as well on this.

But it is, it will be metal siding above.

The, what you're looking at with all the windows, that would be the Mercer Street facade, and that will be Path of Dark Space.

The residential entry on the left of the building here that's on 2nd Avenue, and then seven stories above for that, encompassing the 93 units.

Remind me what you're doing about freight delivery.

With, oh, we will be delivering off of 2nd Avenue, and we're working on crane placement now.

Great.

So more details, please.

I think that has concluded the lease terms.

I just should give credit to Tom Mack.

It is not easy to make sure that our financing works well with these leases, and he's doing a really good job to figure out how we meet all of those outcomes.

The details that you are juggling, all of you, are really very impressive.

I'm just delighted we went through the RFP, and I'm very glad Plymouth was successful.

And I look forward, in a year and a half, to seeing what this looks like for the community.

Any other questions?

Okay well then I'd like to move that the committee pass council bill 119643 relating to the gay site.

Second.

All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

And none opposed and no abstentions so the motion passes and this will go forward to our full council next Monday.

Thank you.

Thank you very much.

Good thanks for coming.

Tom Tim, John, nice to meet you all.

Okay, item number nine.

Thank you.

Item number nine, Council Bill 119629, an ordinance related to appropriations for Human Services Department amending ordinance 125724, which adopted the 2019 budget, lifting a provisor and ratifying and confirming certain prior acts.

Great.

Thank you.

And if we can invite our presenters up to the table.

Very nice to see you all.

Amy, do you want to start introductions?

Absolutely, I'm Amy Gore with Council Central staff.

Hi, I'm Amadi Avalos, YFE planner.

I use pronouns he, him, his.

Sorry, I just turned on the microphone, so hopefully that was good for the record.

It's fine.

Okay, sorry.

Thank you.

My name is Amadi Avalos.

I am a planner with the Youth and Family Empowerment Division, and I use pronouns he, him, and his.

And I'm Tanya Kim with the Seattle Human Services Department.

Nice to see you, Tanya.

Thank you so much.

Okay, who's kicking this off?

I will just very briefly.

As you recall, last year during budget, Council passed Green Sheet 14-A-E-1, which placed a proviso on SBT funds allocated for a media campaign.

The proviso requested HSD submit a report to this committee detailing the department's plans for those funds.

The green sheet is attached to the memo that you should have.

If you don't have it, let me know.

And I've also provided the recommendations that the community advisory board provided to HSD.

But otherwise, I will leave it to you guys to talk about the plan for those funds.

All right, please go ahead.

Great, so we do not have a data deck, so we have the memo in front of us.

Do you happen to have the central staff?

Yes.

Okay, great, you have it.

I just want to make sure I was referencing what you have in front of you.

Essentially, we're here in hopes to lift the proviso so we can get going, because it's getting towards the end of the year.

And the Sweetened Beverage Tax, they have the Community Advisory Board, and the Community Advisory Board has recommendations on where funds should be allocated.

One of the projects here being presented today through this proviso response is really focusing on the public awareness and countermarketing campaign.

And so we're here today to share with you what our approach is going to be in hopes to get the proviso lifted.

Amadi here is really the brains, but I'm the spokesperson.

And so if I get something wrong, he will chime in.

Thank you.

Okay, so we have, what I have for, what I'm looking off of is the one dated August 19th that the Seattle Human Services Department submitted to you, Chair Bagshaw.

And I'll walk through this.

I know we have a short period of time, but what I can assure you on is that this, do you have that?

I'm looking at Amy's memo and flipping through these other things at the same time.

Amy's memo, I've got the August 19th memo as well.

Oh, perfect.

Okay, great.

So, for the August 19th, what I could assure you rather than reading through everything just at very high level is that we took the intent and the vision of what the Community Advisory Board recommended and how they would like to see this carried through.

And we essentially took that and we developed this proviso response to demonstrate that we, believe that they're subject matter experts.

They thought this through.

They have an example of successful campaigns elsewhere.

And so it's our job to really support the CAB to see this vision through.

So the first part of the memo is just to summarize what the Green Sheet Proviso is.

The second part on page one is focusing on some of the highlights.

So the Community Advisory Board, or CAB, which is what I'm going to say moving forward, sent the mayor's office a memo to outline what it is that they were really wanting to focus on.

It's one, to raise awareness of harmful health effects of the sugary sweetened beverages and of the healthier beverage choices.

Two is to raise awareness of the deceptive and manipulative marketing of SSBs to people of color and low-income communities.

with a particular interest with youth and young adults and generating action and resistance.

And then three, it's to raise awareness of what SBT is doing in Seattle.

And so we took that, and on the second page, it's the deliverables.

And so you'll see just in table format essentially what they were asking for, one, two, and three.

Our interpretation of this, which is a second column, so it's the public awareness campaign, the countermarketing campaign, and the public awareness campaign.

And what that looks like is advertising, engaging youth, social media.

and making sure that our website is informative.

So in order to make this happen, the action item really for us is to have a request for proposal and really put this out to bid so we can work with an organization, whether it's a marketing firm or a community-based organization that does campaigns and mobilizing to apply.

And we have been working, actually not we, Mari has been working with our colleagues over at the Office of Sustainability and Environment, the office that supports the CAB, to get feedback on the actual RFP itself, those action steps, and ensuring the qualifications, et cetera, is in alignment.

And so for us today, we just kind of summarized the work that we see ahead.

in order to kind of get your approval really to move this work forward.

Very good.

I'm interested in how you're going to focus on youth and earlier today at our committee you saw a number of extremely well qualified and articulate young people.

On our youth commission, I'm wondering if there's a way to engage that commission with either somebody's voice or to be able to include them in some way.

I'm keenly aware that somebody that may be a generation or two outside of where they are, I may not realize or feel what can be impactful to them, and I'd love to have their voices included.

Noted.

We do have, I will say, an expectation for the firm or organization who we select to have experience working with community-based organizations and youth.

But your point is well taken that we have young people here, even on our own commission, and so that's something that we'll keep in mind.

Absolutely.

And I would follow up with that, that the other intention is that whoever does apply the applicants for this RFP, it's expected that they either have that network, as Tanya spoke to, of community-based organizations and youth networks that they can actually reach out to and conduct community engagement with to gather information to design the campaign.

Secondarily, if they do not have those networks, the expectation is that they will subcontract out, that they will be compensating youth organizations and community-based organizations in that community engagement and designing.

Okay.

Very good.

Thank you.

So, lastly, on page three, we have a timeline to offer you.

Really, we're starting here in October, but let me just say that we've developed the RFP, as I had mentioned, and it is posted because we're mindful of the months going by.

And so, we have the RFP posted that it's September, but then we go to October, and we communicate with the selected firm, from October to January we're expecting to do community engagement design and moving forward with the campaign itself.

So I guess the remaining question is that and what our action today would be is to lift the proviso and it would actually release $249,765 that could be used for HSD's media campaign.

Do you believe that you've done everything that needs to be done in order to move forward with this?

We do and we're going to continue working with the Community Advisor Board to be in deeper engagement moving forward as well.

And so they are aware that we'll have them on the rating.

They'll walk with us in making decisions, recommendations.

And so we satisfied this, but more work is to be done.

Great.

And we've got our community advisory board.

I know that they've been participating.

They made some recommendations.

And asking all three of you, is this proposal in your mind consistent with the CAB recommendations?

Yes.

Okay.

Any questions, Council Member Gonzalez?

Not necessarily any questions per se, more comments.

I think as the proposal moves forward, and I'm ready to, in general, support a lift of the proviso.

But I do want to mention that it seems to me from the materials that I've read that there seems to be a pretty heavy reliance on communication firms and consultants.

And there's nothing necessarily or inherently wrong with that.

But I also want to acknowledge that the CAB recommendations did emphasize the need to have a hybrid approach between using consultants and professional services, for lack of a better phrase.

and community-based organizations as trusted messengers in this particular space.

And so I want to make sure that HSD is going to head in a direction that more closely aligns with that hybrid vision and recommendation that I read the CAB as recommending, and also an expectation that That you know, I think one of my frustrations at the city is that we oftentimes rely on community members to do this work for free While paying professional services exorbitant amounts of money To do effectively the same work or to in some instances not do the work But shift that burden to community and then expect community to do it for free so I do I think there needs to be a little bit more work on the rollout and implementation of this to make sure that whatever grant is awarded or whatever contract is awarded acknowledges the need to compensate community-based organizations and community members for the expertise that they bring to the table and to the conversation in terms of this public awareness campaign.

That is a really good idea.

I wonder if as you're developing the RFP that one of the conditions can be that we're going to ask how are the people that are going to be doing this work going to include community and will they pay them?

You know, I think that is a point Council Member Gonzales that you just brought up that is a really good one because we do hear that and we're asking people to come to meetings and whether it's evening meetings or you know the interminable number of committee meetings that we can have.

We're really trying to reach out to community.

But if we're expecting them to do these things for free, but I also don't want to set a precedent that everybody expects that they're going to get paid for all the volunteer activities.

So I would like us to target that.

And it's the people that are both from a language standpoint that they're fluent, but also fluent with the neighborhood culture.

It's something to take a look at seriously.

So if I can ask you to do that.

Absolutely.

So to speak to that, within the currently released RFP, we did receive feedback from the CAB on the RFP itself, specifically around language and questions that we would like to ask of the applicants.

So within those proposals, we are expecting that the budget that's being proposed actually does include things like stipends to community, ways to actually compensate them financially so that they are not just being used as voice boxes and then being sent out back into communities you're speaking to.

And we are also explicitly having the CAB design all the questions for the interview process so that we make sure that we're not missing points like that, specifically around community engagement and how we're compensating our community.

Excellent.

So Council Member Gonzalez, are you comfortable moving ahead today and then having them report back to us or letting us see an RFP?

Yeah, sure.

The only other thing that I would add to this is that I want to, because communities of color, particularly ones that may not speak English or speak English as a second language, I think there needs to be a specific focus and strategy around a public awareness campaign that is culturally and linguistically competent to reach those populations.

That to me just continues to be a gap in terms of how we structure a lot of this work.

So I think if we're really serious about impacting people's choices and equipping them with the most scientifically accurate information to make healthy choices, we'll see the greatest impact by making sure that we focus on those populations who are disproportionately targeted and unfairly targeted by this industry, which tend to be low-income communities of color, primarily immigrant refugee communities who don't have a good grasp of the English language.

So is that something that's being taken into account in the RFP process?

Absolutely.

Again, so there will be expected within those proposals, proposals around how linguistically appropriate language would be, and they're also culturally relevant language.

A big part of the initial outreach stage with community-based organizations will be around finding culturally relevant ways of communication, culturally relevant channels of communication, so that these are actually going to the right ethnic language stations, things like that.

And so, yes, that will be an ask of the applicants.

Are the applicants being asked to come equipped with translation services or with expertise in in-language creative creation?

I would have to get back to you on that and the specifics.

I really want to discourage the use of firms who have zero cultural and linguistic capacity and instead are writing things in English and then translating them.

It never works, always falls flat.

It is a very English-centric way to approach public awareness campaign and it will fail.

And we don't have a lot of money here.

And there's literally people's lives and health at stake.

So if we're serious about cultural and linguistic outreach and public awareness, then we have to be serious about hiring somebody who fundamentally understands what it means to speak the language.

And I mean that in the most literal sense.

Translation of these concepts will not work.

It just won't work.

So I'd like to hear as part of a follow-up report how the RFPs are prioritizing applicants who have that baked into their theory of change and the way that they do the work.

I'm going to be very skeptical and I will continue to publicly express my skepticism about any firms who are hired to do public awareness that are just simply putting things into Google Translate or hiring an interpreter to translate language for a public awareness campaign that originates in English.

It has to originate in the original native language.

I understand and I think, you know, that's the nice shared value that we have at the Human Services Department.

And so when we have, you know, just the services that we provide, I was here earlier at a different committee, is ensuring that these are culturally responsive and mean something to the community.

And so what I love about Amare's approach as well as what the CAB is asking for is that it's also community led.

So I would be shocked if we didn't meet that expectation, but we'll be explicit and we'd be happy to come back.

I guess I'm still struggling with that.

And so I just, I, you know, to me, again, the way that this RFP is being structured is that it's going to be very heavy on communication firms.

And I think, again, I think we all do share the value of having linguistically and culturally competent services.

I just don't think we do it particularly well.

And that's not just a criticism of HSD.

I think it's as a city family, we don't do it particularly well.

And so I wanna be really clear that I think we need to really be direct about the fact that it cannot just be a burden of community-based organizations.

It can be informed by community-based organizations, but a public awareness campaign has to utilize experts in terms of the ones who are going to be making the big money who really fundamentally understand what it means to be culturally and linguistically competent.

I will speak, just speaking to that, I will also say that part of the qualifications that we are asking for of firms is that they do have staff that are representative of the communities that they're actually reaching out to, specifically the communities most impacted by the sugar-sweetened beverages.

So I do hope that that would, again, create results where, as you said, these are organizations that live within these communities, have an understanding of the communities, and that it's not just lip service and translation.

But we would definitely consider that very seriously.

Thank you.

I would just like to underscore that maybe in a slightly different way.

This was a point that Councilmember Gonzalez brought up during our budget last year and the year before, the need to have the culturally relevant people that are impacted by this included.

And so maybe we could ask that as that RFP is drafted, that it come back to this committee.

When do you expect it to be done?

It's done and it's posted right now.

Because it's open for a period of time.

And that was done in concert with the CAB.

Let's take another look at the selection criteria, would you?

And make sure that in that selection criteria that includes what Councilmember Gonzalez is talking about.

If you don't feel that it reflects what she and I share the value, then let's consider doing an amendment on the evaluation criteria.

So that's out and out front and people know what we're going to be looking for and how we're going to score it.

Absolutely.

So perhaps you could just get back to us informally and let us know.

We could do that.

Thank you.

Okay so uh you ready to vote?

Good so this is item number nine is council bill 119629 to lift the proviso for the sweetened beverage tax allowing you to proceed with this RFP.

So I move that the committee pass this council bill 119629.

Second.

All those in favor say aye.

None opposed and no abstentions.

So thank you.

The motion passes and we will move it forward on Monday.

And thank you.

And Tonya, two things and if you'll just get back to us.

Talk to us about the criteria because I admit I haven't delved into them as deeply as I probably could have.

And please say hello to Alan Lee.

We miss him.

He misses you too.

Okay.

Next item.

Can you read that in?

Thank you.

Item number 10, Council Bill 119642, an ordinance relating to city emergency purchases of goods and services, emergency consultant contracts and emergency public works contracting.

Again, thank you to our emergency services.

And I want to extend my thanks for you for all being here, for staying.

I know that you've been sitting in the audience for a long time.

It's great to have you and I want to say again, thank you for coming to my office yesterday and to acknowledge that Team Gonzalez was well represented.

And Brianna brought up some issues.

We have a couple of amendments consistent with what we talked about yesterday.

So if you want to dive in, then we will just keep moving this forward.

Thank you.

And Tom, do you want to start introductions?

Thank you, Madam Chair.

So I'm Tom Ixell with Central Staff.

Barb Graf, Emergency Management.

Alinka Drolnik with Finance and Administrative Services.

Liz Alzier with Finance and Administrative Services.

Good.

Thank you all for being here.

Tom, are you introducing or are we just going to pass it to Barb or Alinka?

OK.

Thank you for your time.

This legislation will do two things, sync the part of the code that deals with emergency management with the part of the code that deals with purchasing and contracting, so they are saying the same thing and are not confusing.

The second part is simplifying and streamlining emergency purchasing and contracting in situations when the mayor declares a civil emergency.

So this means departments will be able to make the purchases and contracts they need to get things done quickly and get our Seattle residents the services they need.

We worked with the Office of Emergency Management to make these changes.

So I'd like to introduce Barb Graf to share why it's important.

Great.

Thank you.

It's really a matter of housekeeping.

You both probably remember that we came to you in 2015 to amend Chapter to prepare for accreditation for the city's emergency management program.

I remember that.

Crystal clear.

Like it was yesterday.

This is one remaining piece of that same chapter that simply brings up to date.

the processes that we use today.

The current code refers to forms that we don't even use, identification numbers that don't exist.

Examples of how this would be used might be the purchase of salt during snowstorms.

That was an example I asked you for yesterday.

Would you want to just describe that?

You don't necessarily want to wait for a low bid process that takes several weeks when you need to reload on salt to treat the streets in order to get emergency vehicles running tomorrow, exactly.

In a more major event, in an earthquake, we don't want to wait to get structural engineers in to help us out, et cetera.

So this simply updates the code in such a way that in a responsible and efficient manner, we can get emergency services at work.

So with that, and again, we're in partnership on this entirely.

We've worked with FAS all the time.

I'd like to introduce Liz Alzear, Emergency Contracting and Purchasing Manager.

Liz.

Thank you.

Good to be here.

So thank you, Barb and Alinka.

And as they explained, it truly is a housekeeping measure.

The updated ordinance will do two main things, updating the emergency procurement procedures to current practice, including streamlining processes, which I'll explain more in the next slide.

It also brings together parts of the code that deal with emergency procedures into one location.

so that it's clear how to conduct emergency procurement following a declared civil emergency across all procurement categories, goods and services, consultant contracting, as well as public works contracting.

Thank you.

More specifically, in addition to consolidating the procedures, this ordinance will simplify the department documentation process so there's not needless documentation.

It will align authorization procedures with current practices, maintain competitive solicitation to the extent possible, recognizing that in an extreme emergency, it may not be practical, but in other circumstances, it may be.

And it will also get in line with federal FEMA requirements.

So that concludes our presentation.

Okay.

Thank you and open it up to any questions you may have.

Thank you.

I think Councilmember Gonzalez has a couple of major amendments.

Especially number one.

Number one is...

adding two commas.

Earth-shattering, but necessary.

Yes, I have a couple of amendments.

I'm happy to go through each one.

So, well, thanks to Tom, first of all, for drafting these amendments for my office.

Really appreciate the quick work.

So amendment one to this council bill is a technical change to the bill as it was introduced.

On page three, line 18, after emergency, it would insert a comma, and after acquisition, it would also insert a comma.

So the sentence reads, the city officer or employee shall conduct competitive solicitation to the extent practical given the emergency, comma, and in keeping with the dollar value of the acquisition, comma, and in compliance with any applicable city, state, and federal laws and regulations.

Thank you to Brianna.

Let her know she is an excellent editor.

would you like to move that?

And I would like to move Amendment 1 to Council Bill 119642.

Okay and I will second all those in favor of the amendment say aye.

Aye.

Did you have something you were gonna say?

I just raised your hand and I thought, oh, either you're voting or trying to signal me something.

Okay.

So the amendment number one passes.

Great.

Amendment number two is a little bit more substantive.

So in the original bill, there was a striking out of the concept of requiring City Council and the Director of Finance and Administrative Services to authorize payment.

We certainly don't want to bring back the authorization requirement in the spirit of I think the intent of the overall bill which is to expedite processes in times of civil emergencies, but we do want to nonetheless in the spirit of transparency to the public and in accountability and in fulfilling our oversight responsibility bring back the requirement to still nonetheless report on a summary of the expenses and those contracts back to the Director of Finance and Administrative Services and the City Council.

The amendment would, on page four, section F, bring back the language and submit a summary of emergency purchase orders through the Director of Finance and Administrative Services to the City Council, period.

Great.

And so, are you suggesting, this language is clear, what you're suggesting, but is the intention just for a report back, not approval?

It would be a report back, but not for authorization of the payment of whatever those contracts might be.

Or orders might be.

And we checked with folks and they were fine.

They were fine with that and the law was fine with it.

Yes.

Tom went through the full process of making sure that this was vetted and approved.

But I won't speak for you, Tom.

We did get law review.

Very good.

Would you like to move amendment number two?

I will move amendment number two to council bill one one nine six four two good.

I'll second all those in favor.

Say aye.

Aye I'm in the post.

Uh, so we have in front of us a past amendment number two As well as amendment number one.

Does anybody else like to do you want to add anything else on this?

Otherwise, we will move forward with this as amended Okay.

Well, then I will move that the committee pass Council Bill 119642 as amended.

Second.

All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

None opposed.

No abstentions.

Thank you for coming.

Thank you for waiting.

I really appreciate all your work and very nice to talk to you yesterday.

Thank you.

Very good.

Barb, congratulations on your final, final announcement of retirement.

Oh, she'll never retire.

She's just leaving us.

She means it this time.

Don't believe it.

Don't believe it for a minute.

Okay, we have item number 11. Allison, I think you'll read this.

Yeah.

Item number 11, Council Bill 119645, an ordinance relating to limiting neighborhood blight, authorizing the acquisition of real property commonly known as 213 South Main Street.

Very good.

Keetle, I think you're here.

Oh, we have our urban forestry folks have just arrived.

So we're going to do one item and then we'll bring you up.

Should I read the resolution as well?

Yes, please.

We'll do both of them.

That'd be great.

Item number 12, resolution 31906, a resolution declaring the premises located at 213 South Main Street, Seattle, Washington, commonly known as Old Cannery Building, to be a neighborhood blight requiring acquisition by the city of Seattle in accordance to RCW35.ADA.010.

Very good.

Ketel?

Sure, so I'll- Kegel Freeman.

Sure, Kegel Freeman.

Here at the table from Council Central Staff.

So I'll, maybe just by way of introduction, talk a little bit about the property and what these two pieces of legislation would do.

As the titles indicate, both of these pieces of legislation are related to a potential condemnation by the city of property located at 213 South Main Street, which is commonly known as the Old Cannery Building.

The city would be invoking a somewhat different authority than we normally invoke for condemnation proceedings.

Specifically, the city would be relying on authority in RCW Chapter 3580A, which is condemnation authority to address neighborhood blight.

So that's effectuated through two pieces of legislation, the resolution, which makes certain findings and declarations, and then a council bill which authorizes both the Department of Finance and Administrative Services and the City Attorney's Office to proceed with acquisition of the property.

But first, the property.

This will be familiar to you.

There's an image of the property and an attachment to the memo.

It's located at 213 South Main Street.

It's a relatively small site, approximately 5,790 square feet.

It's in a Pioneer Square mixed 100-120 zone.

which means that it can be developed up to a height of about 10 or 12 stories.

And the site is developed with a single-story building and has not been occupied since 1989.

We're talking 30 years now.

Yeah, quite a while.

And it's a building that's in a deteriorated condition, but the site has been the subject of relatively recent permit activity.

In 2017, the Seattle Department of Construction Inspections issued a massed-use permit decision for a seven-story building, seven-story, 54-unit mixed-use building on the property.

but that project has not proceeded to construction.

The site is owned by Ron and Adele Amundsen, and it has kind of an infamous role in Seattle's history, of course, because it is the site of the murder of Salome Domingo and Jean Vieners, who were organizing for Filipino cannery workers, and that murder happened in 1981, I think, ultimately.

It was attributed to their criticism of the Marcos regime.

So, Resolution 31906 makes certain findings and declarations that are necessary to proceed using this state authority that we have to condemn property and require it to address blight.

That statute requires that three factors be met to proceed with condemnation under that authority.

One, the building has to have been unoccupied for a period of one year or more.

It hasn't been occupied since 1989. The property, dwelling, or structure has to constitute a threat to the public health, safety, or welfare as determined by the executive authority of the city.

And a lot of the analysis of this was coordinated by the Office of Intergovernmental Relations.

And in an attachment to that resolution, there are letters from the Chief of Police and Chief Scoggins and Chief Best that identify the public safety risk to their employees and should they need to enter the building.

And there's a third criteria as well, which has to do with the property being associated with illegal drug activity during the previous 12 months.

The letter from Chief Best notes that the general area is associated with a concentrated area of criminal activity, but this third prong is not necessary for meeting the test, and it's probably the sort of the weakest component of that three-part test, or two-part test.

So the resolution declaring that acquisition of the property is necessary to eliminate blight, that is a precondition to proceeding with this authority.

And so the resolution essentially makes findings and declarations consistent with what is in the OIR report.

And it attaches to documents that OIR report and also a letter from Deputy Mayor Mosley, who is the designee of the executive authority.

Thank you.

I appreciate the summary.

And Council Member Gonzalez, this has been something that we have been working on for close to a year now, reaching out, talking with the property owner, talking with people around the property and our Pioneer Square Alliance and many of the building owners along Second Avenue.

And I just want to underscore in the event that the property owner is watching or hearing from us, it is not our goal to condemn his property and turn it over to someone else to make a profit.

What we really want him to do is to follow up with the 2017 permitting that he had on the table in front of the Pioneer Square board and to move forward to clear the property and to build the residential units as designed.

And the requirements here from a public benefit standpoint is that he reach out to the Filipino community and others with the Cannery Building Workers Union to work with them to determine what can be done to recognize and memorialize what had happened there in 1988. And it is really our goal is to use this as an opportunity for him to recognize we're serious and we will move forward, but he has all the right in the world right now to make that decision.

So I have asked that when we've been working with our law department, that the property owner understand that we will move forward.

We're not voting today.

but we will move forward with condemnation authority if he fails to step forward and do something about this blighted building.

So we're not voting today.

I want to make sure that the full council understands.

We technically could, but since this is the first time people have spoken about it, we just made the decision that we will vote on it at our next meeting.

So do you have anything else that you would like to add?

No, I just I mentioned I mentioned previously that the council bill essentially just provides the authority to FAS and the city attorney to proceed with.

acquisition of the property.

There are some procedural steps that need to happen before what's called final action under a state statute, but final action would be authorization by the council to proceed with condemnation, and those are procedural notice steps.

At a minimum, they would take probably about three to two weeks, and those notice steps have not yet begun.

The notice has not, but the appraisal is underway, as I understand it.

We may even have a final appraisal back.

committee vote can happen prior to that happening and it just a full council vote can happen that's correct yeah good so it's my intention that at our next scheduled meeting that we will vote on this at that time okay very good just quick questions um so

Assuming that in the next committee hearing we decide to vote this out of committee, and then assume that all of the procedural due process issues and requirements of notifying the owner on this action are taken, and then assuming that full council action actually occurs, what would happen after that?

So it's not self-executing.

Obviously, it provides authority to the executive and the city attorney to pursue condemnation, but it doesn't compel them to pursue condemnation.

But they would be authorized to and to address the blight associated with the property.

That would be an option in mitigating that blight.

So de-wonk that for me, because you used a lot of terms of art there.

So what does it actually mean to effectuate condemnation and address the blight?

All the ordinance would do would be to authorize the city attorney and the Department of Finance and Administrative Services to proceed with condemnation and acquire the property.

So that would require some legal action from the city attorney's office?

It would require some legal action from both FAS and the city attorney's office.

With FAS being the plaintiff, essentially?

Yeah, essentially.

And FAS would be also, they could, you know, it authorizes acquisition.

It doesn't necessarily authorize condemnation.

So it could begin with a negotiation with the property owner about a sale that is not forced by the court.

I think the only other example that I know of where we sort of entered into condemnation, and correct me if I'm wrong, was around the Sicily properties.

Was that a condemnation action or was that something different?

That was, but it was for a different purpose.

It was an authorization, and I may get some of these details wrong, but I was looking at it relatively recently.

It was authorization for the city attorney to pursue condemnation so that the city could collect on liens that were the result of judgments against those properties.

Right.

I just bring that up as an example, I think to, in the spirit of Chair Bagshaw's comments about the seriousness of the city of Seattle to have these conditions addressed.

I think it should be noted that even though this is a nuclear, kind of a nuclear option for the city, it's one of last resort.

It is one that the city has precedent and recent history of pursuing in the event that a property owner continues to refuse to address what continue to be pretty significant blight conditions in a core part of our city.

And you know, whether it's in District 7 or in any other district, we have an expectation that our property owners aren't going to simply leave their property derelict and subject to what may come.

and that we do have tools available to us as a city council and as a city as a whole to really address, meaningfully address some of these issues that arise.

And so I hope that the caution here is taken seriously.

If we can, you know, sort of, get cooperation, that's always ideal, but I think that we have to be prepared to act.

That is a area of downtown that's only a block away from here, a couple blocks away from here that I think, you know, is pretty notorious for being a blighted area of the city.

And we have real tools at our disposal to use in this area.

And I think one of the criticisms we get as a city council and as a city as a whole is that we oftentimes, And I would like to, you know, sort of sit idly by and allow these things to fester.

And I would like to, you know, make sure that at least the property owner understands that that's not the rules of engagement.

And we're not going to allow that to continue to be the rules of engagement after 30 years of to actually make a difference.

So thank you Chair Bagshaw for bringing this up.

I know that it's a pretty extraordinary step and not aligned with your usual style of consensus building, but I can, that to me also speaks volumes that you're willing to take this extraordinary step now to me really signals that we're sort of at that area of last resort.

Thank you.

Okay, I'll pick this up next time and with all intentions of moving forward.

Okay.

All right.

Thanks so much.

We have now reached four o'clock.

We have two items left on the agenda.

I want to spend some time with our Urban Forestry Commission now that they are here, focus on trees.

I think that we've got the final item was an introduction of the RV legislation that to Jeff Sims and others who have put a lot of time in on this, I'd like to say thank you.

We're not going to get to it today.

So let's just focus on trees.

Thank you, Cody.

Sorry to keep you sitting through all of this.

Cody's like, fine.

Good.

All right.

Well, so Allie and everybody, why don't all of you come up?

Come on, Forestry Commission.

We love having you.

And Yolanda.

Item 13, resolution 31902, a resolution declaring the city councils and the mayor's intent to consider strategies to protect trees and increase Seattle's tree canopy cover.

Thank you.

Thank you.

As you're getting settled in, why don't we just start here, Ali and Yolanda, and go that way with the introductions.

And really happy to see all of you.

Alec Panucci, Council Central Staff.

Yolanda Ho, Council Central Staff.

Weston Brinkley, Chair, Seattle Urban Forestry Commission.

Nice to see you, Weston.

Steve Zamke, Vice Chair of the Seattle Urban Forestry Commission.

Good to see you, Steve.

Michael Walton, Urban Forestry Commission.

Michael.

Steven Fry, Urban Forestry Commission.

Joshua Morris, NGO representative on the Urban Forestry Commission.

Good to see some of you out there and some of you back up here.

Sandra Pinto, the Bader Staffing Commission.

Shari Souch, Community Representative, Urban Forestry Commission.

Thank you, Shari.

All right.

Allie, are you going to kick this off?

Good morning, committee members.

Afternoon, good afternoon.

Sorry, I've been here several times today.

It feels like all the way around the clock, and you're starting in the morning again.

We are here today to talk about Resolution 31902 that represents a joint commitment by the council and the mayor to work on updating tree regulations with the goal of having proposed legislation in 2020. I'm going to provide a quick background on how we got to this point, and then I'll turn it over to Yolanda, who will provide some more description of the content of the resolution.

As noted during public comment and during other public comments, the process to update the city's tree regulations has started and stopped several times in the last five plus years.

I think that this, while there was communicated some frustration, this demonstrates the complexity of this issue.

What we've learned from previous attempts to update the regulations and from looking at other cities is that coming up with a proposal that is actually going to move forward towards adoption and implementation requires taking the time to do outreach that represents a variety of stakeholders and positions and do the detailed technical analysis to really look at what it will take to get an updated and more robust program off the ground and what resources are required.

We have heard from various stakeholders that Portland, Oregon's tree regulations provide a good model as an example of having strong protections for our urban forest.

As noted in the central staff memo, those regulations are the result of a multiyear process that included a robust process to engage stakeholders, conduct technical analysis, and develop a proposal that I think was amended several times before implementation.

So learning from that, this resolution represents a process that will build on some of the previous work the city has done.

So it's not suggesting that we embark on a multi-year program, but sort of try to accelerate a process over the next year to develop a proposal that will really try to balance the city's goal to protect, maintain, and enhance the urban forest while still supporting our goals to support our growing population and address our housing needs.

So with that, I'll turn it over to Yolanda.

So resolution 31902 takes what Ali had mentioned in terms of looking at what the city of Portland did and to complete a robust public outreach process prior to drafting legislation and implementing new regulations.

This lays out a number of strategies that the city is committed to exploring in 2020, which will include retaining protections for exceptional trees and expanding the definition of exceptional trees, Adopting a definition of significant trees as trees at least six inches in diameter and creating a permitting process for the removal of these trees.

Adding replacement requirements for significant tree removal.

Simplifying tree planting or replacement requirements including consideration of mitigation strategies that allow for infill development while balancing tree planting and replacement goals.

Reviewing and potentially modifying tree removal limits in single family zones.

establishing an in lieu fee option for tree planting, tracking tree removal and replacement on both public and private land throughout Seattle, providing adequate funding to administer and enforce tree regulations and requiring all tree service providers operating in Seattle to meet minimum certification and training requirements and register with the city.

So that is not the exhaustive list, but this is an example of some of the issues that have been identified and that need, in some cases, some further study, as we know.

and just kind of analysis on how that would work.

And so SCCI is committed, Seattle Department of Construction Inspections is committed to, you know, looking at this list plus anything else they might be considering.

And also the resolution outlines the following specific actions to pursue that will result in legislation to update our policies, practices, regulations related to trees in Seattle.

So, and just kind of a general work plan.

So, developing a project scope, conducting the necessary technical analysis.

Some of that has been done over the years.

I want to acknowledge that.

But I think there's some more questions about specifically the in lieu fee option and, you know, other aspects of the potential legislation.

And analyzing the Urban Forestry Commission's recommendations previously shared with the mayor and council.

including the draft ordinance and other feedback we have received.

Developing and executing a community engagement plan, ensuring that we've reached a wide variety of folks out there in the community, other than those who have voluntarily come to us, going out there and being really proactive, I think is an important aspect.

Using the feedback received by this community engagement process and results of the technical analysis as well as input from the Urban Forestry Commission to begin to prepare recommendations and assess resources needed to administer and force the proposed changes.

So obviously there'll be budget implications or thinking specifically of permitting and needing to invest in the updates to the permitting system to allow for permitting of tree removal.

And then, of course, conducting the State Environmental Policy Act analysis, also known as SEPA, and issuing a SEPA determination.

Assuming all that goes well, the plan is to successfully make it through the SEPA determination without appeal or any complications.

the idea is to have legislation to council in 2020, noting that obviously there could be procedural hiccups, or if we hear more from the community, or that the technical analysis reveals something more that needs to be studied, that might take some more time.

But that's currently the plan, and that Seattle Department of Construction Inspections and the Office of Sustainability and Environment will report quarterly to the chair of the Planning, Land Use, and Zoning Committee or successor committee on progress made on completing these actions and provide timely notice if they anticipate the work extending beyond 2020.

I want to thank you both for laying that out.

Many of my friends from the Forestry Commission know that it was really my objective to move this forward with an ordinance and have it passed before the end of December, before I got the hook.

I was backed off of that ledge because when you were explaining all of the things that we had to do, all of the analysis and let alone the SEPA process that we wanted to do this right and strong and I want it done in 2020 and my successor and whoever is going to be heading over the PLUS committee needs to understand how important this is to us.

The only time that I have ever been stopped in the street by somebody who is about half my size and given a finger wag about the trees that were in her yard and how important they were to save.

And I just want to acknowledge the fact that all of you on the Forestry Commission are doing the kind of work that we need to have done.

And I just want us to keep pushing to make sure that we see it done in 2020. But in the meantime, we have a resolution in front of us.

Yeah, I think it's worth noting and recognizing that while this is maybe not as satisfying to some, having the joint commitment from the mayor and the council is important because this is going to be a highly technical ordinance and to be successful it needs to be implemented, there needs to be resources behind it to make sure that it is executed in force and all of those things.

And so having the departments that will be responsible for implementing, leading the effort, and having the Office of Sustainability and Environment and their work with the Urban Forestry Commission able to really engage and lead this process, I think, could result in an outcome that we actually have a piece of legislation that can move forward successfully.

Great.

Thank you.

Would any of you like to add to this, Sandra?

I just wanted to add also that we are inviting the Office of Planning and Community Development and SPU Streets for Seattle Outreach Arm to kind of join the team and support this effort.

Anybody else?

Just quickly to speak on behalf of the commission, I want to voice our strong support for this resolution.

It's a nice culmination of efforts despite not being the ultimate goal.

And we want to thank you very much for your commitment to this issue.

And if this is the last thing you get to formally move forward on the issue, we're very proud of it and we hope you are too.

Thank you for that.

I'll tell you the thing I feel the best about, not only having been informed by you and your commitment to this, but the fact that you wrote a strong letter and that the mayor's office said they'll work with us on this.

Mayor Durkan believes in this as strongly as I do.

And I think we can have faith that it is going to move forward on the timeline.

I talked with Deputy Mayor Mosley last week, and he just recognized how important this is to all of us.

And I think if we can just keep that pressure on from the Forestry Commission, that this is something that's valuable.

All of the things that we heard in public comment, just how important trees are, we all know that.

We all buy into it.

And I like the idea of the million trees that we're trying to get planted in King County.

But we also know that 100 seedlings don't replace one of these beautiful old Douglas firs that have been around.

So we'll make sure that this happens.

Any other comments from any of you before?

I would just give one comment in the sense of just I think the process of open public process is extremely important.

One of the things is we don't want, you know, public backlash from people finding something that's onerous or burdensome.

And the best way to make certain that doesn't happen is to ensure that in the process of the drafting and the public being able to comment on it, that it's a public process and not a rushed process in the sense that we're doing it tomorrow, but that it does get that public involvement is very important.

Very good.

Well, thank you.

Thank you for saying that because I have the Sorry, we've got other things going on here.

I appreciate it, because I didn't want to rush it to a point where somebody said, oh, you forgot us.

And you know, we see that all the time on these things, where we can have public outreach, and then somebody who is very deeply engaged in this said, well, everybody except us were included.

So I'm hopeful that we can get there.

One of the things I recommended when we were in front of the commission was to do some cafe-style public opportunities.

I think that, and what those mean, I know that they take a little more time to get organized, but Department of Neighborhoods working with I think these are important where people can come and we actually talk specific questions, take down public feedback, put reports together to say, this is what we heard.

And then we go to another neighborhood.

But so we're going out to the neighborhoods expressing our desires of what it is we're trying to accomplish, get their input on what they want to see for their neighborhoods.

Council Member Gonzalez, did you?

Thank you.

Yes, I do.

I have, I was sitting here, trying to think of tree puns, but I couldn't come up with one.

So I've missed my moment to make a tree pun.

You can bark up a tree.

Come on.

I have just one thing that that I'd like to see incorporated not just in a recital, but in an actual be it resolved section.

So the last whereas on page.

talks about the need to, talks about this resolution in the context of the goals that are articulated in the Green New Deal for Seattle, which was adopted in August via resolution 31895, which that particular effort also encourages preservation and planting of trees citywide to increase the tree canopy.

cover but specifically calls out prioritization of engagement with residents of low-income and low canopy neighborhoods and I noticed that that is been relegated to a whereas as opposed to being included in one of the sections in the actual body of the resolution so I continue to be concerned that in this particular space, we keep going back to the same well and talking to individuals who have perhaps the luxury of thinking about trees as opposed to people who live in neighborhoods who might not have the capacity to think about these issues, but who are certainly negatively, disproportionately impacted by the lack of tree canopy in their neighborhoods, both in stormwater infrastructure and also in terms of air quality.

So we'd really like to make that more intentional.

Do you want to make a motion?

I don't like doing wordsmithing at the table, so I'd rather just work with staff between now and Monday to come up with some language that really is intentional about about that commitment in the Green New Deal for Seattle that really does focus on the marrying up of this area and this body of work as an area of priority, but also recognizing that there is disproportionate impact in terms of the people in the neighborhoods who are impacted by this issue and really being intentional in the work plan of doing outreach to those communities.

So I appreciate your concept.

If you'd like to add a couple of sentences and run them past us before Monday.

Yeah, Yolanda and I will draft something for you to review and continue to work with you.

So it's available Monday.

Appreciate that.

No, I think that's a very good addition.

So we are down here to item number 13. Do you have any other comments?

I don't.

All right.

Well, then with the understanding that we're going to be adding and amending before Monday, I'd like to move that the committee pass resolution 31902. Second.

All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

And there's none opposed.

We don't have any abstentions.

We're moving forward.

So again, thanks to all of you for the great work.

And we'll just make this canopy bloom.

Thanks.

All right.

So anything else?

Okay, next Wednesday at noon, we're having yet another Finance and Neighborhood Committee.

We will bring back the RV legislation.

We will bring back the cannery building legislation, and we have a number of items.

Okay, very good.

All right, anything else for the good of the order?

If not, the meeting's adjourned.

Thank you all.

Allison, you did a remarkable job of keeping us on task.

Thank you.

Thanks for watching!