Seattle City Council Select Committee on Civic Arenas - Special Meeting 9718

All right, good morning, everybody.

Good.

So, as you all know, let's do a call to order here.

Good morning.

This is the meeting of the Select Committee on Civic Arenas.

Welcome to order.

It is Friday, September 7th, and the time is now 9.33.

I'm Councilmember Deborah Juarez, the co-chair of this committee, along with Council President Bruce Harrell.

I also want to thank Councilmembers Bagshaw and Councilmember Johnson for being here today.

Before we begin, I think we need a little moment here to say go, Seattle Storm.

Tonight's a big night.

As you know, Seattle Storm will be playing the Washington Mystics, and we will be on our way to winning our third Women's National Basketball Championship.

So who says that Seattle does not have a winning basketball team?

Excited about that.

Go Stewie.

All right, this is our fourth meeting of the Select Committee on Civic Arenas since the MOU was approved by council and signed by the mayor in December of 2016. Today we will receive a presentation on two ordinances.

That would be Council Bill 119344, which revises the use of the admissions tax code relative to this project.

And for my colleagues, that's tab two of your notebook.

And Council Bill 119345, which includes the three transaction documents we've been discussing and referring to ad nauseam for about 18 months.

The development lease and integration agreements.

Again, for my colleagues, that's tab one in your notebook.

Public comment will be held today at the end of the following presentations.

Every council member received a notebook of materials earlier this week by central staff.

Oh, thank you, Council Member Herbold.

Every council member received a notebook of materials earlier this week by Central Staff Director Kirsten Arkstad to prepare for today's discussion.

This notebook includes hard copies of the proposed legislation and the briefing packet.

The briefing packet is about 30 pages long and it's divided into five sections and that would be tab four of your notebook.

This briefing packet was provided to my colleagues before the August council recess by the director.

I'd like to take this time to recognize the hard work of staff which brought us here today, which we would not be here today and prepared to discuss the developments if it were not for the efforts of Director Kirsten Arstad.

The executive, our experts, our legal team, and I want to thank my co-chair, Council President Harrell, Councilmember Bagshaw, and Councilmember Johnson for being part of the client group and attending all the meetings and briefings and with your many questions and follow-ups.

There have been many hours committed to this process, not just with my office and the executive, but a lot of other people here at City Hall to make sure that we arrived here today prepared.

It's been quite a process and there's still more to come.

I'd like to remind my colleagues that over the course of this year, we have received multiple briefings on the status of negotiations and particular items and conditions.

My hope is that through these committee briefings, as well as individual briefings, that my colleagues feel confident and prepared as we move towards a potential vote in committee on September 14th and a full vote on September 24th.

Today we're here to determine whether anything reflected in the transaction documents and the other documents listed, whether or not they're inconsistent with the council's guiding principles as expressed in the signed MOU of December 2016. So I'm going to briefly do something for my colleagues so they can follow because I'm guessing with this presentation there will be some questions coming up.

The material that I refer to is also available to the public and online.

My colleagues, as I shared, received a briefing notebook, which is divided into five sections.

And I want to draw your attention.

It is a cheat sheet quick tip.

Tab four, which is a 30-page briefing document, again, divided into five sections.

You received the first copy on August 16th.

We revised it on September 3rd.

That briefing packet in a nutshell covers the seven critical areas.

That is the financial due diligence, the community benefits, labor, tenants, transportation, design and construction, and the regulatory process.

As well as the appendix which lists the 11 key documents which correspond and support the subject matter of the areas I just listed.

I want to share with you what our thinking was on the format of the briefing packet.

Let me give you an example.

Like the first issue is due diligence.

The briefing packet, first of all, addresses all seven critical areas.

So if you looked at due diligence, you would see that it explains what the issue is. where you can find that issue of due diligence within the MOU that is the corresponding section in the MOU and the follow-up 14 FAQ questions that come after that.

Another example is community benefits.

There's eight topic areas and then within that you can look at it and it will direct you where in the MOU Those eight areas are addressed and then of course there is the after that there's eight FAQ follow-up questions and last on page 29 and 30 which is tab 4 and I made mine a yellow sheet because it's a great cheat sheet.

It's an excellent summation and clarification of the status of particular action, roles, and responsibilities.

There are 20 topics.

On page 29, 1 to 9 talks about action, discussion, timeline, and roles and responsibilities.

So an example would be, if you look on page 29, 1 to 9, you can see that controls, what is in the hands of, I'm sorry, yeah, what is the role of city council?

What is the role of other members?

So controls and incentives agreement.

Can council take action if appeal is filed?

Yes.

Conceptual approval of term tunnel.

Can council take action if appeal is filed?

Yes.

So you can see where our role is, where the role is of, It's not a role of counsel.

And then on page 30, if you look at the next page over, it's a document inventory.

And it gives you kind of the status and negotiations about what's been done, what's been signed, what is pending, what is the process, and what is the status.

So as we go through today's presentation, as I learned going through the briefing doc, and the last page is 29 and 30, I was able to quickly get to those documents and have a lot of my questions already answered.

And again, I want to thank the director for this.

This has made it right at our fingertips.

And of course, I want to thank Marshall as well, making it easy and executive and Mr. Nellum's too for us to be able to understand because all these complex, sophisticated issues with all of these moving parts.

So thank you very much for that, director.

So with that, we will move into our items of business.

So I'm gonna have Nagini read into the record what we're gonna be doing today on the presentation.

And again, we'll be taking public comment after the presentation.

We have evaluation of proposed legislation, Council Bill 119344 and 119345 concerning redevelopment of Key Arena at Seattle Center.

We'll have a briefing and discussion to follow.

Thank you.

I also want to note and thank Council Member O'Brien for joining us.

All right, so you, will you please introduce yourselves and then take us through your PowerPoint and your presentation.

Great.

Director of Seattle Center.

Marshall Foster, Director of the City's Office of Waterfront and Civic Projects.

And I'm Kirsten Aristad, your Central Staff Director.

So I'm going to dive right in.

Thank you for that introduction, Madam Chair, members of the committee.

We are here to begin by talking about your guiding principles as reflected in the MOU to provide context for today's discussion.

And then we'll briefly summarize the two bills that Nagin just mentioned.

After that, we will discuss the components of the two bills and how they relate to your guiding principles.

That's the analysis.

And I just want to say that the focus of our presentation is on giving you information to help inform your discussion and possible vote in the coming weeks on whether to approve the bill, and authorize the mayor to sign the agreement.

So that's a really important point.

So this is the information you're receiving today is to help you decide whether the council as a whole wants to give the mayor the green light on signing the agreement.

And as a point of order, because I don't want to be head on a swivel up here, if my colleagues have a question, just feel free to go ahead and, especially to Councilmember Herbold way down there, who I often don't look this way, please feel free to just go ahead and ask questions.

We're not that, that formal.

Yeah.

Okay.

So, Let's address your principles, which for this conversation, the three of us have distilled into four themes.

Financial due diligence.

And the question for that is, does this proposal minimize the city's financial risks and participation?

For community benefits, will the community be supported and given a voice?

For labor and tenants, the question is whether the agreement will treat workers, tenants, and impacted businesses equitably.

Under transportation and construction, does the project's design use innovative mobility strategies to move people and the various modes of transportation?

So those are the council's guiding principles as conveyed in the MOU.

So, slide three, the proposed legislation, encompasses the two pieces of legislation included in your transmittals.

And I'm going to speak about the 3451, the transaction documents one first, which is the main bill that encompasses the three transaction documents.

This includes the lease, which is about the use and occupancy of the new arena.

There's the development agreement that addresses the construction of the arena, and the integration agreement, which speaks to how the proposed project will integrate with Seattle Center, its tenants, and the surrounding community.

So a side note, the lease agreement has a particular term that's related to the admissions tax revenues, and that's the second council bill 119344. Just quickly, this bill makes a change to the city's admission tax code, and in brief, the change would expand the definition of authorized uses to include sports and music in addition to arts and culture.

which are currently current authorized activities under current law.

So, Directors Nellams and Foster and I are going to now go into the meat of the discussion which is the proposed deal terms and whether the proposed legislation, as I mentioned before, follows your expressed guiding principles as conveyed in the MOU so that you can determine whether or not the council should authorize the mayor to sign the transaction documents.

Slide four highlights the various financial categories of the arena deal.

We've talked about minimizing the city's financial participation and risks.

So the city hired David Abrams of Inner Circle Sports to evaluate the various aspects of the financial arrangement.

Previously, you received briefings, small group or individual briefings, from Mr. Abrams, where he went through his very dense analysis and explained why he deemed this project workable and credible.

I'm only going to recap some of the highlights from those conversations for the listening public.

So as we all know, the cost of construction and any cost overruns are the sole responsibility of ArenaCo.

The city is not obligated.

Mr. Abrams, during the course of his work, identified a number of risks.

And in his role, he helped the city, the law department, the executive, and others to address those risks.

And I don't want to talk about all of them, but one point of risk for the city was the period between when the deal would be set, when the mayor would sign the agreement, and when ArenaCo would begin its work demolishing and constructing the arena.

And based on Mr. Abrams' analysis, he found that the monies that would be available to the city in the event that ArenaCo would choose to, or had to, walk away from the deal were not present, which would leave a big hole in the ground or a partially finished building and no recourse for the city.

So this, the city listened to his recommendations and through law have incorporated the necessary language into the legal documents.

So in a nutshell, the documents reflect his recommendations.

Madam Chair?

Yes.

So this is a question that's come up a couple of times, Director Arstad.

You know, in the development agreement itself, we've got a particular section called the Qualifying Parent Guarantee, which requires that Oakview Group and other affiliated partners of ArenaCo have at least $800 million in identified aggregate net worth as evidenced by current audited financial statements.

Is that paragraph directly related to the protections that you just outlined that Mr. Abrams had suggested we include in the development agreement?

Yeah, I think that generally the answer is yes.

You know, he worked with the city in identifying the cost, you know, the cost of the project and wanted to make sure that those costs that were estimated were accurate, you know, based on his knowledge and based on the materials that he had access to.

And absolutely, through our legal consultants, through our lawyers in the law department, and even, you know, with CBO and the executive and council, we were very clear that there would be appropriate funds available before the project commenced.

And as we've talked about, those revenues are going to come from three sources, private equity, private loans, and then a federal historic tax credit.

And if I may, a follow-up, Madam Chair.

Absolutely.

And as I understand it, the project costs have increased a little bit, so the current project scope is estimated to be about $700 million.

This $800 million qualifying parent guarantee, at what point do we have all the audited financial statements in order to, effectively showcase that $800 million worth of assets.

Is that something that's provided to us upon the final terms of the signing of the development agreement?

That's a good question.

And in a nutshell, the proprietary information that David Abrams had access to, you know, through the various investors and others are not made public, but he had full access.

And so we delegated that review to him and through the individual small group briefings, that's what we talked about.

And I think that Marshall has some additional comments.

Good morning, council members.

Marshall Foster with the Waterfront and Civic Projects Office.

I'll just add one additional piece to that.

The parent guarantee is specifically linked to ensuring the contractor's performance.

under the terms of the agreement.

And the way it's structured is there is an option to either provide a payment and performance bond or the parent guarantee.

And essentially, if they choose the parent guarantee, at that time they need to demonstrate that the firm backing up the GMP, the Guaranteed Maximum Price, has the resources in hand.

So they have to positively demonstrate that to the city as they advance into that next stage.

Thank you.

I appreciate that explanation and I think councilmember Johnson brought up something that people are going to want to understand, and that is, and I'm going to ask you this question, with all of the analysis that's been done by Mr. Abrams, this is not a unique approach.

With big projects like this, when companies are coming forward with the type of the design and the cost, that there's some protection that they are going to want to have for their financials.

Can you just talk a little bit about how Other projects have gone this way in terms of we have the intermediary, the expert, David Abrams, that was looking at the documents but giving us the information that we've been asking for.

Maybe you could just describe that a little bit more fully.

So, you know, under the wise counsel of the law department's attorneys, we all know, you know, what our areas of expertise are.

And we don't generally, you know, most of us don't have a lot of experience looking at arena deals.

And so Mr. Abrams was hired along with Carl Hirsch, you know, on behalf of the city who have that specialized area of knowledge.

I'll just add a few thoughts.

I think the key thing, Councilmember, for us in terms of the, you know, taking the input and advice we got from the team was to ensure that before work begins on the asset that we control today, KeyArena, that we have an absolute certainty that they have the financial means to complete the project.

That was the kind of guiding light that our team brought to this, and there's a couple key elements that are ensuring that.

and these are I think very consistent with other arena deals and in some cases I think they go a little bit beyond other arena deals.

There is no city funding in this and given that context it was important to us that both the equity required to build the project and the full debt instrument, the loan was not only complete but able to be drawn upon before any work commences on key arena that would reduce its value, essentially the demolition of key arena.

So they will have in escrow the full equity required as well as completed loan instruments and the ability under the terms of that loan to draw upon it.

That last point was very important to our team that we know that the ArenaCo Oakview Group's development entity have the ability to see the project through with their lender as well as having the equity component of the project.

In addition to that, we required that they have a guaranteed maximum price from their contractor in hand, and also that they have a completed agreement with the NHL for the 32nd franchise.

So all those pieces essentially have to be in place before a spade is turned on KeyArena.

Thank you.

In a nutshell, I'm hearing that, no, it's not unusual to hire these experts for projects like this.

It's a good question.

So let's go to bullets three and four of this slide.

And this is the place where I'll talk about the lease term and the capital improvements.

The proposal, the project, has an initial lease term of 39 years in which ArenaCo will be required to invest $1 million per year in the first 10 years and $2 million per year for the next 29 years for capital improvements.

So remember, they're doing the initial investment to construct the facility.

They are solely responsible for the operation of the new arena and for maintaining, but this is about during the lease term that the condition of the building, you know, is maintained to a satisfactory level.

So along with the 39-year initial lease term, the agreements lay out a path forward for two lease renewals, two eight-year lease renewals.

And as a condition precedent for issuing the two eight-year renewals, ARENA Co. is required in years 21 through 30 to make an investment of no less than $50 million, $50 million on capital improvements, and then no less than $50 million in years 31 through 47 in order to acquire the second eight-year renewal.

Does that make sense?

Yes, it does.

So this deal is essentially crafted to...

Kirsten, excuse me.

I want to address this to Mr. Alex Zimmerman.

I know you're sitting there doing your usual little laugh.

I'm going to ask you to please not be disruptive.

Thank you, Council Member Bagshaw.

Let's continue.

So the deal, you know, the proposal is essentially crafted to avoid future problems such as some of the things that we've been hearing about the news with regard to one of the local arenas.

So I think that that's something that we should be very pleased with.

So bullets five and six, let's talk about the numbers.

I have to apologize in advance.

This section is dense with a lot of information.

And as council member Madam Chair mentioned, the FAQ is gonna be an extremely helpful resource as well as the materials behind tab three of your notebooks, unless you want to walk yourselves through the three transaction documents.

And you can see that a lot of this is in various places.

And it's really hard to kind of corral your mind.

So I will do my very best to speak about this in very simple terms.

But don't hesitate to ask us if you have any questions.

So talking about the numbers, how much is the city going to make?

from this project, from this, you know, the new arena?

How much will ArenaCo be making?

And so those are the two basic questions before us.

So let me first talk to what the city is going to be guaranteed.

So 18 months ago, a year ago, everyone in the city said, we want to make sure that the city is made whole.

So the monies that Seattle Center is currently making needs to be made on an ongoing basis, even though we're not doing, you know, the reconstruction, even though we will no longer be operating and maintaining the facility.

What we said was we wanted to maintain that base level of revenues.

And so the city hired a top four auditing firm named KPMG and they worked very closely with Seattle Center and the city budget office to calculate the four year trailing historical annual average using the years 2014 through 2017. So using this as a framework or as the basis for negotiating the agreement, this means that the city is guaranteed a base rent of $2.8 million a year and a guaranteed tax revenue of $2.2 million per year.

So the 2.8 million plus the 2.2 million is guaranteed 5 million.

I just want to break out the 2.2 million dollars number because that ties in with the second council bill having to do with the admissions tax legislation.

So the 2.2 million dollars per year is comprised of a baseline, an agreed upon baseline of 1.3 million dollars that the city receives from the admissions tax currently.

And then 900,000, the remaining $900,000 comes from the other city tax revenues and business activities.

So far okay?

Okay.

I'm just trying to follow along.

Where do we find this in our packet?

What you're describing right now.

So there are, so if you go to tab four, And if you look at the second page, which is the table of contents, you will see there there's a financial due diligence section that starts on page three.

So lots of information there.

Got it.

draw your attention to the development, the lease, the transaction documents.

There's a fiscal note that Marshall put together, and that fiscal note is very helpful, including the attached summary to the fiscal note.

And let's see, there are, I got to remember where everything is, behind tab three, if you will look at...

Excuse me.

If you will look at the second document, the document behind the yellow and the first yellow and blue paper, there's a summary of the proposed Seattle Arena development project.

And so if you go to page two, there again, we've described the elements of the financial deal.

And the attachments are all empty, is that because they're yet to be filled out?

The exhibits?

Yeah.

Yeah, I was going to speak about that in the end.

So the framework, the language in terms of this arrangement between ArenaCo and the city have all been agreed upon between the parties.

And the, but as you can see, there's hundreds of pages and lots of detail.

And some of the exhibits were just not, we just weren't able to complete them.

So those will be forthcoming.

And through a package amendment, we will add them to the documents.

But they will not change the material terms of the deal.

And I guess we'll get to this more when we get to the section about tenants and labor.

But it's, there are a number of times where they refer to, I think it's exhibit E, which is the mitigation plan.

And it's hard to- Sort of see, okay.

Yeah, thank you.

If you'll go to the next document behind the one that I just pointed out, you will see, I'm not sure what size this is, 11 by 14 document.

It has a summary of all of the community benefits.

And to the right, it gives you a reference to the specific transaction document.

So if it says DA, it's the development agreement.

If it's a LEAD, LD, lease agreement, the integration agreement, so on.

And then you can see the specific reference.

So that's a very handy document.

Then let's turn to the next document.

There's a Seattle Center Arena project mitigation table.

And you can see a lot of the financial aspects of the contributions that OBG has agreed to make above and beyond the $700 million investment.

So I think it's probably good to just kind of go through this right now.

And that's why I'm glad we did the notebooks.

And isn't the first document you referred to the one that we had in the last briefing?

You just updated it?

Yeah.

Would you like me to just talk about that real quickly?

That's the one I still use because it's so quick to get there.

So in the notebook behind tab three, everything else is on white paper.

And if there's different documents in a section, I've divided them with blue paper.

But this paper I've highlighted in yellow.

And it basically outlines your, you know, the city's general principles, your guiding principles in terms of, you know, the things that you wanted to see in the transaction documents.

And what I have done next to each of the principles or the goals is indicate with a yes or a no whether the transaction documents based on my staff analysis have been met.

And what I can tell you is that on this yellow piece of paper there is nothing marked as a no.

I really truly couldn't find anything.

All right, thanks for the orientation.

Okay.

Can I add just one quick point to that?

Yes.

Councilmember, on the exhibit itself, the construction impacts mitigation plan, that is a very important part of this agreement.

It's been discussed where there have been a number of in-person discussions with the organizations affected.

That piece is complete at this point.

There's a lot of important detail on that that has taken some time.

We are going to get that published, if not by the close of business today, close of business Monday for the public to see.

Not yet as formal legislation, because it will be an amendment that will work with your staff to deliver, but just so people have an opportunity to see that what we've discussed is translating now into the legal document.

Okay, so we just talked about sort of the city's, you know, the city revenues being made whole.

Let's talk about what ARENA is going to make under this deal.

And then so that people aren't alarmed, then what we'll do, what I'll do is talk about what the city and the ARENA will be earning, you know, in terms of the upside revenue.

So I'll talk about that.

So.

Director, can I just step in for one second?

Yes.

Nageen just handed me up a note.

So, those in the room who wish to refer to specific materials, there's a binder on the podium right here, correct?

With everything in there.

I know there's only one, but everything else is online.

So, if somebody wants to...

Every single one of the documents that are in the binders have been linked to the agenda.

So, that's a really good place to...

Yeah, if you start the agenda online, but then there's hard copies if people want to just look, but that's...

Everything's transparent, everything's open.

We're not meeting in a dark room, smoking cigars, cutting deals.

It's not yet.

That's a joke.

Everybody.

That's a joke.

It's a joke.

All right.

So ArenaCo will receive in consideration of, you know, their investment, the numerous financial contributions that I've, you know, outlined behind tab three.

as well as taking on all of the risks associated with this project.

They will receive an annual payment for 10 years of $350,000 to reflect the cost of the sales tax that it will be paying for constructing the arena, the construction tax.

Basically, the city is making ArenaCo whole for that cost as part of the larger financial deal that the parties have entered into.

So it's important to know that these construction revenues are revenues that the city would not see, we would not see unless this project were to move forward.

Any questions?

Okay.

For each year of the lease term, ArenaCo will receive a payment equal to the amount of the admission tax revenues generated only through the operation of the arena.

and not counting, excluding the $1.3 million admission tax baseline guarantee that I spoke about earlier.

So if revenues are being made from the admissions tax, which there will be, the city will get the first $1.3 million, and the remaining will go to ArenaCo.

Okay, any questions about that?

Uh, let me just see.

Oh, and I made a note to myself that this calculation does not include admission tax revenue generated from other venues, only just through the arena.

I think I did make that point.

So the admissions tax bill, which is the higher number bill, is a change to the code that would allow the admission tax revenues to go to sports and music.

in addition to what current law allows for, which are certain arts and cultural activities.

Specific to Seattle Arena.

Yes.

Okay.

Very specific to Seattle Arena.

Okay.

If the council were to choose that, hey, we're not going to change this, we're not going to adopt this council bill, it's not going to have a huge impact.

We will still owe, that amount is still going to be calculated and collected by the city budget office, and we will still need to pay that amount.

This gives us flexibility that in the event there are revenues generated from the arena through the admissions tax, we can use either the general fund or the revenues coming from this source.

Okay?

Under what circumstances would we need to do that?

You know, I think that a simple one might be that if we were to, you know, go through another serious recession and the general fund is really, you know, limited, you know, in terms of revenues, then the city may choose to use some of its monies in order to fulfill its obligation under the contract.

So are there limits on it?

I mean, I know the Office of Arts and Culture really relies on this revenue source.

So are there limits on the number of dollars in the proposed ordinance from ad tax revenue that could go to other uses?

So there's two parts to that question.

One is, you're correct, the city collects the admission tax revenues.

And council back in, I think, 2010 passed legislation that has those revenues going to the Department of Arts and Culture.

And again, because the piece of revenue that we're talking about only applies to the arena, it should have very little impact on, it doesn't have an impact on the Department of Arts and Culture as far as I understand.

Based on my understanding, there is no lid.

So if the admissions tax generates this much revenue versus this much revenue, I don't believe that there is a lid that I will

There's a portion of that revenue that the Office of Arts and Culture is receiving now.

So I wouldn't want to have a situation, a portion of that revenue from the key arena that is going to the Office of Arts and Culture now.

So I wouldn't want to be in a situation where they would receive less revenue because we are allocating it now to sports purposes.

or allowing it to be allocated, just for its purposes.

So like we did with the Seattle Center's base rent, looking at the four-year historical trailing average, maybe we can look to see what that might look like for arts and culture and determine whether or not there is something that we can do in that arena.

Thank you.

OK.

My understanding is that this was just an upside to this, that that would be an increase.

Yeah, absolutely.

Okay.

I mean, that's the point of it is so we have more money.

Right.

So, okay.

So, that was the dense part of the presentation.

Did I synthesize it enough?

Okay.

Can I just ask one final question?

So, one of the elements around upside revenue that's still kind of to be determined is the sponsorship benefits valuation.

Director Nelms, in my read through the integration agreement, it looks like there's been some decision by the city and the ArenaCo to hire a marketing firm to really value what the Seattle Center's sponsorship benefits could be under a new agreement between the Seattle Center and ArenaCo on on sort of center wide sponsorship, I presume.

Can you talk a little bit more about that and how that relates to any upside revenue that the city might see as a result of new sponsorships on Seattle Center?

Yes, I can.

Thank you, Council Member Johnson.

A couple of things.

One, the city hired, or OBG hired Navigate to look at what the sponsorship opportunities were at Seattle Center.

And so they've conducted a an inventory, let's say, of all the available opportunities that exist there, knowing that we probably wouldn't want to use everything because we wouldn't want Seattle Center to become something that it never has been in terms of commercial sponsorship, etc.

So there will be a balancing of that.

But their goal is to identify everything, create some packages, and bring those packages to us for review and approval.

And the thing about this is that any sponsorship deal or agreement is subject to the approval of Seattle Center, Seattle Center Director, so that we make sure that we have control over how much sponsorship, advertising, et cetera, shows up on the campus.

Now, the upside potential is a balancing act because one, the more you do, the more money you can make.

However, the more you do, you run the possibility of maybe losing your soul.

And so that is a careful balance that needs to be maintained.

So what we see and what I've been talking about, what our team is, we're probably going to do a little bit more than we have done.

But we probably never will do as much as we're asked to do because we're going to try to thread that needle in a way that brings additional upside, additional revenues, et cetera, but doesn't allow the Seattle Center to become something it's never been.

And so all of those issues are going to kind of continue to be worked on post the signing of the integration agreement, development agreement, and other transactional documents?

Yeah, the big issue and the thing that we negotiated for was to make sure that we retained control and basically had the last say on that.

And that was the most important thing from our standpoint.

But as I understand it, in order for us to get a little more flexibility, maybe not to the lose our soul part that you talked about, but to do a little bit more than we do today, it does require some updates to the sign code, which We'll go through Council Member Juarez's Civic Development, Parks and Native Communities Committee in order to facilitate more of this potential.

Yeah, and I believe that is correct, especially for the things that are facing the streets, et cetera.

But since the majority of the campus are on vacated streets and are on the interior, we really control a lot more of what happens there than...

the normal, let's say.

Well, I mean, I think that this is one of those opportunities where upside revenue is great for us, but I think we want to, to your point, balance out the commercialization, for lack of a better term, of Seattle Center versus the revenues that might come from that.

So I look forward to further conversations and hearing from you a little bit more about where that upside might be and how we walk that fine balance.

Thank you.

Let me just follow with Mr. Nillum.

Is it fair to say that you would maintain the balancing act that you've been doing for well over two decades.

Yes.

I'm born and raised here.

I have some sense of what the soul looks like.

Thank you.

Great.

So this is a good time to talk about the upside revenues.

And just for the listening public, I just want to remind folks that the upside revenue is calculated based on the net revenue, which is above the rent adjustment threshold.

the agreed upon tax and facility revenues that the city will be receiving from its current operations.

That's that $5 million figure that I mentioned before.

So in talking about the upside, this is where both ArenaCo and the city have something to gain.

In the first 10 years of the lease, the agreement has the city earning 25% of the total net upside revenue and 75% going to ArenaCo.

So I don't have those numbers.

We've seen lots of numbers from our consultants and others.

But depending on the variables, it really changes.

But assuming that there is a profit to be made, that's how the revenues will be split for the first 10 years.

For each year thereafter, the upside will go to 50-50, 50%, 50%.

Do we have a range?

Do we have an expected range at this point?

You know, we were talking about that right before the committee convened, and none of us can remember those numbers.

And I think that that's because we've got a lot of numbers in our heads.

So I'll get that to you.

OK.

OK, so if there are no further questions about the financial due diligence piece, this is where Director Foster and Director Nellams will take over.

And then I will just come back to do the conclusion.

Okay, thank you very much.

So I'm going to shift our gears here a little bit over to the package of community benefit elements that you'll find in these agreements.

And again, appreciate the quality package here that was put together with all the material.

One thing you'll find behind tab three is a matrix that essentially walks through an agreement we reached with kind of key community organizations and resident organizations back in May as to a package of community benefits.

What this matrix does is translates from that original agreement in May over to what you can find in the transaction documents.

We've been meeting with them, reviewing that, and I think I can say confidently we've been able to translate those commitments over.

Let me just stop you just quickly please for my colleagues in their notebooks in their community or in their briefing document That would be page the 30 page briefing document that you got in August and on September 3rd.

I If you look on page 7, it breaks down, like I said, community benefits, where it is in the MOU, and then the five FAQs that we kind of distilled was a major thread of questions that we were getting from our colleagues and from the public.

Okay.

And that's kind of, again, just like a cheat sheet.

So it just takes you through some of the questions.

So you may not even have to ask Marshall a question, which I'm hoping you all will, but I just want you to know that.

Go ahead, Marshall.

Yes, there's actually a few places, and there's also more detail.

or tab three in this larger matrix.

Probably more than we want to get into at the table here, but it's there if there's interest.

So I'll summarize the kind of six key elements.

General outreach and coordination.

One of the important things we heard out of the gate is that we need the Oak View team and the community and Seattle Center to have a strong communicating structure from day one of construction that will continue into operations.

That'll deal with everything from, you know, construction logistics, hall routes, how the community's responding to that, to under operations issues like trash pickup after events, scheduling of major events.

and all the coordination and opportunities to collaborate and, frankly, mutually support each other, support the Uptown business community, support the resident organizations through this whole process.

We've seen a lot of similar structures with our two stadiums to the south to kind of create that ability to communicate, and we want to see the same thing here.

Key elements that are committed to in these agreements Oakview Group actually already does have a community liaison who has been doing the work of building those relationships, communicating on a daily basis between them and the community.

The Seattle Center will also have an ombudsperson who will be focused on helping ensure that is happening and staffing that effort on behalf of Seattle Center.

There will be a regular community coordination meeting that will take place between Oak View, Seattle Center, and a range of different resident and community organizations in that community to address all those issues I referenced.

Trash pickup, operations, everything associated with making this arena a successful neighbor in that community.

It will also look at a broader geography.

In addition to just talking about the arena environs, it will look at uptown, it will go up into Queen Anne, it will look at the connection to Belltown and South Lake Union.

So we actually created some geography in there that describes a broader geography that that group will be looking at as it does its work.

And when will the ombudsman be hired?

I'm hearing, you know, we're getting close to the time when that person's services will be needed.

So that would be really helpful to know.

Yeah.

Councilmember Herbold, the ombudsman will not be hired.

It will be a member of our existing staff and I will be designating that person before the end of this month.

And so this person will no longer be doing the body of work that they're currently doing and now this will be?

We will make sure that they have the capacity to deal with what's happening because this project will be the one of the most important things on our campus and we'll make sure that they have the capacity to deal with that and the support to do that.

Financial support during construction.

So there's a couple of I think pretty unique things that have been brought to bear here.

The first is there is direct organizational capacity support that Oakview has agreed to provide to the uptown community.

on the order of $225,000 to essentially support the development of the Uptown Alliance and their capacity to support the businesses in Uptown and to cultivate that relationship and with Oak View and Seattle Center and to sort of be a strong element in ensuring that this is all, that it comes together well.

That is already, my understanding is there's already an agreement, if not executed, very close to executed between the parties there, that's direct between Oak View and the Uptown Alliance.

It also will support the Uptown Arts and Culture Coalition, which will be part of that effort and will receive support during this period.

The other critical piece, and this is actually reflected in the construction impact mitigation plan, is there will be $500,000 provided by the Oakview group during the two years of construction, as well as an additional support from the Seattle Center on the order of $250,000.

for a total of $750,000 to support marketing and promoting the Seattle Center and its resident organizations, the uptown community, as open for business during construction.

And I can speak to this from our waterfront experience.

This kind of effort goes a very long way to make sure people understand that our businesses are open and that they are thriving.

If you look at what we were able to do with a similar program on the waterfront, we actually saw in many cases at least equal if not in some cases better performance during some of our construction activities.

So we're really looking to make a major investment in promoting this whole community of organizations during the construction period.

Great.

So is that something that you're going to contract out with, with a firm to do that sort of PR work?

It will be led by Robert's team at Seattle Center.

Yeah, we'll be doing a lot of the work internally, but we'll be partnering with OBG and their communications folks.

And most likely, we will also be bringing in some private consultants and or marketing help to create and run that project or that program, I should say.

It would be great to get a timeline on that as well, because again, I'm hearing concern that the impacts are going to be right around the corner and these kinds of campaigns take a little bit of time.

I've also heard concern that some of the funding for this work, even though it doesn't say this in these documents, is anticipated to be in-kind.

In the agreement, the 500,000, up to 30% of that can be in kind.

And we thought that that actually works for us because OVG will have access to communication and marketing folks as they work on the NHL, as they work on their team, as they work on the arena, as they work on selling.

X, Y, and Z that we wanted to be able to tap into and share.

And so that was a limit that we put in the agreement.

And something just to bear in mind with this is I think we actually see that as a significant opportunity.

Oakview and NHL Seattle have significant purchasing power with the types of advertising and marketing buys they're making.

So this is an opportunity for us to actually leverage that and in some cases get a better pricing for the type of marketing work we want to see happen.

Could you direct me to where in the documents this is addressed, this issue of the in-kind contribution to the Open for Business?

Yes.

It's a term of that mitigation plan, which, again, we were still dotting I's and crossing T's literally last night, and that will be published, if not today, first thing Monday.

The exhibit.

Oh, the exhibit.

Yeah.

One quick follow-up, and Councilmember Herbold has raised an issue that I've heard as well, which is, you know, what in kind is may or may not be what the community is really emphasizing.

Can you talk a little bit more about the art and culture overlay district that is now in play, how that will work with Uptown and the connection to Belltown and Southlake Union at the same time?

If it's all right, we're going to talk about public art and programming in just a moment.

And I think we'll touch on some of those themes and help me make sure I get to that exact point, if that's OK.

OK.

I think it's.

And I can just see some of the faces in the audience.

We just want to make sure that it's clear what their involvement will be, because I know Oak View Group and all of you at the table have done a tremendous amount of community outreach.

I want to just make sure it's clear what, going forward, what they can expect.

Absolutely.

Yeah, and I'll jump right to that in just a moment here.

The next bullet deals with what was a critical element of the negotiation, a total of $20 million that's being provided by Oak View Group to directly support Seattle-based organizations and the community's engagement and participation in this new asset at the arena.

The first is a direct investment of $10 million in youth care.

which already provides a range of services that we're all familiar with in Seattle.

That will be a direct relationship and investment from Oak View to youth care.

The second piece will be a $10 million contribution to establish a community fund essentially focused on bringing opportunities for the immediate communities as well as the city as a whole to participate in all the activities at the arena and have access to all the activities at the arena.

That $10 million fund will be essentially overseen by a giving council And that giving council has been a key topic of discussion.

It will essentially administer that community fund much like other non-profit granting organizations administer funds.

The giving council will have a strategic plan and bylaws that it will create and it will essentially go through an annual granting process and will make decisions about grants based on its strategic plan that's established.

We have had some back and forth about the composition of that given council, and I think a key thing is we want to strike a critical balance between participation from Oak View and the sports organizations that are part of this, the Seattle Storm, the NHL, maybe in the future the NBA, as well as the community and resident organizations, and also at large representation from the city as a whole to ensure that the whole city is at that table and is seeing the benefit of that fund.

And I think we're at a point now where we're reaching a good balance on that.

I won't go into the details, but I think we have a good balance that we're ready to strike on that.

Would you remind us about the $10 million?

Is that over a period of how many years?

So what's the expected distribution annually?

So I'm just going to refer us to this table, and I'm going to make sure I get the detail exact.

This is under tab three here.

Give me just a moment, and I'll pull that detail forward.

You want a bigger version?

Oh, yeah.

He's got the big version.

Yeah, I got the big version.

So I'm not going to pull up the precise language right here, but it's a half a million dollars annually over 20 years.

It's going into that community fund.

Thank you, Robert.

And when does that begin?

Does that begin at construction or does that begin at operation?

It begins at operations once they've essentially finished the construction and start activity at the arena.

I ask because I was curious as to whether or not this fund might be eligible to be used by arts organizations that have financial impacts during the period of construction.

should the giving council agree that that's a good use of funds.

There's a lot of concern from the arts organizations that during construction that there's going to be a loss of revenue.

It doesn't sound like this would be an eligible use if it doesn't begin until after construction is completed, but that's an issue I'm going to want to talk more about.

Sure.

I think your reading is correct.

The timing, yes.

So those are the key elements of the Youth Care and Community Fund.

Now let me get back to the question about public art and art activation, which is part of this package.

As part of the development of the arena, Oakview has agreed to a voluntary contribution into the 1% program.

Not a requirement, but I believe it's the right thing to see here.

We're happy to have that as part of the agreement.

There's two elements of how that will work.

It's a total of $3.5 million.

And there are two pieces to that.

$1.75 million will be part of their overall art investment in the arena itself.

It will be the more traditional public art that we know and love around the city and we associate with city projects.

There will be additional art elements that go well beyond that budget from our understanding of their design, but that, as a minimum, will be part of their commitment to the city.

In addition, and Councilmember Bagshaw, this gets to your question, there will be $1.75 million, the other half, which will be dedicated for arts activation and programming.

And that's going to be done in a unique way.

What we've been able to negotiate is that will be a 10-year revenue stream of $175,000 a year, which will be administered by the Office of Arts and Culture to provide grants and direct programming to activate the arena and its environs.

And that will be a combination of activity primarily through community organizations.

I think we've mentioned some here today, which are likely candidates, other citywide organizations that want to get involved and bring their programming to Seattle Center and the arena, and direct programs that the Office of Arts and Culture will bring to the site.

And we're pretty excited to see how that's going to evolve.

We don't know the details yet, but I think it will also naturally dovetail with the kinds of activation that Oakview will want to do as part of its event programming, and we'll likely see sort of a program that develops that has, you know, things that Oakview's driving and things where the city's bringing together to really make that site a very dynamic kind of link and conduit between Seattle Center and the uptown community.

That's really the goal of that piece.

I want to thank you for that.

That was a piece of the language in the MOU that I thought was really important, is to make sure that the 1% for the arts could be used for something more than just physical art.

So thank you for having an expansive definition.

Thank you.

Yeah, we're very excited about this part of the package.

It feels like it's going to be a great addition.

Now, a final couple of elements, important elements, mandatory housing affordability.

So obviously this is a critical issue on everyone's minds in Seattle.

The key thing that we want to be clear on here is that consistent with our conversations in the MOU, Oakview Group will provide a $2.5 million contribution to the city's mandatory housing affordability program.

We're going to do that in two pieces.

The first piece will be what they are required simply per the code, the MHA code as it was established and applies to the project they will provide.

That is going to be less than $2.5 million.

As the code ultimately was adopted, basically it will not add up to the full 2.5.

they have agreed within the first two years of their operations of the arena.

So once they're open and operating, they will provide that additional balance to $2.5 million.

So we'll get the entire amount.

What that does is it allows them to access some of their operating revenue to help cover that.

And essentially, that second half is not required by code, but that will be a voluntary commitment from them.

But what's required by code will be there.

Well, actually, it will be.

Yes.

And they will pay it, you know, at the time it's required by SDCI and the like.

And that's actually still being determined exactly what it is.

This is a complex project because so much of it is subsurface, which under MHA is exempt.

It's also a landmark structure, which under MHA is exempt.

So that's part of the complexity here.

But the key thing is the elements that are required to pay MHA per code will pay and then the full two and a half will be paid within two years.

What if it's, how do you know 2.5 is the ceiling?

Well, that was the number that was reflected in our MOU.

That was the number we had in our project budget and they acknowledged would be an MHA payment at that time.

Marshall, yes.

Do you have a sense of the split?

I get the complexity of calculating square footage and what qualifies and not, but is it like 50-50ish?

It's not.

It's not.

And again, bear with us because literally SDCI have not done the detail, but it'll primarily be for the area under the South Atrium.

The South Atrium is a new structure that extends, you know, where the service area is today.

That will be the part that will be subject to MHA technically.

My question was on the $2.5 million, do we think about half of it will come under the requirement side and about half later or?

It'll be a couple hundred thousand that'll be in the initial piece.

Okay, so most of it is...

Most of it will come within the two years.

Thank you.

Lastly, community event days.

As you remember from the MOU, ArenaCo, as part of the operation, will provide 14 days at no charge for some of the key events that we know and love at Key Arena.

Critical one is the Seattle King County Health Clinic that Robert's team puts together every year, Bumbershoot, and those type of events will continue to have that use at no charge of the arena.

On those two, I imagine there's a, I assume it's not just the day of the event, the work to set up and break down.

And so the health clinic is that like six or seven days?

That's why it's 14 days.

It incorporates the move in, move out time also.

OK.

So will bumper shoot in the health clinic take up most of the 14 days?

Yeah.

Bumper shoot and the health clinic would take up virtually all for 14 days.

It was really designed to accommodate those two events.

Yeah.

OK.

So I think that summarizes community benefits.

Robert?

All right.

Pardon me?

Thank you.

I'm going to talk to you about labor, tenants, and business.

I'm going to talk a little bit about some of the agreements that Oakview Group has done on the tenants and business.

I'm going to talk a little bit about some of the mitigation efforts that Oakview Group has laid out with its contractor.

But let's start with labor.

Oakview group and 14 labor unions have signed a labor harmony agreement.

And my understanding is as of last night, the Oakview group has signed a community workforce agreement and the labor unions are actually routing the agreement around for their signatures, but all the negotiations are done.

And so those agreements are getting ready to be executed.

Inside the agreement, on the DA, the development agreement, there is an apprenticeship goal and plan for the general contractor and the work to be done on the arena to include an 18% apprenticeship and a 15% WMBI inclusion plan as part of the construction of the arena.

The Wembley inclusion plan also includes an 18% aspirational goal, so they're going to try to do better.

But all of that is part of the agreement as agreed to by Oakview Group and their contractor.

On the employment of current key arena workers, we had a lot of different key arena workers, but there were 31 that actually worked in the building for year-round, for events, et cetera.

We are we had a plan to get put a plan together to place them into other jobs at this date we have placed or Either they've been placed or moved on on their own accord We placed 27 out of the 31 we're still working on the last four our goal is to have them place before the end of the year, which is a what we will do and our promise to them.

And so we're working on us continue to work towards that.

I'm gonna not spend much more time on that, but I'll come back if you have any questions.

I want to spend most of my time on the impacts at the center for our tenants and users.

And most of that, and most of the concern about that is in construction.

And most of the answers that we have about that are in this, exhibit E that everyone wants to see and we got to get that to you.

But let me talk a little bit about some of the things that OFU group has done to start the mitigation process.

I think that a lot of us were very concerned because it took them a long time to actually hire a contractor.

And we kept wanting them to do that so that we could get started doing a lot of other things.

I think that the fact that they took as long as they did and were as thoughtful as they were, will pay us dividends throughout this construction project because the contractor that they hired changed a lot of the things that we had anticipated happening.

Let me give you a few examples.

For instance, The original thought was that for the construction project, part of Thomas Street would need to be closed from 1st Avenue to Warren.

Most of Thomas Street from Warren to 2nd Avenue would be closed with only one lane available going one way.

The contractor, Hunt Skanska, has determined that they, one, don't need to close any of Thomas Street.

Thomas Street will remain open throughout the entire project.

Additionally, Second Avenue between Thomas Street and Denny was thought to be needed for staging for trucks and hauling.

Hunt Skanska says that know that they only need to use Second Avenue between Thomas and Denny for staging after 10 p.m.

So taking, those are the kind of decisions that you're making.

to ensure that people on our campus, like the Children's Theater, people on our campus who use Thomas Street, who use Second Avenue, like the Science Center, they have continued access and that their patrons have access to and from their events.

The other thing that was going to be a major issue was that we were going to need to move people out of the Bresse garage because they were going to be doing tunneling underneath and that was going to impact the garage.

Hunt Skanska came with an idea of, I think they call it hand digging or hand tunneling or whatever.

Anyway, it's a system that they've used.

They've actually done it under Virginia Mason Hospital.

They know how to do this.

But what it means, the impact is that Pottery Northwest is now allowed to stay in its space while the construction and tunneling is going on.

Another thing that they did, they came to us and said that, look, We're going to be running trucks for about the first six, seven months, taking materials away from the arena.

We're going to need to do this about 18 hours a day.

It would be very helpful if we could take them across campus in the wee hours so that, We weren't impacting the neighborhoods, especially at nighttime.

We agreed that that made a lot of sense.

So there's a haul route through the campus on Harrison Street that will be available to them from 1130 to 630 a.m.

each day as a way of taking materials through the campus.

They were also, well, When Hunt Skanska came on board, they talked about using flaggers and traffic control folks and so forth.

They talked about them as concierge, so not just out there to move trucks or equipment, but to engage with people and provide information, directions, etc.

So again, taking as long as they took to hire a contractor, in the end, a lot of these things are going to benefit us.

as we work with the community, work with the impacts, et cetera, for our resident organizations.

Now, Marshall has already mentioned the marketing plan and the funds that are available for that.

That's one thing he's mentioned.

that we will have an ombudsman, that they will have their liaison, that we'll have meetings.

All those meetings and everything will be Seattle Center's providing space.

We're making sure that we're going to be able to bring people together to talk through and make sure that as issues occur that we are on top of them right away and that we have a system and a process to deal with them in real time as opposed to having people wondering about who do I go to, how do I call, what happens.

Our goal is to run through a project where you get no calls.

Our goal is that we have a project that all the calls come to us and that's what we want to do.

Robert, can I just- Go right ahead, interrupt me at any time.

No, I just want to underscore what you were saying about how important it is that they got the right contractor.

And for two pieces of experience, I know that what you've done, Marshall, down on the waterfront, having somebody that's with a cell phone with 24-7 access if somebody has an issue is huge.

And I also, I know that I'm about to sound like I'm giving an advertisement for Skanska, but I live immediately across the street from a 400-foot building that they're putting up.

They did that excavation at night from, you know, 10 p.m.

until whatever every day.

And we manage now for an entire year with this, frankly, good neighbor agreement.

And seriously, I mean, I'm from here to the corner as close to this building.

And I can't say enough good things about their outreach to the community.

So for people who are worried about this, I would just say we got a good company that is really focused on not just value to the community, but around project labor agreements.

They're good to their workers as well.

Thank you.

And I also want to mention that we also, in the mitigations and so forth for our events, we've carved out some specific dates and times when the construction project, actually the construction fence will be able to go to the middle of 2nd Avenue on Seattle Center property between Harrison Street and Thomas Street.

That's just east of where Key Arena is now.

in between Key Arena and the Fisher Pavilion, just to give you your bearings.

How is that going to impact Seattle Children's Theater?

I'm getting to that.

So what we have, one of the reasons that we're doing that is by allowing them to use half of 2nd Avenue, they're able to use that area and then be able to use Thomas Street and then 1st.

as a way of a haul route during the daytime so that they don't have to deal with Second Avenue per se.

The other thing that I was going to mention is that that fence is actually a movable fence because for certain events when the center has large events, excuse me, New Year's Eve comes to mind, excuse me.

The fence will move all the way over so that all of Second Avenue is available for Seattle Center events, etc.

And we identified a number of events where that would happen.

Things like all of our major festivals in the summertime, and like I said, New Year's Eve.

just as an example.

So one of the things that is very important as we talk about mitigations for tenants and users is that as we go through this project, we're trying to make sure that one, access is there, that people will understand that we're open through a marketing plan.

that the contractor is going to be very diligent and very conscientious about how they show up and how they impact and what they do and that we have a system and process in place that allows us to mitigate whatever happens in a real-time basis when it matters and not waiting for somebody to make a decision.

I'd also like to mention a couple other things on the tenant side.

We are moving some people out of the Blue Spruce building.

That move will happen by October 1st.

We have relocated four of the tenants into other spaces that Seattle Center either manages or leases, and we will accommodate all of them.

We're also moving our maintenance facility from the Bresci garage over to the next 50 pavilion, which is right across from the playground, the artists at play that we created over in between this armory and Mopop and just north of the monorail.

We'll be doing that, that move work will occur on November 1st, by November 1st.

The last piece that I'd say about our movements is that the Skateboard Park will close on October 8th.

And we have been working with Skate Park, Skate Park Coalition.

We've been working with Council Member, Council Member Batchel's office.

We've been working with a bunch of folks from the city, from SDOT, from law, from marshals.

We're all together and we've come up with a preferred site that we will hope to be bringing to you very soon.

which is some right-of-way on Vacated Broad Street, where we believe we can build a fabulous skateboard park and create a wonderful connection between Southlake Union and Seattle Center, because on both sides of this park will be Harrison Street and Thomas Street, which will both go through to Southlake Union.

and be able to make a pedestrian access and thoroughfare and pedestrian pathway in that.

So we're very excited about getting to a preferred site that we all agree on and now we're just working on doing the due diligence to put a package together that we can bring before you.

As you're taking that breath, I really want to acknowledge and thank the skateboard community, because that has been an amazing effort.

And I know that there were a lot of people that were worried that we were going to ignore that community.

And they have been included, as I understand.

There's been enthusiasm from Skate Like a Girl, as well as just the broader group of people that are really committed to this.

And I understand that it's, OVG is committed to a $1.5 million investment for the skate park and then the remainder is going to be picked up by a park department?

Is that or we're?

It's close.

Let's say that OVG has committed two million dollars to move all the tenants and the skate park that I've mentioned and that how that's broken down is what will be reflected in the mayor's budget.

We do anticipate some budget discussion this year about ensuring we have the full funds to be able to build that park.

OK, let's move along.

Sorry.

So I was going to stop there unless you had some questions.

Nope.

I could continue.

I know you will.

But I want to get to transportation.

I want to get home tonight.

So I'm going to move us forward here into the transportation and design and construction areas.

So as we all know, transportation is a really big dimension of this project.

There are a couple of key elements here.

Some of them are things you would expect of any city project, and some of them are quite unique.

First and foremost, we have completed a final environmental impact statement that was published on the 30th of August.

That builds on our draft, it builds on public comment, it builds on detailed analysis of how the transportation system, all modes, function in North Downtown and how it'll be affected by the increase in seats in the arena as part of the new arena as well as the increase in events as part of the new arena plan and the parking structure that's proposed on their site as well.

So the critical thing to know is as the starting point for this conversation, there is a series of mitigation measures which have been discussed for many months but they are now So the final environmental impact statements are incorporated and articulated in that final environmental impact statement.

They're based on a very objective analysis of the transportation system and modeling of what types of improvements will impacts across again all modes of transportation.

You will see a variety of different measures described in there from intersection upgrades to improving the bike network on the west side of the Seattle Center campus between downtown and Roy Street.

You will see a whole host of traffic operation improvements, primarily adaptive signal issues in terms of increasing our investments in that system and a host of other elements.

I won't go through all of them, but I think it's a very comprehensive package there.

The other thing that is described there, and this is unique to this arena and this type of land use, is an access management plan for the arena.

And what that is, is an intentionally living document that outlines a whole host of transportation demand management strategies.

Things like parking reservation systems.

Things like bundling transit tickets with event ticket sales so that we can give people incentives to get on transit.

Things like bundling shuttle services with an arena ticket purchase so that you can park remotely and take a shuttle to the event.

The document is designed to intentionally have a series of strategies and then it identifies a set of mode share goals for the arena to achieve in terms of managing down essentially, you know, vehicle trips to the arena, shifting people to transit and other modes.

And then it gives them a menu of tools to use to achieve those goals.

This is much like what we've done with Safeco and CenturyLink Fields.

I think it's a new generation of sophistication that we'd like to bring in here.

We're dealing with a lot of big changes with our transportation system, like ride hailing, Uber and Lyft, a lot of changes in technology.

So this approach allows us some room to adapt over time.

And probably most importantly is to build a partnership between the city and our transportation management.

and Oakview and their arena management so that we can do very real-time learning and adapting to ensure we get the mode share that we want with the arena.

Marsha, kind of a quick clarification.

You said that some of this was based on the Safeco field and the fields down south, and you called this a living document.

So what is the distinction there?

Are you saying that the document or the management plan The the access management plan down south is not a living No, they all are okay down there.

They're they're transportation demand management plans Okay, this is very much a different slightly different name same concept that the point with living is that you've got a team of people who are using it and Frequently they're updating it.

They're trying out strategies.

They're seeing how they perform.

They're saying, okay, let's keep doing that Let's try something different.

It's not a plan that sits on a shelf.

That's basically the distinction so Those elements which are all attached to the final environmental impact statement the direct mitigations and then that access management plan Those are now available.

They're public Oakview is completely aware of them.

The next key thing, and this is like any other project in Seattle, is those translate into conditions that are applied to the project as part of their master use permit, which has not been published yet, it's expected later this month, and also their street improvement permit.

The former is published by DCI, the latter is published by SDOT.

Essentially, those elements that are described in the EIS become conditions.

And that makes them requirements of the project.

And so that's what you'll see happen next there.

So those are all part of what we call the regulatory structure of this project.

That's all part of the permitting and regulatory structure.

What's really unique here on transportation, as you all know, as part of the MOU and now part of the final transaction documents, we have a $40 million city transportation fund that they will contribute to.

That is intended to provide transportation improvements that go above and beyond the EIS SEPA mitigations.

The tool to decide where and how to spend that money was designed to be the North Downtown Mobility Action Plan.

That plan was funded by Oakview Group.

SDOT has essentially close to completed that plan through a bunch of community input.

We have a prioritized list of projects that has come out of that.

And the goal is as the next step, once this agreement is complete and we know that that fund actually will exist is to go back and essentially finalize a list of projects that will be executed with those funds based on the NODO map.

We will also, I'll tell you, if you read the NODO map and the priorities, it's far beyond $40 million.

Okay, it's a significant list, all good projects, but it's well above that.

We will be leveraging other city sources, funds that exist.

For example, we have some grants that have been created to help support adaptive signal.

upgrades and that type of thing.

We have some funding from the Port of Seattle as well.

Those will be leveraging those, those funds with the NODOMAP.

We will also in all likelihood bond against that $40 million to be able to get the best bang for our buck up front to deliver some more significant projects up front.

So that gives you kind of an overview of the transportation pieces.

If the city is considering or will probably be looking at bonding against the $40 million, those funds will be restricted specifically to the transportation piece, correct?

That's correct.

Yes, we'll agree on a project list and then we won't be able to bond the full 40 million because that's a million dollars a year over the full term of the lease.

We typically bond in 20-year increments.

So what we're talking about right now is basically a 20-year bond package, which will probably also include some pay-as-you-go projects.

So we probably won't bond that full amount.

We're still looking at options.

We'll be discussing those options with the community once these agreements are in place.

Thank you.

Marshal, I have some specific transportation questions, but I want to make sure we're all clear on kind of the different tiers of requirements and agreements going forward, and I understand that.

And so the first level is the requirements that come out of the environmental impact statement.

And so that was published a week ago, and we now know what those are, and the public can see what those requirements are going to be.

And then my understanding is the next tier is another set of requirements that will be requirements conditioned upon the master use permit.

And that's going to be issued at some point in the next few weeks, into the month-ish?

We're expecting that, I would say, third week of September, shortly before you act on the 24th.

And so we've been talking a lot about the types of things that we think will be in there, but we don't have a list.

challenges with, for me and a lot of the public who's watching this is, who are asking us saying, hey, make sure this is in there.

It's like, well, I'm not gonna know if that's in there until that master use permit is issued.

But the timing, and Kirsten, maybe you can help us here too, the timing on when we in the public will have a chance to see the conditions on that master use permit and the final vote on approving these, is there gonna be

So again, I can't I can't absolutely commit SDCI but their intention is to publish those to publish the master use permit prior to the council action which is planned for the 24th.

I will say the mitigation measures in the final AIS you can see exactly the types of projects that will be in those conditions.

Things like upgrades to the transit functionality on First Avenue North and Queen Anne Avenue North, upgrades to the bike network on the west side of campus, the signal upgrades, all those things are described there and it's I don't want to say it's an exact one-to-one translation because SDCI has to do one final scrub that there's a clear nexus between those and the project impacts when they put it into the conditions, then it is truly permanent, but it is very close to a one-to-one relationship there.

So I appreciate that.

And in our conversations, you and other folks in the city have been really clear.

to help set the expectations for me, which is helpful.

I think for the public, it's a little more vague, and there's just a question of, like, how do we know the city's going to deliver on this?

And so that'll be really helpful to be able to see that.

And so those will be the two sets of requirements that by the end of this month will be locked in.

and everyone publicly will be able to know what those are.

And in addition to that, you've mentioned that there is a couple things.

There's the $40 million spread out over 40 years that we will work collaboratively to figure out what to fund and we'll use the NODO map as kind of the baseline for what we'll be working off of.

And that's pretty fleshed out and hopefully largely finalized, but I assume it'll also evolve over time.

And then there was also the arena access management plan that you described as a living document.

And so I want to ask a few questions about how that evolves and how we work on that.

And so if we were here five years ago, we would not be talking about TNC pickup because we didn't know that that was going to exist five years ago.

And with the pace of technology around transportation today, there will probably be types of modes or ways people access modes five years from now that you and I can't anticipate today.

So how does that...

plan evolve and when something like the next version of TNC pops up and we're working with the arena and say, hey, there's this new thing.

It's having some big impacts.

We want to make sure it's happening over here.

Is that just an agreement?

And they say, no, we don't like that.

We're going to just keep operating the way we're doing.

How do we have leverage in that conversation through this plan?

Sure.

So a couple of things on that.

One of the elements of the plan is they essentially look at events in real time as they happen and the performance of the transportation system with us as events happen.

So for example, after the first two events, there'll be a significant look at the performance on the ground.

It requires them to have a mobility coordinator on their staff, so a position that is focused on their performance, you know, before and after games.

And we'll also be reviewing that with that community coordination committee that I talked about as part of the public, the community benefit piece.

So we'll have several different points of contact and communication around that.

Ultimately, it does set clear goals for what mode share they need to be able to hit.

And it intentionally, for the exact point you made, that the transportation system is evolving very quickly right now, it gives them a menu of tools to work on with us.

But ultimately, they're held accountable to the mode shares that they need to hit.

And so that kind of real-time accountability, I think that's great.

I want to work to figure out how we make sure that, you know, not after every event, but every, I don't know if it's quarterly or semi-annually, there's more of a public presentation of that because the experts will be working on this, but I know that some of our community members are going to want to really understand what that is.

And maybe there's a way for constant information to be shared online so folks can see it, but some way for us to have some reporting on that.

And when we look at the criteria, I think there's a lot about vehicle travel times is one of the things we'll be measuring in the corridors that are affected by events.

One of the comments we heard from advocates was wanting to really call out transit times in particular.

Transit, for the most part, travels in the same lanes that vehicles do, but they have unique challenges because they can't Rapidly turned down the alleyway and get around obstruction.

And so they're stuck and they're pulling in and out of traffic.

So I want to we've talked about this private one.

I'd love to hear from you How are we prioritizing transit in these evaluations?

Where is that specifically called out?

Oh

So one of the proposed mode share goals for them, or one of the performance goals, is that transit speeds, bus speeds, are not degraded on the critical corridors around the site.

So that would be an example of one of the things we'd be monitoring in real time.

And that's 1st Avenue North, Queen Anne Avenue North, Denny Way, and 5th Avenue North, which is a little bit to the east.

And in terms of the, you know, the parking piece, I think a big, and the sort of, you know, traffic operations, a big part of that is ensuring that they're optimizing the use of the reservation system to avoid circulating traffic and the shuttle kind of remote parking system.

So setting mode shares that they're getting their, you know, their users, their fans into those systems and marketing them well.

So I think it really does try to cover all the different topics with the goal of making the whole system perform well around the arena.

Have you spoken about Monorail?

I know, I don't know whether Alan Hart is here, somebody from Vaya Architecture, but they've done some tremendous work.

about what needs to be changed at the Westlake Station as well as at the Seattle Center Station to be able to move 6,000 people an hour.

Can you talk a little bit about how that's going to work?

Yeah, actually, that's a perfect topic for this.

So I think one of the opportunities with this AMP, Arena Access Management Plan, is we've found a path through the study that was done.

to significantly increase capacity on the monorail.

And that's really important because if we can shift, if we can go from 3,000 to somewhere close to 6,000 people an hour, we can really leverage the light rail system by getting that last mile traffic, especially after events, using the light rail system.

So that's a good example of where we think this living document approach makes sense.

We'd like to say, Oakview, as part of this, bring forward strategies to get to that goal.

Is it a partnership with Seattle Monorail Services?

Is it direct investment?

Are there ways to leverage the way you bundle tickets to increase the utilization of the monorail and get to that goal of what we saw in the feasibility study that we did as a city?

We'd like to essentially reach out a hand to Oakview to become our partner in making that possible.

And also, I would like to make sure you include Visit Seattle in that.

I had an opportunity to talk with their leadership within the last six weeks or so.

And they're very much wanting to be a part of that.

We'll make sure that happens.

Thank you.

Go ahead, Councilman Bryant.

Thank you, Chair.

So I have a couple specific questions that I want to highlight.

would appreciate any comments you can share with us now on these.

So specifically around pedestrian access and pedestrian safety, it's been highlighted that in the EIS, the formulas we were using or the modeling we were using for how many people are going to come by walking versus biking, et cetera.

I assume those follow best practices and everything.

I'm not an expert there.

But kind of concurrent with that, we've learned from the folks proposing the NHL team that a significant number of folks that are signing up for tickets live much closer than the modeling may have showed.

I can't remember the number, but within four miles, yeah.

We've seen that number in the media as well.

Yeah, which is great.

I mean, it's great on a number of reasons to know that there's so many folks so close to it that want to do it.

And frankly, the fact that there are people in close proximity to the arena that will be using it is a lot easier transportation problem to solve than folks coming hundreds of miles away, but we know we'll get both.

What I hear from folks that are paying close attention to pedestrian investments and safety investments is a sense that, a fear that the EIS, depending how you read it, may understate the amount of pedestrian activity.

that will be there, in part because it may be that there's a lot more people coming from a lot closer who will feel much safer walking, or be much more able to walk, or bike too.

And also the reality of just, we all know getting to the Seattle Center at big events is a challenge, and so whether we drive or take transit, oftentimes, or maybe take a TNC, those trips get truncated a mile away, and then we get out and we're pedestrians for the last mile, or half mile, or quarter mile.

So even folks taking other modes, pedestrian maybe, I guess everyone ultimately is walking into that arena.

So we're all pedestrians for the last few feet.

So a real emphasis on pedestrian safety.

And so I'd love to hear you talk a little bit about what some of those sets of investments to favor pedestrians are going to be and how we will kind of adapt over time on that.

Yeah, so one of the things, if you've walked, I'm sure everyone here, you've walked to the arena, because you're absolutely right, we all ultimately walk in with our own two feet.

We'll do that tonight.

I will too.

There are a lot of opportunities to upgrade the pedestrian experience around the arena.

And that's actually, when you look at the list of proposed mitigation measures, those are the top of the list.

And I'll give you a few examples of the critical things.

We need full intersections at some of those intersections along First and the connections over to Queen Avenue North don't exist today.

So this proposes full intersection upgrades so that you've got PED signals.

First and Harrison, for example, you've got, you know, First and Thomas, those get full treatment like other urban intersections.

Widening out crosswalks and bulbing out our sidewalks all around the arena is part of this package.

So you're getting a much, and we're very aware of the volumes of people already.

but more so with the new arena and making sure we've got space on curbs and we've got the timing and the crosswalk widths to safely move people to and from the arena.

Part of the design on the south end on Thomas Street is actually to provide some flexible space for major pedestrian surges as they're moving out.

With the new arena, I think you're going to see a lot more movement around 1st and Thomas.

That's designed to be a major entry and exit point to the new arena.

And then on the east side, I think an important part of the package you'll see is to improve the pedestrian lighting on the Seattle Center campus from the major exits right there on the east side across Harrison and to the armory building and ultimately over to the 5th Avenue garage and to the new transit and ultimately the connections that will exist.

to South Lake Union on Harrison Street.

So there's actually connections kind of pushing in all directions.

The project will also be essentially rebuilding all of the plaza spaces around the entirety, including the north courtyard elements so that we've got a consistent level of pedestrian treatment and lighting around the entire facility.

So those are some of the kind of top of mind key investments that are essentially requirements as we move forward.

And then in addition to lighting, wayfinding is something that I know is critically important, especially for the folks that are coming from further away and may not be as familiar.

Will that be part of that?

It absolutely is, yeah.

One other thing that you, well, a couple of things.

One that you mentioned earlier was adaptive signal timing.

And that's an issue, it's a technology that's evolving, and we hear a lot of concerns from people in the community who are really frustrated by the current deployment of adaptive signal technology.

And, you know, the idea, my understanding of the idea behind this is instead of saying, you know, the light, you know, at the top of the minute it turns green going this way and 30 seconds later it turns, it's trying to understand where traffic volumes are coming from and adapts to, so that there's not phases where nobody's using it and tries to maximize throughput.

The technology today has evolved in a way that it's really good at picking up automobile movement, it's okay at picking up bike movement, and it's pretty non-existent on pedestrian movement.

And so as a result, without some sort of interventions, adaptive signal technology tends to prioritize automobile movement, often at the expense of other modes.

And so it's evolving.

And you and I talked about this the other day.

But I know there are concerns.

There's folks in the pedestrian community, and I support them in this and agree with them, that until that technology's evolved, really what this does is it maximizes automobile throughput at the expense of pedestrians and other users.

And there's a fear that when we're talking about that today, and it won't be up and running for a couple years, but that it's just going to make it a really dangerous and unfriendly pedestrian environment.

How are we going to manage that?

So a couple of comments on this and a caveat that I'm not SDOT, but we can play SDOT on TV.

No, I'm just kidding.

So we work very closely with them, and this is an issue they're extremely aware of.

I think the key point I would make about this is the technology and the infrastructure are two distinct things.

We believe that the upgrade of the intersections to support adaptive smart signals that can respond in real time to changing conditions is a critical kind of next phase investment to get our whole system capable of being much more adaptive.

And the second piece, and this is where I think if SDOT were here they would also agree there is room to grow and to improve our system, is that the technology that we use to manage it has more to learn about how to respond to pedestrian volumes and how to fully accept that and respond to that in the system.

And that is a learning area, just like we were talking about with how we manage TNCs and everything else.

From my conversations there, there's a keen awareness and a desire to start pushing and piloting into how to improve the technology that's driving the adaptive signal system.

But fundamentally, what this package of mitigation measures would help us do, leveraging some other funding sources that we have access to, is get our grid built out with the infrastructure to support it.

So right now we have Mercer.

This would allow us, again, not all on Oakview's back, partially, but also through other sources to upgrade Denny and Dexter and also get some intersections in on First Avenue as well, which are critical parts of that overall system.

So we'll get the infrastructure and we'll keep improving the technology as we go.

I know that's not a perfect answer, but I think that's really where we are.

And a lot of this will be with SDOT, and I'll be having ongoing conversations with them about, you know, what's the appropriate timing of those investments, and how do we ensure that we're not doing more harm than good.

if we're doing it earlier rather than as the technology evolves.

A couple of things I just want to mention when it comes to bike infrastructure.

There's a number of, you know, there's a downtown bike plan.

We've had a lot of talk about that.

We've kind of set aside the stuff around the arena in a recent resolution we passed in anticipation of this work coming out, recognizing that this all would be addressing it.

Can you talk a little bit about where some of the bike safety improvements are going to be made?

And maybe also if you could mention about bike parking at the arena and how that's going to be managed.

Again, with the hope, I think we're all going to be better off regardless of what mode you're using.

The more people that are choosing to walk or bike here, it improves the system for everybody.

Sure.

So the critical element that has been top of mind for us and for SDOT as we've kind of looked at how to build this package out is that we get that kind of AAA continuous network improvement between the downtown system and the second avenue, the new facilities there through the west side of campus that will connect to Thomas and then ultimately up to Roy.

And so, and we were, had an opportunity to discuss some of the details of this with you.

What SDOT is looking at right now is the best alternatives to make that pathway through using First Avenue and Queen Anne Avenue North.

And basically what you're going to see there, regardless of which street ultimately and the integration of those two streets that they decide from an engineering perspective is going to work best, is you're going to see that continuous network connection through the west side connecting to those major east-west pathways as well.

In addition to that, and I'm not going to do a very good job of citing the detail for you right here, but in terms of the bike share and the actual staging of bike parking at events, that is a major element of that.

mitigation package as well that we ensure we have those pieces built into the arena program and that we have the ability to operate that successfully pre and post event.

I can't cite the numbers right here, but all of those features are part of the package that SDOT has developed.

And will that be, I know we've talked about targets and mode split targets.

My hope is that we exceed expectations on folks choosing to bike.

And one of the ways we do that, of course, is by making it friendly.

If there's bike valet set up for X number of bikes, and it turns out that it's at capacity and full, do we have mechanisms to say, oh, we need to expand that?

I mean, I assume it's in everyone's interest to do that.

Yeah, I mean, that's another great example of why the access management plan, living document approach means so much to us is that it gives us the ability to say, oh, wow, there's untapped demand here that we didn't realize for biking to the event.

We need to take the bike valet from 100 to 200, those kind of decisions.

If we lock them all in right now, we don't leave room for growth.

So that allows us to respond to those things.

And one last thing I'll mention, because it was a list of things from advocates, and I imagine you have seen some of the letters too.

A connection between Queen Anne and First on Thomas Street, it's a one block stretch.

In the plans that we talked about the other day, that was highlighted to be a greenway, which could be fine, I think there's some, fairly major traffic area, and so what happens to Thomas in the future will have a big impact.

If it's a heavily automobile-traveled corridor and all there is is a Shero on that with a sign that says Greenway, that's not going to feel terribly safe.

If it's more of a Wooner treatment where there's not much traffic and the traffic's on this very calm, the Greenway might be very appropriate.

If it's going to be high volume, I think folks are saying a protected bike lane may be appropriate.

I hope there's flexibility.

I hope the goal is not that we've committed to do a greenway here, but we've committed to make it feel safe for folks using bikes and whatever the appropriate treatment is.

Yeah.

We said continuous network for a reason.

And I think that point is a valid one.

Our short conversation on that was this is based on what we understand of the current conditions and the current event conditions that a greenway approach was seen to make sense, but given the concern and some of the higher scale of inactivity, it may make sense to revisit that.

So we're discussing that with SDOT now.

Thank you.

Thank you, Council Member O'Brien.

Council Member Johnson.

I don't want to belabor the transportation conversation too much longer, but I just want to make a couple of brief points on the heels of what I thought was an excellent Q&A from Council Member O'Brien.

You know, I think one of the challenges for the public to really understand all of this, Mr. Foster, is that we've got a set of investments that will be made during the construction period.

And those set of investments are going to be required through SDCI's environmental impact statement process.

On top of that, we've got the $40 million fund that we have negotiated as part of the agreement about effectively another set of investments that are going to be funded using that fund.

And then we've got a third bucket of money, and that's just sort of city funds writ large for other projects that are necessary in the corridor or in surrounding neighborhoods.

So as we get close to that final EIS, list of mitigation projects, I think it'd be really helpful for us to be able to understand, as you mentioned, there's a lot of overlap between projects in each of those three buckets.

Once we do have that final document, to be able to understand what is then ticked off as a result of that is going to be super helpful.

But then the second thing that I just want to highlight is a concern of mine, which is I don't want us to get too far along in commitments as it relates to bonding.

Because once we start to bond against that revenue, that revenue doesn't exist for us anymore because then debt repayment for projects.

And so I understand there may be strategic value for us in bonding against some of that revenue early on to deliver a set of capital projects that we feel will be necessary for the transportation impacts to KeyArena once the KeyArena is up and running, i.e., projects that we need to get in the queue and have open around the same time that the arena's open.

But if we lock ourselves in to a lot of, a majority of, or all of that $40 million, it does not leave us very much flexibility for the kinds of strategic investments that I think Councilmember O'Brien's highlighting may be necessary once we actually understand the way that folks are going to get to the arena once it opens.

So I want to caution us to be strategic about how much of that money that we really want to bond against because the more that we bond, the less flexibility we have.

And there are that third bucket of city resources and projects that we know we want to fund with other city funds that I think could be a good place for us to look at as opposed to tying up the $40 million from bonding.

that doesn't tie our hands to that sort of inflexibility.

So I just want to highlight that's an issue that I'm going to be tracking really closely because I want to make sure that we've got some flexibility here and there are other resources that we could point to that might be a better use for those interim transportation conditions that we know we want to have constructed in the next couple of years.

Thank you Councilmember Johnson.

I just want to acknowledge that and appreciate it.

We've been having the same conversation and the finance team at SDOT and the folks who've been working on this mitigation plan that's a real question and concern we've had that it may be smart to Essentially hold and use some of these funds over time rather than bonding against them Especially in the first years so that we can see how this thing operates and use that Information to make the most informed choice about what to bond.

So thank you for that We have one more follow-up question from councilmember Ryan then we're gonna move ahead

One last transportation one.

While it's over a decade away, there will ultimately be a light rail station serving Seattle Center.

There is a lot of work going on right now with Sound Transit and the city to work on various alignments on that.

Can you tell me how this project is part of that conversation?

Depending on where a tunnel might go and stations might go, it may be really near the Carina or maybe further away.

The timing is not perfect on this, but.

We can both jump in on this.

I'll just say quickly, it's been a critical part of the discussion from day one, especially the idea that there's a major new origin and destination here that frankly supports having a station that can serve both uptown, but also the center, probably quite close to the arena, in fact.

And I'll just add that SoundTrance staff and Seattle Center staff and others have gotten together a couple of times to look at options and share information with each other.

One just fact that we wanted SoundTrance to take into consideration is that It might not be a good idea to have a station right at the arena, because you need some staging area.

You need places for people to be able to breathe a little bit and congregate and so forth.

And so we've talked about other potential sites, maybe along August Wilson Way, etc., that might be more apt and more available and more useful.

So we've had those preliminary discussions.

Great.

Let's move on.

So I will just quickly summarize some of the elements related to design and construction.

We've talked about the $700 million total project cost.

As I think everyone knows, you know, the project is a landmark structure.

And they have fully embraced that and will maintain the historic roofline.

integrating preservation of the glazing and other features that are part of the controls and incentives on the building.

They will attain a LEED gold or equivalent standard in terms of the sustainability and the energy, water, and waste systems in the building per city standard.

And it will also be built to NBA and NHL standards.

While the city has not been directly involved in those conversations with those organizations, I can tell you they have been intense and robust.

And this building, as it's designed, does meet those standards.

construction impacts mitigation plan.

We've talked about that.

That is a required element.

It's an exhibit to the development agreement.

There's also a logistics plan which lays out by phase exactly how they'll utilize adjacent streets, the hall routes, the staging areas.

I think Robert did a great job describing to you some of the benefits of the Skanska Hunt.

plan, which really reduces some of the immediate impacts on streets and the like.

Those are all required elements of these agreements.

Oftentimes, those are more, you know, we have a plan, but it'll adjust over time.

These, we really did want to have a very clear upfront understanding for all the organizations potentially affected.

And there have been a number of presentations on details of those, and we'll continue to do that.

Lastly, I just wanted to ensure everyone there is strong construction oversight that will continue throughout this process.

I can't say enough good things about the team that Robert has at Seattle Center in his redevelopment office and the work that they have done, not only putting together these agreements, but they will continue to do in overseeing Skanska Hunt's construction.

There will be essentially weekly meetings.

funded by Arena Co., a Seattle Center construction coordinator who will basically support that oversight and provide that oversight.

Critical decisions will be made by the director.

For example, if there was any need for a material change to the design of the arena, which has, just so you know, already gone through an extensive review and approval by Seattle Center's team, that'll all be subject to their review and approval as well.

Colleagues?

Any questions before I hand it back to Kirsten?

I have a couple of questions about design.

One of the things that I know it's a few years away, but thinking about once it's up and running, how to make that user experience great.

I know obviously everyone's interests are aligned there.

A couple things that I've been frustrated at some of the other stadiums in town that I want to just highlight.

One is access to water fountains.

And so I know this is kind of a minor thing sometimes, but it can be really expensive to buy beverages at stadiums.

And in my experience, what I found is it's really easy to find places to buy $5 bottles of water, but finding a free drink of water somewhere can be a challenge.

Kirsten, I appreciate you reaching out to OVG and getting some design, and my understanding is there's some commitments they've already made for the number of water fountains, which is great.

You sent some photos of some of the design of these things where there'll be water bottle fillers, so people will be able to bring in empty water bottles to the event.

They don't want to buy water or other beverages.

They'll be able to get stuff for free.

One of the concerns I have, and I'd love if you could follow up on this.

When we had talked the other day, it looked like on the main concourses where the folks that aren't in suites or whatever would be acting, there's going to be eight fountains per level.

And by my dividing those up around, that felt like it wasn't too far a walk.

But from the photo you sent, I'm concerned that those eight per level, maybe in pairs.

So there may only be four stations per level, which feels like that can start to be kind of hard to find if they're not well signed in long walks.

So I'd love to have some clarity if there's going to be eight stations or eight fountains, and there may only be four stations.

And if there's anything we can do to increase the frequency of that, at least in the suite level, they have probably sinks in their own suites.

I'm not terribly concerned about that.

But on the main concourse level, where the general public is, on those levels.

I would love to see the frequency that they're trying to do, so follow up on that.

The other thing that I hear concerns about all the time, and to some extent it's a fact of life, is just the cost of concessions at events.

I look to the Port of Seattle as someone who I think is doing some really good work at the airport with the vendors, where there's a captive audience and folks feel like they're taken advantage of.

I think there's still a reality that when you go to stadiums, you pay a lot for a beer and a hot dog and a burger.

And I get that that's probably part of the economic model for folks like OVG, and that's how they make this play out.

It would be great to see paths where there are cheaper alternatives, and in particular, When it comes to some of the in-kind contributions and serving lower-income communities, I imagine there'll be events where tickets will be given to folks.

But if it's a three-hour event and it's still $20 to have a meal there, I hope there's opportunities to, in addition to giving away access to the event, that there's opportunity to bring in some food or have a lower-cost option on the site, just to be aware that not everyone can afford to spend.

you know, 100 bucks for a family to just concessions alone at events.

I heard that.

All right.

All right.

Thank you.

So the last slide.

I think that we had a fantastic conversation about this very complex and detailed project.

And as we Think about what we talked about today.

This diagram just basically, you know, highlights where the guiding principles came from, the signing of the MOU, today being September 7th where we're discussing the documents, the proposed legislation.

And then the two bolded lines are to highlight that the committee will be voting next Friday and then the following Monday on the 24th there's full council final action.

And if all goes as planned, if, you know, the council were to agree and direct the mayor to sign this agreement, then construction could begin as early as October 2018, where the keys would be handed out.

So, you know, in conclusion, I think that as your staff and based on my analysis, working with law and the executive staff, And I believe that the proposal that you've seen today is responsive to the council's guiding principles and the MOU.

That doesn't mean that there still isn't room for improvement and that there won't be ideas for amendments.

And so speaking of amendments, I want to just talk about the next steps.

Because we will be taking a vote, this committee will be taking a vote next Friday in committee.

to follow the path that we did with negotiating the Memorandum of Understanding to propose an amendment for the first time on the 14th without giving OVG, ArenaCo, an opportunity to weigh in just wouldn't be feasible.

So I am asking that all issues that you've identified that could potentially be turned into an amendment be provided to me by no later than 10 a.m.

Tuesday.

That allows me to work with OVG, get things written up, And then, as you know, distribute it to your colleagues and get it posted on the agenda before next Friday's meeting.

So not a lot of time, but we did something very similar under the MOU and it was very effective.

And MOU and law and our consultants are on the ready to help us.

Let's see.

Let me just close by saying that based on what I have heard today and what I know, there is an interest in addressing some changes in the agreement.

And so let me just talk about the ones that I do know.

Councilmember Juarez has talked about broadening the voice of the Giving Council, and so she's looking at increasing the number of board members from nine voting to 11 voting, and so that could potentially be offered up next week.

I've identified that the council, in talking with you, that you want to be notified of issues and concerns as they occur with regard to demolition, construction, operation, and maintenance at the same time that the mayor's office, the executive hears.

And so you will probably see an amendment that will add the council on the list of parties to be notified.

And as we talked about earlier, there will be a technical amendment that would fold in the outstanding exhibits.

And I've been told that we are, I believe, getting them by the end of this week.

So hopefully over the weekend.

And then all of the questions that you raised today, which could potentially be translated into issues or amendments.

Those are things that I'm hoping that I will hear from you and your staff about before 10 a.m.

on Tuesday.

So any questions?

If not, we can...

All right.

Thank you.

All right.

So in The chair will be right back.

The co-chair will be right back.

I guess we'll jump into public comment now.

So we're going to go ahead.

I'm sorry.

Mr. President, can I just interrupt you?

I forgot to say one very important thing.

All of the work, the words that you've heard come out of, you know, the three of our mouths have, you know, are backed by so many people within the city and the executive department and the law department and in OVG.

I just think that we need to acknowledge that there are many, many people who have done tremendous amount of work and who probably are more expert at some of these terms than we are, and I just want to say that publicly.

I wish I could say all of the names, but in the interest of time, I just want to say thanks.

Thanks for pointing that out, Director Kirshen.

Very appropriate.

We were just wrapping up, co-chair, and I guess you could start the public comment process.

I'm good, you know, I'm ready to get things done.

Did you thank me?

Did I get thanked in there?

And I always thank the co-chairs.

Thank you very much.

So, we'll, with that, we'll move on to public comment.

Since we have, Nageen, how many people we have signed up?

Thirty?

We have 31 people.

So, we are going to call people up in groups of four to mic one and mic two.

Nageen will call out four names and you can queue up.

And again, we only had one matter on the agenda today.

And I ask that you speak to the agenda item, which is the Seattle Center Redevelopment Project and the materials in front of us.

We hope to have a very kind and decent exchange.

We're excited to hear your concerns and your, particularly those of you that live in this neighborhood.

And if you can't follow those rules, you will be deemed disruptive and you will be removed.

So let's go.

All right, so the first four, if you could please head to the podium.

We have Alex Zimmerman, Kevin Malgazzini, and I'm sorry for butchering names, Stacey Foster, and Alice Lockhart.

And feel free to line up at either podium.

Who's our fourth person?

Hold.

Who's our other fourth person?

Fourth person is Alice Lockhart.

One minute, Mr. Zimmerman.

Starting now.

Starting now.

Let's go.

And then the main concourse and the upper concourse.

It's a good deal.

Two hours, nine console, geniuses, all Einstein for two hours, a couple billion dollars for a year contract.

Guys, when you stop enacting like a freaking and all corporation what is I know for last 40 years to pardon.

30 year what is I live here, a rap, rap of people.

It's typical, nothing unusual.

What is we want from nine consul who never have experience with business and give people chance, speak for one.

I demand establish a working group of people who give detailed information, because evil is in detail, about this stupid contract.

Sieg Heil, my dirty, freaking Führer!

All right, next.

Thank you all for your considerable effort in getting us to this point today.

My name is Kevin Malgasini, Managing Director at Seattle Children's Theater, where we serve over 150,000 people a year, both at Seattle Center and around the state.

I feel great about this process so far.

By and large, I feel like the communication has been good when information is available.

and OVG, Seattle Center, and City Council seem to have everybody's best interest weighing all the different needs of the organizations.

There are a multitude of logistical issues to be worked out, and we are well aware of the nearing window in which to do so, but we're hopeful that the relationships and communication paths that have been established so far will help navigate truck haul routes, bus queuing, and all the other problems and opportunities that we will come upon during the construction.

There are a few concerns I want to note for the record today.

The First Ave garage has been prioritized for the arena construction crews, taking that away from Seattle Children's Theatre patrons.

That is a concern that I want to note.

I want to applaud the city in ensuring that city revenue is made whole during constructions, but I anticipate resident organizations may bear that burden.

Is there potential for the city to invest in resident organizations to offset the negative impact that we will bear?

I'm concerned that the tenant mitigation that there is no tenant mitigation fund provided and we look to the appointment of the ombuds person to clearly articulate resources and responsibilities that person will have to assist the organizations whose programming facilities or financial solvency are impacted by the project.

Thank you so much.

Kevin you can always provide more notes to us later if you need to that'd be great just direct it to us.

Thank you.

One minute is awful short.

I'm Stacy Foster.

I'm a local attorney, but I'm here to speak on behalf of SCT.

SCT has been the most important theater for young audiences in the world, not just in the city of Seattle, for over 40 years.

I know that many of you are aware of that.

Many of you have visited the theater and have brought your children there.

But we are very concerned that this wonderful KeyArena project may have a detrimental impact on SCT.

We applaud the fact that Mr. Nellams and the Seattle Center have worked hard to mitigate those impacts.

But we're concerned that our operational revenues will be impacted during the two years of construction.

And our margins are so small that we can't afford to lose any of the income from our 15 shows a week.

We ask that a mitigation fund be set up to provide immediate operational revenues for the resident organizations at Seattle Center who are impacted by the construction.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Good morning, Council.

I'm Alice Lockhart with 350 Seattle.

The ARENA EIS states that ARENA greenhouse gas emissions are legally not significant, but it did find the ARENA inconsistent with Seattle's climate plan.

It did find that this single building will increase Seattle's greenhouse gas emissions by a substantial fraction of a percent.

largely through personal vehicle and ride-hailing trips.

Unfortunately, this is not mitigated in the Draft Arena Access Management Plan, far from it, with a plan mode share of more than 50% for personal vehicle and ride-hailing trips all the way through 2035. even with that $40 million spent.

When we find that we must retrofit the arena to add real connections to transit and stop using natural gas, who will foot the bill, Seattle or OVG?

Thank you.

All right, the next four we have Meg Wade, Rick Hooper, Reese Talmer and let's Laura Black.

My name is Meg Wade.

I'm also with 350 Seattle and just want to thank you for the thoughtfulness that I've seen in this process.

As my colleague just mentioned, we are concerned about the increase in emissions still represented by the plan and I know that we're talking about whether this this session is about whether or not the MOU has been fulfilled and met, but I'm wondering about the values and the goals that we've set as a city to achieve carbon neutrality.

If we're not applying that here, if we're not asking for major business partners like OVG to also commit themselves to carbon neutrality, I don't understand how we actually move ourselves forward on that front.

If we're seeing an increase of 3% of the city's overall building emissions as the EIS stated, we're moving backwards on our goals around that and we need to be making sure that we're actually applying our values and applying our commitments to neutrality at these moments.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Good morning.

I'm Rick Hooper.

I'm co-president of the Uptown Alliance.

The FEIS and other documents before you today represent some very good work.

Many issues and details to come.

Appreciate the community benefits sections.

Key questions still remain about mitigation detail.

The FEIS notes, quote, final mitigation measures will be determined by SDOT, SDCI, and Seattle Center.

We look forward to continuing to understand more about next steps relating to that.

The arena access management plan draft is a great start on certain key detail.

However, I remain disappointed in what is said about the monorail.

Monorail capital and operating improvements, while nicely mentioned in the FEIS, aren't mentioned enough I think in the AAMP.

The 2025 attendee mode share monorail goal reflects minimal differences from today.

It should be higher with appropriate changes to the monorail system.

The monorail deserves more serious attention.

Let's start now on getting improvements ready for opening day and support all three phases of improvements needed to the monorail.

Thank you.

Thank you.

If I can remind you all, it's a minute, so.

Aloha, my name is Rhys Tanimura, council members.

I brought my own binder.

I'd like to thank Robert Nolums and the Seattle Center team as well as the representatives from Oak View and Skanska for the responsiveness to our concerns around the impacts of construction.

I have a remaining concern that is in the development agreement that's in the Appendix G, Exhibit G and about page 55 that outlines the plan for fence line abatement during the festivals on the east side of the arena.

The plan to place vendors on the east side of the 2nd Avenue roadway is not the plan that has been discussed in multiple meetings with OBG and recently Skanska.

The plan has several operational issues including it does not provide for the water power and sanitation that currently exists there that we've been talking to them about, you know, continuously.

So we'd like a secure commitment that this will be re-evaluated before the final draft gets approved.

You know, we truly appreciate your commitments in the lease agreement to supporting public art projects and engaging local musicians and artists in life of the arena.

We would ask council that Northwest Folklife and the 30 other arts and cultural organizations be supported in the fact that we are already actively doing this work on the campus.

Thank you for your time.

Thank you very much.

Sir?

Hello.

Greetings, council members.

My name is Luther Black.

I am a board member of Northwest Folklife and the immediate past board president of Northwest Folklife.

We are proud to program one of the largest accessible to all community powered arts, culture and heritage festivals in the region.

Next May, over Memorial Day weekend, we will produce our 48th annual Northwest Folklife Festival, an iconic community arts celebration.

We look forward to 2021, to our 50th festival, continuing Seattle tradition of community celebration of diversity and heritage in our region.

major concern is getting to and well past our 50th year.

We appreciate the commitment of funds from the Oakview Group and Seattle Center towards comprehensive marketing and communications plan for Seattle Center and its resident organizations.

We believe this is very much in line with the vision of the Memorandum of Understanding that this integration of improved arena contributes positively to the vibrancy of Seattle Center.

We believe The $750,000 is a good start, and we'd like to see the FAT Fund increase to a level that demonstrates the understanding that current residents of Seattle Center was actively promoted as they contribute to the vibrancy.

I want to thank you for your time, your consideration.

I look forward to your action.

Thank you.

The next four, please.

Kenny Farriar, Deborah Frost, Vaughn Perkins, and Mike McQuaid.

One, two.

Hello, Council.

My name is Kelly Ferriar.

I've worked with Northwest Folklife for over 10 years.

Thank you all to Seattle Center and for OVG for taking the time thus far to work with us to find solutions that will definitely impact our 47th and our 48th year Northwest Folklife Festival.

We have the honor of working with over 100 different diverse communities that represent this region and this city.

And it is a larger platform, the Northwest Folklife Festival, for their authentic voices to be in the heart of the center for all access.

It's a festival that is built by and for the community.

Today, I'm asking council to provide accountability for solutions to minimize the loss and financial impact to our cultural planning, 47 years the festival has been going, a place to share art, heritage, tradition, and all ongoing cultural evolution.

Further, in light of the rapid changes in our city, it is also a place that some of our displaced and continually marginalized communities are able to have voice in the center and the visibility to share who they are and their cultural traditions.

We believe that this request is in line with the terms and objectives set forth in the MOU, particularly around social equity.

Thank you so much for your time.

Thank you.

Hi, Debbie.

Hello, Debbie Frost of Uptown Alliance.

Good morning, council.

A huge thank you to city staff and OVG for the support to the communities, especially through the community benefits discussion over the last year and a half.

We're very thankful for the direction that that has come.

We need to now still work collectively over the next couple of years, especially for the arena opening.

In a couple of particular areas, the arena access management plan is a good beginning.

We'd like to see a management plan for the entire campus.

The campus needs to go to that level with all their tenants on how their 15 million current visitors come to Seattle Center.

The commitment to the monorail improvements is not just a phase one, it is phase two and phase three.

We need those 6,000 riders to not come by car into this community.

We need that ready for opening day.

And then finally, brought up earlier today on adaptive signalization, it is a failure at a pedestrian level in Uptown right now.

We need to correct it.

We need to make sure as it goes forward on Denny and different places that the pedestrian is absolutely a part of the adaptive signalization.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Sir?

Members, my name is Vaughn Perkins.

I live in the South Lake Union community.

I'm on the Transportation Committee.

there and I live on the corner of Denny and Westlake above Whole Foods and to be able to move around in that area with the number of cars and the activity has become very difficult to the point where we are no longer as a family using our vehicle we basically walk and or use other transportation.

So with all the changes with the arena coming into the neighborhood it means that the monorail isn't there we need to take a look very closely because we need to expand that giving the opportunities for us to others to be able to use the monorail to come into the community, reducing the number of traffic through vehicles coming into the community.

With that, in addition, we have the connector of the streetcar needs to be funding for that.

It's important because, again, the number of transportation that is available for the area is very important for us to be able to expand the use of our facilities.

Thank you.

Thank you, sir.

Honorable Councilmembers, my name is Mike McQuaid.

I'm a member or the chair of the South Lake Union Transportation Committee.

I'm also a member of the Arena Redevelopment Community Advisory Group, and I'm a fourth-generation Seattleite.

Through considerable discussion at the transportation level in the Community Council and South Lake Union, we feel that the Arena EIS process was thorough, engaging, transparent, and thoughtful.

It adequately identified impacts of the renovation of Key Arena on the community's public and the environment, and I have confidence that we are moving in the right direction of mitigation and mitigating the transportation impacts of the project.

You're going to hear a lot of down-in-the-weeds comments here from different groups that are all valid.

Ours are certainly prioritized with traffic flows on Dexter are critical.

and robust funding and complete build-out north downtown of adaptive signal control is important.

Also, transportation planning for the broader community is critical.

I urge you to vote in favor of these two bills and encourage your colleagues on the full council to vote as well and move Seattle forward.

Thank you for your work on this.

Thank you, sir.

Next four names.

Clara Cantor, Kate Ness, James Lobb, and Matthew Curry.

Hi, my name is Clara Cantor.

I'm a community organizer for Seattle Neighborhood Greenways.

And I'm here to comment on the transportation mitigations that were brought up in the AMP and discussed here tonight and or today.

And thank you also to the council for the robust transportation discussion that happened.

That was fantastic.

There are several potential items mentioned that we want to support and thank for, including the bike and bus lanes on 1st and Queen Anne Avenue, and also the pedestrian improvements mentioned.

But I want to say that these elements represent a bare minimum, and this development is going to be affecting the neighborhood at large, and the transportation mitigations need to reflect that by extending beyond the Seattle Center campus and the immediately adjacent streets.

In particular, connecting the arena to the basic bike network, not just downtown, but also to South Lake Union and points north and the West Lake Trail would be a huge boon, as well as building out a network of comfortable and safe pedestrian routes extending off campus, including to downtown via 4th Avenue, to the waterfront via the John Coney Overpass, and from South Lake Union via Mercer Denny and a potential Thomas Street Greenway.

Thank you very much.

Thank you, Claire.

My name's Kate Nessie.

I live in Edmonds and I work at SPU on Queen Anne.

I use the Seattle Center quite frequently.

We are a member of MoPOP, our family, and I am there average of once or twice a month over the course of the year.

But most, I would say 80% of my trips there are by car.

I usually drive and park or sometimes I park at SPU and take the bus over the top of the hill.

What I read in the EIS is that that is the assumption is that 80 percent of you know that it's going to continue that it will be car based.

I think that's a mistake.

I think this is an opportunity for the city to start to change that and to look at transportation options that are going to decrease the reliance on cars and increase the reliance on walking, biking and taking transit.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Sir.

I'm James Lobb, Executive Director of Potter Northwest, and I just want to say thanks to Robert and the Seattle Center team for all their work on this exciting project.

Also, OVG for their support through this, specifically the hiring of Morgan Littlefield and the way that we've been able to work together and have our voices heard.

And also thank you to council members for all your support.

We feel that we have been given a voice to this process and as a small business that we hopefully will not be harmed through this.

So we hope we continue to have your support as we work towards designing mitigation plan with OVG should something happen to our garages.

They're, I guess, hand tunneling under our building.

But we're actively working with OVG right now so that Pottery Northwest can continue to contribute to the vibrancy at Seattle Center.

And we're also excited about this marketing campaign.

will be open during the construction process, but that will be an awesome place for people to come visit and that the construction will be an exciting thing that that's happening.

So thank you very much for your time.

Thank you, sir.

Hello, Matthew Curry, board secretary, SLU Community Council.

I want to thank those involved in the ARENA EIS process.

We at SLU Community Council feel this process was thorough with multiple opportunities for community engagement.

We see this EIS supporting improvements to mobility infrastructure.

In particular, Dexter Avenue and Denny Way corridors would benefit from implementation of adaptive signal control.

We have already seen the benefit of this technology in moving post-event traffic on Mercer Street.

There are opportunities to take advantage of existing grade-separated corridors.

Here I am referencing our beloved monorail and its potential for event ridership.

Likewise, our waterways offer another set of corridors that do not compete with our roads.

Water taxis and foot ferries can aid mobility Finally, the $40 million Oakview commitment should engage the area immediately around Seattle Center in coordination with SDOT's NODO Mobility Action Plan.

We look forward to your yes vote on the ARENA transaction documents.

Thank you.

Next.

Next, we have John Stewart, Ashraf Hashem, Sarah Wilk, and Kyle Ducey.

Thank you.

John Stewart with Feet First, and I'll try and burn through my minute as quickly as possible here.

So really, a couple themes that I really want to echo, we want to echo.

Thanks to everyone who's worked on this.

I know this is a gigantic project with a ton of moving parts, but there are several really major concerns that we see.

And you heard one of them loud and clear from several folks, including Councilmember O'Brien, which is around adaptive signaling.

I know there's a lot of love for the technology.

I understand the benefits to moving cars.

I also know, as you heard from the Uptown Alliance folks, as we've heard from a lot of community members, there are serious problems with the current implementation on Mercer for pedestrian safety.

The technology tends to shortened pedestrian crossing times, which in the long run leads to a lot of jaywalking and potentially fatal results.

We haven't got there yet, but I really don't want to see us get there.

So I understand that technology is complicated and it's changing, and I've heard this from Esthat as well.

I think we're running a major risk of jumping down this road too far without really thinking through the consequences.

And I would urge you when you hear adaptive signaling to be really careful exactly what that entails.

And I'm over time, but I'll quickly say also, I would echo Neighborhood Greenway's comments that looking strictly at the Seattle center grounds is great.

It's important.

Pedestrian lighting, way funding, those things are really key.

But again, we have to think in terms of long-term transit connections and other things.

Think about the neighborhood.

Think about a mile radius, at least, from the center building when you think about improvements.

And thank you.

Thank you.

Sir?

Hello.

My name is Ashraf.

I'm the Executive Director of the Vera Project.

I want to start by thanking the Council for its guiding principles and the Seattle Center for its facilitation, OVG, for their commitment to keep us thriving during construction and operation of this amazing new arena.

Now, as one of the most name-dropped organizations in the FEIS and the transaction docs, we are stoked about the careful considerations incorporated into OVG's mitigation plan.

We do feel confident that we are able to continue our programs uninterrupted and remain hopeful about the ample communication and flexibility on both sides.

So shout out to Morgan and Todd.

Thank you for making us feel supported and heard.

We also want to thank OVG and Seattle Center for the marketing budget to keep public informed about a sustained vibrancy of the Seattle Center throughout the construction.

I think this is a great start, but we can move forward to something a little more robust.

That said, we have a great deal of work to do perhaps on the city level to overcome potential crises from unexpected financial implications towards loss of earned income for us and other uniquely affected resident organizations as highlighted by Council Member Herbold.

Thank you.

Finally, we appreciate the communication, collaboration, and construction mitigation efforts of the OVG City of Seattle and Seattle Center and are excited to see this project move forward.

Thank you very much.

Hi, my name is Sarah Wilke.

I'm the executive director at CIFF.

We operate theaters on Seattle Center campus and in the uptown neighborhood.

And mostly it's important for me to share with council that I as a community member have felt supported and that I have been given a voice in this process.

It's also important and meaningful to us that The guiding principle of contributing positively to the vibrancy of Seattle Center has continued to be at the forefront of all the communication that we've received from both sides.

We understand that as tenant of Seattle Center in particular, we will be impacted along with the other tenants.

We're incredibly appreciative, especially of the work that Oakview Group has done to put in mitigation during the construction phase so that we feel our programs can continue.

But the marketing budget is incredibly important and we do hope that city can see if they could match that even further.

We know that that's the best way for us to stay in business.

Finally, as a member of the Arts Commission, it's also important to me to make sure that the admissions tax ordinance does not impact the Arts Department.

Thank you.

Thank you, sir.

Good afternoon, council members.

My name is Kyle Ducey.

I'm the current president of the South Lake Union Community Council.

Our community council neither supports nor opposes the project, but is responsive to the EIS process and has specific transportation items to bring to the attention of the council members present as voted by the South Lake Union Community Council.

First, traffic management is the responsibility of the city, specifically SDOT.

We challenge the city to find traffic management solutions that ease the burdens on our neighborhood.

Right-of-ways that are operating at an F-level are not acceptable for our neighborhood.

The complete build-out and funding of ongoing operations for the Adaptive Signal Control Network are critical steps to manage additional vehicular traffic due to upzoning, general city growth, and now additional arena events.

This is an opportunity for SDOT and the city to take positive steps in managing vehicular traffic in North Downtown.

And of immediate concern is additional traffic from the tunnel project now opening in combination with the street grid reconnection and the uncertainty it brings to traffic flow on the Dexter Corridor.

Thank you for your time.

We have John Barr, Andrea Friedland, Slick Watts, and Brian Robinson.

I've been, thanks for having me today or talking about the issues today.

I've been at this for, my name is John Barr, NHL Seattle community.

I recognize this shirt.

Yeah you should.

I've seen it like eight times.

I've been representing NHL Seattle for about eight years now.

I've been at this a long time.

I even remember attending Councilmember O'Brien and at that time County Councilmember Ferguson's event up at the North North Community College on another arena project.

But I just want to thank you for thinking about hockey.

Hockey's always felt like the underdog here, and to feel like it's important enough.

And I think we really answered the bell on March 1st when 32,000 people signed up for season tickets.

And that's skin in the game.

That's not just signing a petition or sending a letter.

That's skin in the game.

And we're big, but we're kind of fragmented.

And I'm hoping this project really brings us together.

And I just want to thank you and everybody behind you, too.

And I know you guys have done a lot of work, Robert.

in my constant through this thing.

But thanks to all the people behind the scenes, I know there's a lot of people to get it to this point.

So thank you.

Thank you.

Hi.

Hi, I'm Andrea Friedland, business representative for the International Alliance of Theatrical Stage Employees, local number 15, the stagehands that work at Seattle Center and Key Arena.

And I just come here to remind you of the individuals who are impacted by this.

not just the 31 workers that have already been addressed, but the hundreds of other workers who come in on a show-by-show basis at the key arena and will be losing work over the next two years in the hopes that there's going to be a lot of long-term work and great jobs.

I want to thank the council for your engagement on this and your support of labor.

I want to thank the Oakview group also for their engagement and support.

I want to give a major shout out to Robert Nellams and the team at Seattle Center for the hard work that they've done to try to place people and to work with the Oakview group to have direct communication with those workers.

And I want to especially thank Robert for staying.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Sir?

Hi, I'm not Slick Watts.

I'm Brian Robinson.

I'm an arena advocate and member of the advisory committee.

And in addition to thanking council, I want to thank my friends from the neighborhoods of Uptown, Southlake Union, and Belltown, along with the Seattle Center organizations for their support.

The coalition behind this project is inspiring, and it's been fun.

I know this construction project is going to be hard on those groups.

And as a developer, I really understand that there is no greater mitigation for construction than a compact schedule that gets it done and completed as quickly as possible so we can all get back to business.

And in this particular project, we're very lucky that we have a compact construction schedule driven by the need to acquire the NHL in 2020. So I was very concerned last night when I heard commentary from the NHL commissioner about the concept of pushing expansion back to 2021. That puts the project schedule at risk.

It increases the burden on organizations like the Storm and all of the organizational residents.

So I'd just like to urge us all to keep our eye on the prize, to remember what's driving this, and to set small things aside, because it's time for us to send a message to the NHL.

It's time for us to have our ducks in a line, pass this quickly.

Two years of construction, not three.

Bring the NHL in 2020, and the NBA will follow.

Thank you very much.

Thank you.

All right, next we have Vicki Clark, Ken Burns, Selena Whitaker, and Brian Myers.

Good afternoon, Vicki Clark, Cascade Bicycle Club.

Thanks to the city for all of your work, and thanks to OVG for their willingness to be a good neighbor.

There are several positive elements in OVG's plans.

In relation to the FEIS recommended protected bike lanes on the west side of campus, we strongly support a start taking another look at Thomas between First and Queen Anne, and would like to see a protected bike lane on that block to make sure a nonstop all-ages route west of the arena happens.

However, people won't just be biking to the arena from the west.

By also improving three short nearby connections, there will be a comfortable all ages and abilities access to the arena from downtown, South Lake Union, and the West Lake Trail.

Destinations north and connecting to the basic bike network.

Specifically, Roy Street, protect the current striped bike lanes from 1st to 5th.

Broad Street, extend the planned protected bike lane from 2nd to 5th.

And 5th Avenue North, protected bike lane from Broad to Roy.

I also want to voice support for the comments provided today by Seattle Neighborhood Greenways and Uptown Alliance.

Thanks.

Thank you.

Greetings, council members.

My name is Celina Whitaker-Packier.

I am on the Board of Directors of Northwest Folklife.

Thank you for having us here today and listening to the things that we need to bring forth to you.

As many of you are aware that Northwest Folklife has been programming at the Seattle Center for 47 years.

We're looking forward to 50. We have had many financial struggles just recently in the past and we are strongly concerned about what the impact of of this renovation is gonna do to us.

As it stands, we are looking at a minimum of 10 to 40K of losses to our vendor program because of the construction.

Already due to the expense of moving, we are looking at 10 to 20K of increased expenses for that.

So we're respectfully asking that there is some sort of establishment of pools of funds that is going to help us minimize this financial risk impact and that there is some sort of accountability overall with regard to financial risk impact and again that we also keep in mind the social equity that we believe is important and that is included in the MOU and that we feel that Northwest Folklife represents on a yearly and daily basis.

Thank you very much.

Additionally, we did present an impact brochure here if you would be willing to take a look.

If we can pass this and have you guys see the numbers that we have come up with that affects us.

Thank you very much.

Hello, my name is Ken Burns.

I'm the COO of Watts Basketball.

I want to apologize up front for Coach Slick having to get away to get his car before it's towed.

I was invited here to listen in and to try to understand how Watts Basketball can be affected by the outcome of this decision.

First, I want to say thank you to the council and to the OBG group and to everyone else who has put this all into place.

From a Watts basketball standpoint and from a Watts Foundation standpoint, our goal is to engage with the kids in the community.

And it's interesting as I hear all of the things from a sports perspective happening with all the decisions that you're making that I didn't hear much about.

the youth, the underserved youth, the underprivileged youth, and how this decision is going to impact their lives.

I know for me personally, I wouldn't be standing here if it wasn't for the Boys and Girls Club and the 10 years and $200 that I paid to be part of leagues and all of the different things that it allowed me to be as a community member.

So I'm looking forward to this decision.

I'm looking forward for the positive response to this decision and moving forward so that we, the Watts Foundation and Watts Basketball can get into the community and get the kids working.

Mr. Burns, you know, I would direct you online to the MOU because the Race and Social Justice Initiative was one of our priorities.

When we did the MOU about and that is what the giving council is about as well We took into account that public benefits would be spread citywide for community groups social service groups social organizations So your comments are right on point and those are in the MOU So if you could take a look at that and maybe loop back with my office, I'd be happy to sit down with you I will do.

Thank you.

Thank you, sir

Good afternoon.

My name is Brad Myers.

I'm a co-founder of a nonprofit called Rise Above and we focus on youth and specifically native youth throughout the region.

I'm here today, first of all, to thank the council for your work and your due diligence and the complexity of this project is overwhelming.

I get it, but I appreciate it.

I also want to thank the OVG group for their commitment to community and kids.

They have a proven track record in every marketplace they go to.

They support kids and communities.

And I'm going to leave with a real quick story because I've got 30 seconds.

Lenny Wilkins is a friend of mine.

He's a mentor and a business partner.

Lenny came to Seattle as a professional athlete in 1969, roughly.

He started a foundation.

He's had the foundation for over 40 years.

I want to say 45 years.

He supports the Odessa Brown Clinic.

Lenny's Foundation, through the Odessa Brown Clinic, has probably served tens of thousands of children, families, that couldn't afford healthcare.

It's a great example of one professional athlete who came to Seattle, who stayed here, raised his family here, and has given back in ways that most of us are unaware of.

Slick Watts, I know Slick had to leave, but I want one other comment about Slick.

Slick has probably served over 100,000 kids since 1976 here in Seattle.

Those are things that go unnoticed sometimes, that what professional athletes give back, what franchises give back.

And for me, it's about the kids.

Thank you for your time.

Thank you, Brad.

And we have two more.

We have Jackie McCormick and Christy Stapleton.

Hi, my name is Jackie McCormick and I'm the co-founder to Rise Above and the president, a native nonprofit organization using sport as a modality to educate and empower our youth.

There are 43 tribes in the Northwest and 29 in Washington State and sport is a primary method we're able to reach kids on a very deep level.

We are fortunate and feel blessed by the work and efforts of OVG to include a small organization such as Rise Above in their efforts to give back and impact community, and more specifically, kids.

In the words of Coach Lenny Wilkins, who Brad just mentioned, kids are our future.

He's one of our core partners.

Kids are our future, doctors, lawyers, and politicians.

And to support Rise Above is an investment in our future leaders, the children of this community, and surrounding communities.

Thank you.

I should let you know that Brad cornered me QC last Saturday.

So I I know all about that.

So thank you.

Hi.

Hi.

Christy Stapleton with the Children's Museum.

We serve 120,000 kids a year, 45% of which come in on a free or reduced ticket.

And we have a long history of serving arts and culture and STEM learning through our programs.

We think it's a fabulous project.

We think Robert and his team have done a wonderful job.

And all of you have worked really hard.

We don't have Any concerns that aren't going to be solved through the rest of the process, construction concerns, and that sort of thing.

Our biggest concern is that there will be a fall in foot traffic on campus and that tenant organizations that depend on ticketing will suffer financially.

Those of us that work on very thin cash flow will be affected and we'd like to stay open.

So we would like tenant mitigation to include dollars to tenant organizations that are negatively affected in their revenue during the construction process.

This is mitigated by marketing dollars.

We'd like, of course, we don't have the plan yet.

It's in its infancy for the marketing plan.

And we're looking forward to that.

More dollars would be better.

And in the instance that the marketing dollars aren't enough to stem the tide of public perception from people who have concerns that getting to Seattle Center will be too difficult, we'd like those tenant mitigation dollars to include operations revenue to the tenant organizations.

Thank you.

Are we...

Okay, so thank you everybody who came.

We really do listen, we really do take notes and I took a lot of detailed notes particularly with people that live in the area and are concerned about transportation and we'll learn more about the giving council and how sales center is a public asset and the public benefits package will play out.

So, with that, I'm going to adjourn.

And before we adjourn, I will say we will reconvene again on September 14th at 930 in council chambers.

And with that, we are adjourned.

And thank you for being here.