Governance, Native Communities & Tribal Governments Committee Special Meeting 5/15/23

We're on.

We're recording.

Thank you.

Good morning, everybody.

This is a special meeting of the Governance Native Communities and Tribal Governments Committee.

The date is Monday, May 15th, and the time is 9.34.

I apologize for being late.

I'm Deborah Juarez, chair of this committee.

Will the clerk please call the roll?

Council Member Peterson.

Present.

Council Member Mosqueda.

Council Member Sawant.

Present.

Council Member Strauss.

Present.

Council President Juarez.

Present.

Four are present.

Thank you.

Thank you all for being here, Council Member Sawant, Council Member Strauss, and Council Member Peterson.

Councilor Mosqueda is excused from today's meeting.

So we will move on to, if there's objection, the agenda will be adopted.

Not hearing or seeing an objection, the agenda is adopted.

IT, is my voice coming through on the volume?

Sorry to do that.

You sound great.

OK, good.

I wasn't hearing it on this end.

Thank you.

I'm going to do the chair's report.

We have one item, as you know.

on the agenda today, and it is a resolution on the long awaited redevelopment of Memorial Stadium.

This committee meeting will also be an opportunity to learn more about the Memorial Stadium redevelopment project more broadly, including some background and descriptions of the project, the project funding, the history, the negotiations between the Seattle Public School District, the mayor's office, the legislative branch, and of course, we have Brian Goodnight here as well.

Our panel is going to have a PowerPoint, and I want to give a brief history of some of the issues that I think are important, and I'm going to make sure I include this in another email to my colleagues, because I'm going to ask that this be, I'll do this later, suspend the rules, put it on tomorrow's calendar to vote on.

So let me just give you a little bit of background that this issue in redeveloping Memorial Stadium goes back almost 30 years.

So, but I want to bring you up to date on the most recent agreements between the city and the school district.

So in 2017, yours truly with other mayors, did a partnership agreement.

In 2021, we did a letter of intent.

In February 2022, as you know, the school district, the capital levy was passed.

That was known as the BTAV2, which included 66.5 million for funding for the replacement of Memorial Stadium.

In November of 2022, we did a memorandum of agreement with Seattle Public Schools and the Seattle Public School District, put together a team, and you'll hear more about the team, of negotiating and what this would look like with all priority given to obviously the school district, because it's the school district's property.

And finally, we put out, there's more, a request for proposal that was issued on March 20th of this year, and the deadline for responding to the RFP with proposals for the project was May 2nd.

As it's been reported publicly, two proposals were submitted, and we understand that the executive's goal in consultation with our committee and central staff is to select a winning proposal a winning proposer by Monday, May 22nd.

Very ambitious, but let's hope we can get this done.

No elected officials are included or were included, are included on the evaluation committee.

but we do have council participation from staff.

That is Brian.

Good night has been part of this process.

As you all know, you have an electronic notebook with all the documents, all the information and the history.

And I'm guessing my panel will correct me if I'm wrong.

The school district, as you know, voted for 66.5 million.

And I believe the city is going to put in 40 million.

And I believe the state is putting in four million.

But we can come back to those numbers in a moment.

So that is my president's report.

And that's just a brief overview.

And you will hear more detail.

And you can ask many more questions about the financing from the people that are on our panel today.

So with that, we will move to public comment.

Madam Clerk, how many commenters do we have signed up today?

There are zero remotely and one in person.

All right, so in our it's our friend from can you I forgot outdoors for all.

Outdoors for all yes.

Yes.

So this is our friend and I understand, well, I will let him speak.

He's a good friend and the work that he does and he is leaving that great organization.

So I'm going to do what I normally don't do.

I'm going to allow this speaker a little bit more time, three minutes, because I want to also thank him for his hard work and everything that he's done in the seven, eight years that I've been here.

working with him.

So I will let the speaker, let me tell you what the instructions are.

We're not going to do the recording.

Basically there's instructions for public comment are pretty straightforward.

We like this to be a good place where people can have an opinion, speak to the agenda, speak to items regarding our work plans.

We ask that you be respectful and that you listen to other people speak.

And with that, I'm going to hand it over to you, our speaker.

Go ahead.

Thank you, Council President Juarez, and thank you to the rest of the council for your service to our city.

For the past 28 years, I've been honored to lead the Outdoors for All Foundation.

I'm Ed Bronsdon, and while I'll be retiring on June 2nd as this nonprofit's executive director, I recognize the crucial importance of public-private partnerships.

Outdoors for All, since 1979, has used collaboration and partnerships with ski resorts, parks departments, hospitals, and schools to enrich the lives of children and adults with disabilities.

It's clear why we do so.

Together we're able to achieve more for these individuals with disabilities and the overall community.

As the City of Seattle continues forward with its business, I encourage you to continue to foster clear public-private partnerships and guidelines for these partnerships as the most efficient and effective way to serve our community, especially in this case with Memorial Stadium.

I've been to Memorial Stadium on too many occasions to count.

As a parent, as a participant myself, as a concert goer, it's such a community treasure that needs our investments and support and I encourage this partnership to continue with clear guidelines.

I also want to thank Council Member Peterson for his support.

Our Outdoors for All is based in his district, and we've been doing some pretty amazing things for people with disabilities throughout the city, but especially at Magnuson Park.

And we're grateful for the council's support for equity and using partnerships and collaboration as a means to doing that.

Thank you very much.

Thank you.

And I just want to take a point of privilege here and thank you publicly.

Um, I know that you're leaving.

I'm sorry that I can't attend your, your goodbye party.

We've been working together since I got elected and you've always been such a good friend to the community.

Um, I had an opportunity to visit outdoors for all, and you made me get on a bike, even though I didn't want to, um, the work that you've done knowing what, you know, I don't, it's no secret that I have MS. And so that was really kind of you.

I wasn't, I didn't care for the pictures that you put up, but other than that, I want to thank you.

And, um, I know you're not going anywhere.

So thank you.

All right, Madam Clerk, I'm guessing that's the end of our public comment.

That's the end.

All right, thank you.

So with that, public comment is now closed.

I don't see any reason to extend it.

So, Madam Clerk, please read agenda item one into the record.

Agenda item one, a resolution establishing the city's support for a new memorial stadium at Seattle Center to be developed through a public private partnership between the city of Seattle, Seattle Public Schools and a private partner.

Thank you, Sarah.

And so what we have in front of us, folks, is the resolution.

And I forget the number here.

Oh, Resolution 32092. So I'd like to introduce Marshall Foster, the Interim Director of Seattle Center.

And Director Foster, would you introduce your panel?

I see some of our buddies here, but go ahead.

Yes.

Good morning, Council President, committee members.

It's good to be here with you.

This morning we have Tim Burgess, Director of Special Projects with the Mayor's Office, and David Kunzelman, who's our Project Director for Memorial Stadium, along with Jackie Kern from the Memorial Stadium team.

Oh, and we also have Brian Goodnight.

I know he's not part of your team, but we got Brian Goodnight from Central Staff.

I don't want to forget about him.

Okay, well, let's do this then, now that we've got that out of the way.

I apologize.

I'm trying to find what I got here.

Besides doing that, we got the panel.

So I'm going to go ahead and let you do your presentation.

All right.

Thank you very much.

Give me just a sec here to share.

I'm guessing you didn't update the PowerPoint from the one that we got Friday.

We have the same one this morning.

OK.

The nine page one.

OK, great.

Yep.

Yep.

So again, good morning.

Thank you all so much for the time.

We're excited to be here in front of you to talk about, as you said, Council President, a project that has been years, if not decades, in the making.

I think everyone is familiar with Memorial Stadium.

It's a 75-year-old facility, which we've been in partnership with the school district on its operations from very early on.

It's a critical part of the Seattle Center campus, and we're very excited to be at the point where we're able to come forward and talk to you about a partnership with the district to redevelop that stadium.

At this point, we think it's time to replace it, but we can have an incredible new state-of-the-art facility first and foremost to serve our public school students, but also to be a critical part of the life of Seattle Center.

As I'm sure you all know, that stadium is a center for obviously student athletics, graduations, but also for some of the major public moments at Seattle Center, whether it's an incredible music experience at Bumbershoot, many of our other festivals that also have enjoyed the use of that stadium over the years.

And as we look forward to the future at Seattle Center, having a new Memorial Stadium will be an enormous asset to all of the public programs that we offer the community.

So we're very excited to have the district as our partner.

And as you described, Council President, to be looking for a partner, a private partner to step in, work with us, to be able to redevelop that facility and have an incredible new facility for the future.

The resolution that's before you today does three key things.

First, it aims to affirm the direction we're on.

As you mentioned, Council President, we've had several MOUs and letter agreements with the district to sort of set the stage for this.

But we're now at a point where we're moving down the path, and we'd like to affirm that the overall direction makes sense in terms of the core goals of supporting public school students, supporting the facilities integration with the campus.

The second key thing it does is it asks the executive to advance, once a partner is selected, to advance negotiating agreements with them for the building.

And then ultimately to bring those agreements back for the city council's consideration.

And one important thing I want to flag is, you know, obviously we're at a pretty high level at this point.

We don't have detailed deal terms negotiated.

We know what our public goals are.

When you see those implementing agreements later this summer, that's when you'll see specifics on the financial terms and other aspects come forward.

And then the third thing that the resolution does is it really focuses us on doing great community engagement, robust engagement over the course of the summer with the community around this project.

Once we have that partner selected, we'll be able to really roll up our sleeves and do that work.

So that's just a quick intro overall.

I'm going to turn it over to David Kunzelman now, who's going to walk you through just a high level summary of a little more about the stadium and how the RFP process will work.

All right, thank you, Marshall.

Thank you, council members.

And as mentioned, I walk through at a high level.

My partners may jump in if need be, but we'll hit some of the points that you've heard and some additional ones.

Highlighted in this slide, as noted, this site has been an important part of Seattle and Northwest history, obviously since the World's Fair, but currently well-loved.

You know, since working on this project everyone we talked to has a story about this facility and that's that's very exciting whether whether you're a student athlete or you've attended an event here.

It seems that this this location has a special place in people's hearts and so obviously that's part of what we're trying to capture next.

So the existing conditions, I think we're all very, very much aware of the conditions of the facility.

The district has been able to keep up what's necessary to keep it active for student athletes.

But as you can see, even from this image, there's a lot of deferred maintenance at the location.

We're at a point now where we believe we're coming to the end of its useful life.

And in addition to that, as you can imagine, there are a myriad of codes that we would like to get this facility up to.

So in addition to Doing those sort of functional requirements it really creates an opportunity so that's really what we're here to talk about it's creating an opportunity, not only to replace a facility.

In kind, but also make it something much greater that really integrates with the Seattle Center campus and meet some of the city schools, in addition to the our partner at the school district and their goals Marshall.

So this slide highlights some of the work that has been done to date with our school district partners, there's been work with stakeholders and various elements within the city and the school district, trying to bring some of the values forward for the project, and a few that I will highlight here that are in the center of the screen.

Really, students youth community and Seattle center.

You know the student focus the student center is the district would say is very important here.

And it's exciting that it's not.

It is about student athletes but it's much broader than that it is about students.

in whatever way they might intersect with this facility currently and how they might intersect in the future.

And so we're really looking for opportunities to integrate students into not only sports but other elements of student life and the function of the facility as well.

So We have cast a wide net with the RFP and asking our partner to consider all the ways that students might be included in all the elements, including the way that the facility might be run in hospitality and maintenance and tech and everything like that.

Marshall?

This is another list of these principles.

These are really the values that came forward in the work that was done, again, with the stakeholders, community stakeholders, in addition to the district and the city.

And I won't run through the list, but you see the values that we have really embedded into the RFP with our partner.

And that's going to be important.

And we've asked the partner through the RFP process to really highlight these.

Equity being a very important one, in addition to the public process that also will follow here.

But centering students, again, I'm going to say it again, is going to be very important.

And the district has really placed a high value on how we're going to be reviewing these RFPs when they come in.

So in addition to the deal terms, we're going to be very much focused on that.

Next.

I'm going to spend a little time on this slide because I think it's important to understand and it'll be very important when we come forward with a proposal.

So this if you look at this parcel A and parcel B is listed here, these are sites that are both owned by the school district.

Parcel A primarily is where the stadium sits currently.

You can see that in the purple color.

Then the hashed elements on parcel B, that's currently a parking lot that, again, owned by the district on Fifth Avenue and the district uses that as an income source at this point with the rental for that.

But of note is the fact that the current stadium crosses both parcels.

And the memorial wall is, in fact, just to the right of the purple there, right on the line.

And thank you, Marshall.

That's helpful.

The memorial wall is right there.

So in the RFP, we are offering the proposer to basically look at parcel A and part of parcel B.

That's that existing footprint.

for the location of the stadium, but they may also, if they wish in their proposal, consider the rest of parcel B.

It's important to the district, of course, that they would be compensated for whatever that proposal might be on that part of the site, but it is open to proposals to bring forward something that not only meets the needs of the stadium, but something larger if they wish.

I just also wanted to note a couple of the other dashed lines that are helpful there.

Those are existing easements, including the one in red, which is to the north, which is the current stands which crosses over city property and brings it close to McCaw Hall.

Thank you, Marshall.

In terms of program requirements, the RFP goes in great detail, of course, about the stadium and all the elements that are included there.

I did want to speak to some of the elements that are important to Seattle Center.

The open space expansion is an important one.

We're always looking at ways to integrate into the campus and allow more opportunity for programming into open space.

We do have some physical elements that are important to us to integrate service shops and warehouse.

I'll highlight the service shops, for example, that's currently off site and we currently lease a space and we would love to bring that back to the campus, not only to integrate it to also then be able to support it on campus without a lease, obviously in the future.

So looking at ways to integrate that into the facility, the existing warehouse, for example, is under those North stands.

So we do have an integration of some of these back of house spaces currently and looking to continue that, of course.

August Wilson Way, you may know is a public bike and walk path.

that passes through part of the campus.

It does not connect all the way to Fifth Avenue.

We would love to complete that as a wayfinding and an important egress point across campus if we're able as part of this proposal.

And then finally, the last thing to highlight is just the integration and connections.

One of the biggest goals of this project is really to bring down the walls of the current stadium, make it more visually integrated but also all the edges around those spaces are important and those are important for programming to Seattle Center so we can support not only large vendors who come and perhaps perform, but also very small ones as well.

And all of those spaces make those opportunities.

And then finally, I just highlight design excellence is going to be very important here as we try to integrate to our existing campus.

Thank you, Marshall.

This is a very high level schedule and really just intended to lay out the steps.

Once we do have a partner and we do enter into contract negotiations, we can get more serious about dates here.

But just wanted to highlight, as Marshall said, the process after we've selected a partner.

Negotiations are going to be very important.

It's hard to know exactly what that's going to look like because we'll have to wait and see what their proposals are.

But following those negotiations is when we would be back to council with the implementing agreements.

Then in terms of the timing of the overall project, again, that's going to depend on what the final proposal is.

But we are certainly hoping to complete the project with a goal of the end of December of 2027. And with that, I think that's the end of the PowerPoint.

I'll hand it back to Marshall.

Thank you.

Okay, thank you so much, David.

I won't say a lot.

I do want to just, as we close, emphasize one thing in terms of the financial side of the project.

One thing that I think we've learned from other partnerships like this is the importance of being really clear about, you know, What are the city's expectations going into the agreement?

A key thing that we included in the RFP language is that, as you mentioned, Council President, there is both public school district and city funding that has been identified for the project, that that is the extent of city public funding available.

I should say of city funding available for the project.

So we really are looking, as proposals come forward, that they focus on that.

as they're funding from us.

And also in terms of cost risk, those kinds of questions as the project develops, that we anticipate the project proposer would carry those risks.

So just thinking about kind of being fiscally responsible and looking forward, we have been clear on those points as we've established the approach here.

So with that, oh yeah, please go right ahead.

So before I, I'm going to hand it over to, I have some colleagues that have a lot of questions.

Thank you for the PowerPoint.

I want to clarify some issues because I think we're going to need to spend a little bit of time on page one of the resolution regarding the 21 million investment and then also our budget action to make sure that we express the council's intent to work with the mayor and Seattle Public Schools to identify funding above the 25 million that, and we passed that in this last budget cycle.

So hopefully the total will be on the city side, 40 million, but, um, I just want to, I want to, I need to put that out there.

I'm sorry.

It wasn't a little, it was a little bit more clear.

I want to go back to David.

David, would you mind letting people know your background?

I got a copy of your, you know, obvious of what you do, but I'd like my colleagues to know your title, um, and what you do, um, for the city.

And then I got a few follow-up questions.

Thank you, Council President I've been with the city coming up on 24 years I'm an architect, and I have worked on many projects including libraries for all.

And then also the fire station replacement program and most recently was at FAS, as the director of capital development there.

And I was asked to come and work specifically on this project so now located at Seattle Center.

And very excited to come at this very important moment in time.

I think, you know, my background is all in development public development, and I appreciate the opportunity to comment but I just want to say that I've been a lot of, I've been a part a lot of these projects both in the city and other organizations before but It really feels exciting with our school district partners that the timing is right and I think we've finally gotten to a point of a lot of shared values and have the opportunity for a great facility.

So thank you so much.

Right, and the reason why I did that, David, is because I know your background from when you worked with the Edmonds School District, King County Library System, Seattle Public Library, obviously, doing capital projects, public-private financing, debt financing, you know, government bonds, all those issues.

So I just wanted people to know that we do have that expertise coming from the Seattle side and working with the school district.

The other issue was, there's two other things I want to bring up.

And you brought it up in the PowerPoint that obviously the priority is for the Seattle Public School and Seattle Public School District because they do have that parking lot and that is a source of revenue for them and has been, and will continue to be.

And as you said, and you know I don't like use the word centering, it is all about Seattle Public Schools that's what's taken so long as we've always want to make it very clear with them and us that that is their property and our job is to.

to make it better and work with them.

So we have a revenue stream that's more for the Seattle Public School District and the students.

And that's why the levy passed, I think, in February 2022. I think the good voters saw that.

So the other point is this, would you mind sharing, and unless another panel person is going to say something, there's some No one listed who the community stakeholders are.

And in my president's report, I've said this before and I said it last week, I wanted to make clear that this isn't a politicized position.

There are no electives on that board making these determinations.

This is a combination of Seattle Public Schools that has representatives in the city of Seattle.

So is there a distinction on that, on the two different working groups or panels or whatever you're calling them?

Becky do you want to jump in on that as you have your hand up.

Thank you very much.

I do want to call out another partner that we haven't talked about yet and that is the Seattle Center Foundation.

And they have done some very good work convening the community.

They convened some community conversations last year and brought together a wide variety of representatives from youth advocates, sports advocates, professional sports, community leaders, those who are dedicated to infusing equity into the planning and the delivery of this project.

So we have a very good start on a very robust community engagement process and we are engaging Pyramid together with the school district, Pyramid Consulting to help us develop a very robust community engagement process that will be done in partnership with the winning proposer.

Okay.

Thank you, Jackie.

Good to see you.

So can you just give me, since we don't have it in a PowerPoint, can you just again, read off who the stakeholders are and then let me know, because I know Brian, to look at the, and maybe he can clarify that, but who are our stakeholders for my colleagues to understand who's all involved on that piece?

So Seattle Public Schools.

I think Council President, maybe you're asking about who is on the panel that is going to be making a recommendation to Superintendent Brent Jones and to the mayor.

And I will grab that list for you in just a moment, but it is a group of representatives from the school district, from the city, and also from the community.

And so if you could continue with some other questions, I will get that list for you as well.

Actually, I'd be happy to jump in.

I grabbed it, Jackie.

Thank you, David.

So in addition to various members of school district and city staff, we're excited about some of the community members, including Matt Hanna, who is the president of the Seattle Center Foundation.

Maya Mendoza Ekstrom, who's the chief operating officer for the Seattle Sounders.

Brian Surratt, who's CEO with Greater Seattle Partners.

And Gloria Connors, who's on the Seattle Center Advisory Commission.

She's a commissioner.

So, you know, we've been excited to have the time and expertise from some of these other community members who are really helping us to broaden.

A lot of us have been very focused at the district and the city on these elements, but they're bringing kind of that brighter, wider breadth to the conversation.

Okay, so what I was asking is, I wanted to know who are actual stakeholders are and then we can ask about the panel, which I'm understanding Brian isn't a part of that panel as well.

If there's a third one, I would like that as well, because I think what I'm hearing from my colleagues is that We don't know who's making what decisions.

So I know we have the bigger panel, which is the stakeholders, Seattle Public School, executive, legislative, some of the other groups that Jackie mentioned.

And then we have some panels that are actually scoring the RFPs.

So that's the piece that needs more information on.

I think, Council President, that is the list that David was describing.

We have one panel which is going to basically review the proposals and make a recommendation to the mayor and the superintendent of public schools.

That is essentially the core group.

Once there is a proposal selected that will advance, then they will broaden out and do broader engagement with a wide range of stakeholders at the center as well as with the school district.

But it really is focused on that core recommendation right now.

Okay, so hopefully for tomorrow, before the end of the day, could I please have a list of those stakeholders so my colleagues know who's making decisions?

And this, I don't want to put Brian on the spot, but where does Brian fit in all this?

Brian, you and I talked about this this morning and last week.

Sure, thank you council member.

So as Marshall was saying, so there's this evaluation panel and there's both voting members on it and non-voting members on it.

Group of advisors, some of which are city staff like myself, and some of which are kind of technical experts that have been hired by the city and the district to provide kind of their technical expertise.

So there is a list that we can get for you after the meeting, we can send it out to all the council members.

And yeah, that'll be on there.

And so the reason why I made the point last week and this morning that there are not elected officials on that.

I'm not on that.

I'm not part of that.

I'm just waiting for whatever, whoever.

The proposer is selected that that isn't something we're involved in, but we do have Brian in Brian.

Good night.

Mr. Good night in the room, not to be there.

My eyes and ears and also putting together the electronic notebook that every council member has with all these documents.

So, perhaps before tomorrow.

If indeed this gets out of committee and we can suspend the rules, so we can vote on it tomorrow.

I would like the mayor's office, and you guys to please put together a chronology of what I just read into the record of the financing, at least since I've been here that started to 16 to 17 up until today's date.

and then of course a list of like the the actual people that are scoring and then people like brian goodnight who are staff um that is one of the questions that is coming off the second floor it's like who's doing what um i'm familiar with it because i've been involved in this since 2015-16 with council member bagshaw and i'm familiar with it because a council member um lewis because this is in his district worked with us to make sure that uh the 21 million investment and then the additional making sure we could get the 40 million and keeping that money there when we pass that in the budget.

Um, those numbers and dates are really important.

And as you all know, I'm a stickler on making sure that I have a chronology.

So my colleagues who aren't waist deep in this stuff can understand and ask the right questions.

Um, I'm not real comfortable with the PowerPoint that I got this morning.

There's a lot of lovely pictures.

Thank you for that.

But I would have liked to have a little bit more information for my colleagues because I know this stuff from doing, um, from doing climate pledge and the other stuff that we did.

I know the documents are going to start coming in and we want to make sure that if indeed we can follow your, again, don't like this word, robust schedule, the more information is better.

And then I can answer questions on the floor as well.

So with that, I'm going to hand it back to the panel to see if, is there anything that you need to add, Brian, before we, I don't want to do anything until I see if there's anything you want to add, and then I'm going to open up the floor to my colleagues.

Thank you.

No, I don't have anything to add at this time.

Okay.

So at this time, colleagues, I know Councilmember Peterson has his calculator out.

Councilmember Peterson.

Thank you, Council President.

Thank you to the team for this presentation.

And thanks for noting our central staff's ongoing involvement in this, which will be helpful.

So I support the resolution.

So just to start with that, I'll be voting in favor of the the non-binding resolution today and then tomorrow at full council.

I appreciate the collaborative and upbeat tone of the resolution for this project and the working relationship we have with the school district.

For the benefit of my constituents in Northeast Seattle, I just want to better understand the fiscal impacts after reviewing the fiscal note that accompanies the resolution.

I just have a few questions about the bonds and the interest and things that, and then touching upon something Marshall Foster had mentioned, which I appreciate, which is who, you know, how cost overruns might be handled.

So I know the city struggled last year to fund many priorities, including several transportation projects.

And we were, the city was still able to identify the initial $1 million, $720,000 from REIT one fund, $300,000 from the general fund.

In addition, on page 137 of the Adopted Capital Improvement Program, we're committing approximately 1.9 million a year for the debt service on the bonds, the bonds approximately 20 million backed by the full faith and credit of the city of Seattle.

So that interest, the Capital Improvement Program only goes out a few years, but assuming we're issuing bonds paid back over 20 y just wanted to basically acknowledge that there'll be some interest costs as part of that.

And that's important because I know when we talk about issuing bonds for things like repairing our bridges and affordable housing, that there is issue raised about, well, how much will the interest costs be?

So are we able to, so the 1.9 million a year over 20 years, I think is about $38 million.

So if 20 million is the principle, does that mean the interest is about 18 million or so over the 20 years interest costs?

Council member, I can jump in if that's all right.

And Brian or others feel free.

Generally, yes.

Council member, that's correct.

That's LTGO bonds.

My understanding from our budget staff is the plan is that would be issued next year.

in 2024, it's very consistent with generally how all of our bond issuances go.

We are paying interest on that issuance, and that is the debt service payment that you're seeing there with the 1.9.

Okay, so the debt service is taking care of both principal and the interest, and then that's over 20 years.

So it's really a combined amount of, so it's really about, $58 million, not just the $40 million.

Just trying to, I think the fiscal note is talking about the $20 million in bonds, the initial $1 million, and then an additional $19 million.

We have not identified where that additional 19 million will come from, is that correct?

That is correct.

And what the council, the budget action last fall stipulated was that our intent would be to find that by 2026. Okay.

So with the latest revenue forecast we received, I know there is some concern about what our fiscal situation will be in 2025, 2026. So just acknowledging that, It's going to be, at least the current revenue forecasts are indicating there may be some challenges to this, but we are still making best efforts to identify those funds.

I think for the fiscal note, you mentioned in the fiscal note, the additional 19 million that you're going to try to find.

I just think it needs to be noted that there are interest costs.

So basically differentiating how much money is going to the developer and the project versus how much money is actually the full fiscal impact to Seattle and taxpayers.

So I think that it's really a the interest costs would make it a $58 million to the city of Seattle, but 40 million going to the project because you've got that amount of interest that we're bearing.

I just think the fiscal note would wanna flesh that out more, differentiate between what the project's getting versus what we are actually paying and we're paying interest so that it's a higher number on our side.

And then will the $19 million, do you think that would be bought in the form of bonds as well in 2026?

It's hard to say, but it's not unlikely that Citi does use bonds a good bit.

It's just we can't say yet because we don't have that specific proposal in front of you.

But it could be.

One other thing, too, just real quick I want to note.

Regardless of what the amount is, the funds that the city would be putting into the project are really specifically about the elements David described.

We're putting in some critical new facilities for our campus operations.

We're replacing some other service facilities where we're renting space with this consolidated at the heart of the campus.

We're completing August Wilson Way, which is sort of a key campus connection that has been identified for years as a priority to complete.

And then we're creating an open space lid connection between the International Fountain and the new stadium.

So the point being that the city dollars going into this have a very specific public purpose to them, if that makes sense.

That's very helpful.

Thank you.

Just a couple more questions, but I see Jackie's hand is up.

Oh, and I just wanted to add one detail to what Marshall just said.

In replacing the the offsite service shops for which we now pay a half a million dollars in a lease payment annually, there will be a long-term operating savings when we get the onsite facility.

That's really helpful to point out that what the city side is contributing is going toward many things that the city needs to replace and the city wants to add value to and even some savings there that you mentioned.

Thank you.

A question about the issue of cost overruns.

I appreciate the executive team highlighting that earlier in the presentation.

I noticed that on page 20 of the request for proposals, it's I think it's pretty clear that it states under the development agreement, the developer slash operator will be responsible for the balance of funding to complete the redevelopment and construction of the project, including exclusive responsibility for covering cost overruns.

So it's stated clearly in the RFP.

So just looking forward to when that transfers over to what it is the council will be approving.

when we're approving the development agreement itself that that similar language is in there that the cost over any cost overruns would be borne by the developer project.

I guess there are two other funding elements to any project.

It's also the ongoing maintenance and the capital replacement.

So as the HVAC system starts to wear down in 20 years, who's replacing that, those costs.

So just want to, It's my understanding there'll be a separate operations agreement that will talk about those issues, who's covering operations and maintenance and who's covering repair and replacements.

Is it similar where the operator would be in charge of any expense overruns that might happen on an ongoing basis?

That's certainly a key element we plan to negotiate.

specifically with the partner, and would like to get as much commitment to capital, to funding the capital maintenance costs as possible.

That's a key thing.

It is, I think it is important to acknowledge here though, this is a very different project than some other public-private partnerships we've done.

For example, Climate Pledge, this is very, very limited in terms of commercial revenue.

potential.

This is really about providing a public stadium, a community stadium that's going to serve students, that's going to serve campus events.

There are very limited windows for revenue generation.

So we are going to have, there are elements we're going to have to negotiate.

That's one of them.

The things we feel in terms of mitigating our risk upfront that are most important, and we've been very clear in the language as you cited, is things like the capital risk to building the project, that those be borne by the partner.

Thank you.

I appreciate this.

I'll be coming back to the council.

We'll actually get to look at the development agreement and the operating agreement and make the real decisions at that point.

So thank you for the opportunity to ask these questions.

So let me just wrap up.

I don't want to wrap up yet because I want to insert a few comments and see and open the floor for my colleagues quickly while we're still on the subject.

Marshall, how many acres is Seattle Center, the footprint, the campus?

74 total.

74?

Yes.

And the Seattle Public School property is about 25?

Do you know how many?

About 10. 10 acres.

Approximately.

Okay.

And that's including the parking lot?

Yes.

Right.

So I don't want to put you on the spot, Marsha, but I am going to come back to you in a minute.

So what I was trying to make sure we had more information on is what Councilmember Peterson brought up, which I heard from my colleagues as well, is, and we've seen this, this public asset belongs to the Seattle School District, not the City of Seattle, which we've had to make clear to people, which was different when we did Seattle Arena.

So, but we still have the duty to taxpayers on the public benefit.

And I just want to make sure that we emphasize that the public benefit isn't just with the school district and that those 10 acres, it literally extends beyond that.

to enhance and repair and develop all those other infrastructures that support Memorial Stadium.

And we tried to take a run at this four or five years ago, and without going into all the history, Jackie knows, it just didn't quite work out where when we wanted to move dirt one time, and whoever got the contract back then, To do the climate pledge, as it was finally called, we couldn't come to terms with getting the school district and making sure that we were clear, but that's another story.

But the point is, we're here now.

So at least since 2016, we have known that that piece of property desperately needed to be taken care of.

We had hoped to get it done when we did Seattle Arena Now Climate Pledge, but it didn't happen.

So that's where we're at now.

My understanding is, and please correct me if I'm wrong on the numbers, are we estimating that if we put in, if we're securing 66.5 from the school district and 20, or I'm sorry, 40 million in the end of the day and $40 million in today's dollars, that the total project cost for this public asset that belongs to the school district that sits in our campus is 250?

I've seen that number somewhere.

That is a number that's been out there.

I don't think our current proposal requires a project that expensive.

But of course, you can imagine there are ways to get it there very quickly.

It's hard to estimate or to put a number on it because we're looking at proposals that are really based on that.

But I would say we're somewhere well south of that, probably in the 150 to 175 range.

And we'll know more after you all pick whoever and then we start getting into those, those underlying documents about financing debt financing all those issues.

So, Marshall, if you can just sum up why is this resolution.

which Councillor Peterson said non-binding.

Why is that in front of us today?

What is its purpose?

Because I know I pushed you guys hard on this.

Besides the fact I'll be gone in 230 days, why are we doing this resolution?

Why am I suspending the rule so we can vote on it tomorrow?

Why are we doing that?

I think fundamentally, Council President, we felt it was important to acknowledge the process that we're on.

Yes, we've had several steps to date with the district, but for a public partnership between the district and the city of this scale, we wanted to make sure we'd had a moment where we'd sort of confirmed that with city council as we move into selecting a partner.

I don't think this is a surprise to anyone.

As you said, it's been decades of attempting to get to this partnership, but now that we're there, we really wanted to make sure that was affirmed and everyone felt strong about it.

And then the other key piece is that we are being upfront and clear that, yes, this is non-binding, this is a statement essentially of intent, getting everyone sort of aware that we will be coming later in the summer with more formal agreements, which will be contracts to actually do the project.

So we didn't want that to be a surprise that that was coming down the road.

So my job and my purpose of going through this, and thank you, Brian, did the fiscal note, and again, I'm way steep in this, so I understand a little bit more of the detail, is that this isn't just a taxpayer-funded boondoggle for a private corporation.

This is actually, for the first time, I think, and correct me if I'm wrong, that the city of Seattle and Seattle Public Schools is coming together for a capital project in which they're both contributing money because there is a need and we finally got it done.

Is that fair?

Is that a fair statement?

Yeah, this is very much a first.

You know, we've got city and school district commitment.

We've got a proposal which really puts a very strong line down in terms of the public use of the building.

But that is absolutely what this is about.

And we are basically aiming to leverage the partner to be able to fully fund a project that we wouldn't otherwise be able to fund to achieve that public use of the building, as well as to help us get the facilities we need to operate Seattle Center.

And, you know, the public benefit piece is something that we have been discussing since 2016. And I think when the voters voted yes on the levy in February of 2022, and I went back and looked at the voter, what the actual wording Um, a lot of my colleagues and some people watching probably don't understand that.

Um, we, we worked with the school district and pushed really hard to make sure that that was in the levy because they couldn't just take it out of their regular coffers.

We wanted the voters to say yes, we will provide 66.5 for Memorial Stadium if the city is going to provide Whatever 40 million in the state now 4 million, because the greater good and the public benefit is mainly going to the Seattle school district.

which is a phenomenal funding source, revenue source.

And I'm guessing, and one of the issues that was a sticking point, well, more than one, when we were doing Seattle Arena was, you know, what was the public benefit to the Seattle School District if they wanted to, you know, triple their parking lot?

Because, you know, the Seattle Public School gets revenue from parking.

And so it had to go beyond parking.

And that was our discussion with them.

You know, it had to, when somebody was finally selected, that was a, There are just a lot of sticking points that didn't get addressed.

So when it finally went to the voters and the voters said yes, that was like the bottleneck.

And so for me, that made my job easier.

Like now it isn't just the mayor's office or the Seattle City Council.

The voters have told us loud and clear that Memorial Stadium needs to get fixed.

and it's an incredible enhancement and gem within the campus of Seattle Center.

And I think we owe that to the school district and certainly the children of the school district.

Yeah, think of the children, Council Member Peterson.

So with that, I've said enough.

So I wanna open it up the floor again to my colleagues to see if they have any more questions and then hand it back to you, Mr. Foster, if your panel wants to add anything to what I've already said.

Council Member Strauss.

Thank you, council president.

Thank you, Marshall, Jackie, Mr. Burgess, Mr. Goodnight, David.

This has been such great work.

I have been working on this since I was staffed for council member Bagshaw.

So your history was helpful and I can't wait to get this done.

This is amazing that we are here and yes, the city will need to add the additional revenue that we have not allocated yet.

I'm excited to vote yes today.

Thank you.

Can I ask a quick question?

Who is representing the Seattle Public School?

Why don't you tell the public who from Seattle Public School is on the panel?

On the evaluation panel?

Yeah, let's see.

David, correct me if I'm wrong here.

We have Fred Podesta, who I think everybody knows, who plays a key role, Richard Best.

who is the director of the capital programs there, Becky Asensio on his staff.

And David, sorry, maybe you've got the list in front of you.

You can fill in the others for me.

You're doing very well from memory, so nicely done.

Steven Nielsen, who is the former deputy superintendent, is also on their panel.

And then Gail Sailhorst is program manager.

She's on the visual and performing arts side for the district, but very entwined with equity at the school district.

And so she is very focused on what that might look like for them.

So those are the primary members.

One other, sorry, is Pat McCarthy.

And Pat is their executive director of athletics.

He has that office that's in the parking lot currently, right next to the stadium, and he oversees and administers the functioning of the current facility.

Who from Seattle Public School District that's elected as part of this process?

So similar to your previous statement, no elected members are on the panel itself and staff only.

And then they provide, similar with Brian, they provide that link back to the electeds.

OK, but who are the electeds on the Seattle Public School side?

Isn't Vivian on there?

No.

No.

So who do we work with on the Seattle, not the panel, just who are the stakeholders, wherever you're calling them?

Councilor, I'm sorry, Mr. Burgess.

Thank you, Council President.

Vivian Sang-Moretz is the board member that the board designated as our liaison with the board.

And then, of course, we work with Superintendent Jones on this project as well.

Right, so some of my colleagues wanted to know on the Seattle Public School side, Vivian, I'm sorry, what's Vivian's last name again?

Vivian Song Moritz.

Yes, and we've met and I'm really glad she's there.

Hope she's watching.

And then of course the superintendent Brent Jones, Mr. Jones.

See, these players are all important for my colleagues to know, because the resolution, and the fiscal note doesn't lay out the process the chronology, who's doing what.

And those are legitimate questions.

They were legitimate questions that I had that I got answered because I'm the chair.

But if we could have that information before the close of business so my colleagues have it in their hand tomorrow, if indeed this gets out of committee and we vote on it, that would be very, very helpful.

We will make sure Brian has that before noon.

Not a problem at all.

And we'll get it out to all of you.

Yeah, and the chronology and the money piece.

So, you know, we got the February 22 with the school district, we got what we're doing, what we did in the budget action, what we're getting from the state.

I think Councilor Peterson brought up some good issues, like on the financing, and obviously there's going to be a combination because it is a public project.

with probably tax-exempt financing, I'm guessing.

There's going to be a split there.

And I know I'm getting in the weeds a little bit, but I want my colleagues in the public to understand that this has truly been a partnership between Seattle Public Schools and the mayor's office and the legislative branch.

And this resolution shows the roadmap that we're not just willy nilly trying to jam this down, down, you know, to city hall to get a yes vote.

That's not what we're doing.

And I want to make that clear.

I was gonna say council member, Tim.

Oh, you're on mute, Tim.

Sorry.

When mayor Harrell came into office January of last year, Shortly after that, I think starting in February or early March, those of us on this team that are representing the executive side here met every Tuesday afternoon from three to four o'clock at school district headquarters week after week after week after week all year long to hammer out exactly what the school district needed and what the city needed to enhance Seattle Center So you're right, Council President Juarez, it has been a collaborative effort with the school district and the city arriving at the point we're at now.

Thank you, and a huge thank you to Jackie, because I've been meeting with Jackie since 2016 on this.

I can't tell you how many 8 a.m.

breakfasts we had with Seattle Public Schools.

I just felt bad we couldn't get the deal done back then, but I'm hoping we can get it done now.

Is there any more questions that we have or any comments from either the panel or my colleagues?

Customer Swan.

Thank you, President Juarez.

I will be voting no on the resolution which advocates for a public-private partnership to be used for the redevelopment of Memorial Stadium.

I want to be clear, this is not in any way opposition to investments in Memorial Stadium.

In fact, one of the budget cuts I explicitly objected to during the budget deliberations last November was the proposed cut to the Memorial Stadium redevelopment capital improvements.

At the time, I argued that Seattle should be taxing big business rather than cutting critical infrastructure investments.

I proposed to increase the tax rate of the Amazon tax to restore that and other funding.

Unfortunately, the majority of the council did not agree, and now we are presented with the proposal to seek a public-private partnership.

In other words, rather than taxing the biggest corporations in the world to fund public needs, the democratic political establishment in Seattle is proposing to essentially sell off the access to public resources to the very corporations they refuse to tax.

And this is the overwhelming history of public-private partnerships around the world, where the public pays and the private corporations enjoy the profits.

There are no details as of yet of what this public-private partnership, this particular contract would entail because the resolution is just agreeing to look for an agreement rather than presenting the actual terms.

However, there are many ways that a for-profit corporation could profit at the expense of regular working people in Seattle through this so-called partnership.

Tickets and concessions could become prohibitively expensive, as has been the trend in stadiums around the country.

and Seattle Public Schools could sign away their access to a sports field that could become a real resource for the school district.

Again, we do not have any details yet, but the history of public-private partnerships around the world gives me no confidence in this approach.

Instead, I believe Seattle should increase taxes on big business and use those resources to renovate Memorial Stadium with 100% focus on the public good rather than the profit of investors.

Thank you, President Morris.

Thank you, Council Member Sawant.

Are there any other comments before I make a motion for my colleagues?

Jackie?

Oh, I thought I saw your hand come up.

OK.

All right.

So with that, let's see.

I move to recommend adoption of resolution 32092. Is there a second?

Second.

Thank you.

The motion has been moved and seconded.

And I understand there's no further discussion.

Will the clerk please call the roll on the recommendation of the resolution to be adopted.

Council Member Peterson.

Yes.

Council Member Sawant.

No.

Council Member Strauss.

Yes.

Council President Warris.

Aye.

Three in favor, one opposed.

Thank you.

The motion carries and the committee recommends City Council adopt Resolution 32092. So with that, If there's no objection, I move to suspend the council rules to have this resolution placed on tomorrow's May 16th City Council agenda for a full vote and briefing from our two Seattle City Council.

Second.

Second.

Looking for a second, but okay.

Hearing no objection.

Am I supposed to get a second on that?

No, I guess I can just do it.

You can object, but I don't see any objections.

So, okay, thank you customer Peterson, though, for that vote of confidence, hearing no objection.

This resolution will be considered for final action at tomorrow city council meeting.

That is resolution 32092. and again, I want to point out for the public watching this.

This is just the resolution, all the defining documents, the financing documents, the agreements, that's all to come.

This just lays out how and who the stakeholders are, the partners and the financing or not the financing yet when we get there, if we get there.

OK, so with that, that concludes our items of business for today's committee meeting.

And our next meeting is.

Thursday, June 15th.

And with that, colleagues, the time is ten thirty six and we are adjourned.

Thank you.

It's good seeing you, Jackie.

You too, Tim.

Recording stopped.

Thanks, buddy.