Seattle City Council 8/15/23

Good morning, everybody.

Today is Tuesday, August 15th.

This is the meeting of the Seattle City Council.

I am now calling it to order.

It is 2 o'clock.

Madam Clerk, will you please call the roll?

Council Member Herbold?

Here.

Council Member Lewis?

Present.

Council Member Morales?

Council Member Mosqueda?

Present.

Council Member Nelson?

Present.

Council Member Peterson.

Present.

Council Member Strauss.

Present.

Council President Juarez.

Here.

Seven present.

Thank you.

Moving along in our agenda, we have no President.

My apologies for being late.

I am here.

Oh, you're here.

Oh, Council Member Morales is here.

So let's make sure we get that noted.

Thank you.

Before I begin the rest of the agenda, I want to thank all of you, my colleagues for covering for me last week.

A big thank you to Councilmember Peterson for acting as Council President Pro Tem in my absence.

It's very much appreciated when we all step up and help each other out.

So thank you very much for that.

And thank you and welcome Councilmember Morales.

Moving on in our agenda, I am not aware of any presentations today, so we're going to go to public comment.

And my understanding is we have 2 remote speakers and 1 person in chambers, correct?

That's correct.

Okay, let's start with our in person and then our remote and give each individual 2 minutes and we don't need to do the recording.

Basically speak to the agenda, be kind, be respectful and we're interested in what you have to share today.

So, with that, madam clerk, go ahead.

Our first in-person speaker is Dakota Donley.

Well, the first thing I'd like to say is this is for a purpose of my faith, I guess, but a public profession of faith.

In the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, I believe in the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.

I believe in Mother Mary Magdalene as Christ's mother, and I believe in the Archangel Saint Michael and all the other archangels, and I believe in the saints.

Now that that is done and over with, council, I am here today because this is a contract that was signed in 2015 between me and this city.

I'm just going to read it off to you.

And I am also here to collect the debt that is owed.

This is an employment contract.

The employment contract has entered into between Dakota Joseph Donnelly and the Seattle City Council on this day, August 8th of 2015. In terms of employment, for the start date, the employment of the employee shall commence on August 8th, 2015. Position, the employee shall be employed as an independent investigator of tyranny in the United States of America.

Duties and responsibilities included included conducting research and investigating related...

Sorry, a little sidetracked.

I have a lot on my mind.

Related to instances of tyranny in the United States, documenting and reporting on instances of tyranny to the public through various mediums, including but not limited to written reports, social media platforms, and public speaking engagements.

Collaborating with relevant organizations and individuals to raise awareness and advocate for the prevention and elimination of tyranny.

Monitoring and analyzing relevant legislation policies to identify potential instances of tyranny.

Recommendations of strategies and actions that can be taken to address instances of tyranny.

Working hours.

The employee shall work for 10 years with a flexible schedule.

Sir, I believe your two minutes are up.

Did you want to finish your sentence?

You're on digital.

It was signed in 2015. I'm here to collect my debt.

What it says I am owed in this contract is $5 million USD.

All right.

And a few other things.

Thank you.

Thank you very much.

Thank you.

Our two remote speakers now.

The first remote speaker is Sabrina Bollieu.

Sabrina Bollieu.

I think Sabrina is supposed to speak for item number one.

Thank you then.

Yes.

Hello everyone.

My name is Sabrina and I'm speaking on behalf of the court of Seattle.

Yeah, you got to come back.

And I should have called you up during the public hearing.

So first general public speaker remote will be Michelle Birkenfield.

Michelle.

Is Michelle there I don't see her tile.

Okay then if she is not.

Well it looks like she's online but she needs to hit star-6 possibly.

Hey Michelle can you do star-6 for us and then we can hear you.

Okay.

Hey there.

Hi.

Here you are.

Great.

Hi.

Okay.

Hi.

I just wanted to, I was going to comment on the drug ordinance really quick.

So do I start?

Go ahead.

Okay.

So I live in a minority neighborhood where I'm the minority.

I have worked on cohort where I'm the minority.

I've been involved in involuntary detainments and mental health.

and a variety of grassroots organizations.

And I'm speaking to the ordinance that would require self-harm to others as a reason to, you know, force intervention for our fentanyl crisis and crisis in all drugs at this point.

There's no safe public use of any street drug now.

It's not safe for any users nor any bystanders.

I have spoken with the security guard or guards at Pike's Place Market who work after hours, who've been exposed to fentanyl, vapors, and even required Narcan.

These drugs can kill any passerby, including children, and there's no way a victim of this can extricate themselves.

There's no dignity in these killer drugs.

Its victims are irreparably physically injured.

central nervous systems and complete paralysis sometimes, and they're very traumatized.

They need serious and immediate medical attention to save their lives.

Continuing to take the drug is pure hell, excuse the expression, and the only way to survive without help.

The Washington state law, including harm to self as caused to mandate diversion to medical rescue or jail, must be retained.

And I'm not in favor of incarceration, obviously.

I'm in favor of medical intervention, serious medical intervention to help these people.

We need to put this on hold now, this vote, and take the time to add that language.

It is the only way for the officers, the medical.

Thank you.

Thank you.

So we are, I'm understanding where those are our last speakers for remote and in-person regarding the agenda, not item, not agenda item one, correct?

Correct.

All right.

So with that, we are going to not seeing any more.

We're going to go ahead and close public comment.

All right.

So let's move on in our agenda and then we'll get down to the six items that are from our committee reports.

Adoption of the IRC.

There's no objection, the introduction and referral calendar will be adopted.

Not hearing or seeing an objection, the IRC is present.

Yes.

Council President, this is Council Member Lewis.

I move that the introduction and referral calendar be amended to change the committee referral of Council Bill 120645 from the Public Safety and Human Services Committee to the City Council.

Second.

All right.

Who seconded it?

I didn't hear that.

Council Member Peterson.

Okay, thank you, Council.

It's been moved and seconded to adopt, or to go ahead and amend the introduction by changing the committee referral.

So with that, are there any comments before we have the clerk?

Can we take a vote on that?

You can take a vote on that, or if there's no objection, you can move to adopt the IRC as amended.

So I- Objection.

Thank you.

I would be objecting as well.

So, Madam Clerk, tell me where we go from here.

Can we just go ahead and call the roll?

Yes, we will call the roll on the amendment and then we can speak to the IRC or we can move forward and vote on the IRC, however it ends up.

Point of information, is this a non-debatable motion, Madam Clerk?

No, this is a well It can be debated if you want It's a motion and a second and we need a vote to decide if it'll be re-referred to a different committee I mean if so, I would be willing to speak to the motion, but Understand that's at the discretion of the council president No, go ahead.

Go ahead and speak to it

Thank you, Madam President.

I'm speaking in favor of this motion to refer the legislation to full council, and the legislation being the proposal sent forward by Mayor Harrell that, among other things, incorporates the Blake fix into the Seattle Municipal Code, and that is Council Bill 120645. To send this legislation to full council and presumably final action on September the 5th, our next full council meeting, and the earliest point this council could take final action on this measure.

The measure that we have in front of us is not just a statute, but for the first time, a comprehensive plan informed by the mayor's task force that has been sent forward for the council's consideration.

Unlike the proposal we considered in June, this measure has been proposed by Mayor Harrell It's supported by Mayor Harrell, the Chief of Police, Public Defender Association, and even the Seattle Police Officers Guild.

A pan-ideological commitment to use diversion and public health as the primary response when dealing with the use of illicit drugs in public and reserving criminal legal system intervention for use when necessary.

We did receive an email this afternoon from the Public Defender Association providing even further clarification to their stance.

Just to briefly quote from that email, This email from Lisa Dugard states, Mayor Harrell's proposed approach reflects a long sought best practices divert first framework and in setting that framework is stronger and clearer than even Senate Bill 5536, the underlying legislation creating the Blake fix, which it implements.

At the same time, it does not tie the hands of officers and directs SPD to develop clear guidance to officers about how to exercise discretion in a way that implements the policy framework.

It goes on later in the email to state, Mayor Harrell's ordinance clearly sets out a framework that is at odds with the war on drugs and could usher in one of the most progressive and effective drug policy frameworks, not just in the United States, but globally.

And we commend this as a matter of policy.

Mayor Harrell's administration made clear yesterday in the statements Director Meyerberg provided to committee in the Public Safety Committee that these on-the-ground executive actions that the mayor is proposing to improve public health and public safety are only possible once the council approves and validates this plan by passing this ordinance.

This plan has now been vetted by the deliberations of Mayor Harrell's task force and a productive hearing yesterday afternoon about the bill in its unintroduced state.

The area and scope for potential amendments has been identified by that conversation and a substitute bill reflecting a number of those possible changes is nearing completion and can hopefully be shortly distributed.

I know there are concerns about timely drafting of amendments, but my office has not been made aware of amendment concepts that could not be submitted for central staff consideration in fairly short order following yesterday's productive work session in committee, nor do the areas colleagues have flagged for potential amendment appear to be overly complex.

By passing this plan and giving clarity to our approval for Mayor Harrell's plan, We can spend the run-up to budget in September jointly emphasizing the investments necessary to expand the public health and safety systems that we were briefed on in yesterday's panel discussion and that are further emphasized in this communication from the Public Defender Association earlier this afternoon.

The agenda for the September 5th meeting of the full council is currently fairly scant.

It would be an ideal use of our time and bandwidth to take up this matter at that time.

And for that reason, I'm making this motion respectfully for the consideration of the council as an option for our proposed course of action on taking final action on this bill.

And with that, I yield back to the chair.

Thank you.

Yeah, Council Member Lewis, what you're doing is you're asking that the IRC be amended so this bill can go to full council on the 5th, correct?

Yes, Madam President.

Okay, thank you.

So that's what we're talking about right now, and I'm going to pose it and I'll tell you why.

First of all, my discussions with the Public Safety Chair, Council Member Hurvold, who I defer to, who's the chair, who would like this in her committee, and they're anticipating amendments.

Also on the 5th, I believe there will only be five council members there.

Four will be gone.

And more importantly, well, not more importantly, but just as important, we all received an email and information from director handy at 1117, making it very clear that they cannot.

In fact, be supportive or be equipped to advise us with amendments and have the turnaround time and be prepared by September 5th.

They will not have capacity to provide policy analysis.

on the drug possession and public use.

So the reason why I say this is that I understand from the chair, Council Member Herbold, that she wants this in her committee, as she should.

And then it goes to full council on the 12th, in which all nine council members will be here.

This gives central staff an opportunity to put together all the, and they anticipate amendments.

I have not seen them, but this is my discussion With director handy, and the email she sent us again at 1117, because we anticipated that this would happen that somebody would make a motion to try to amend the IRC to put it on the calendar on the 5th, in which we are not prepared.

So, for that reason, and that reason, only just because we need the time and I just don't want to go back into the whole.

Arguing the discussions in the merits of this law, there's a lot there.

We still have not received the executive order that is supposed to come with this law still waiting for that.

And we did have this in front of us in June 6, and it failed by 4. so I understand we are going to have a different modality and approaching this law as we should.

So, with that reason, I'm going to oppose this.

And with that, I want to see if there's anything else for my colleagues before we have a vote about whether or not to amend the IRC to put this bill, council bill 120645, for a vote in front of full council on September 5th.

Is there anything else from my colleagues before we go to a vote?

All right, I am not seeing any.

Councilor Lewis, is there anything you want to add before we go to a vote?

No, Madam President, I am ready to vote.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Madam Clerk?

Councilmember Herbold?

No.

Councilmember Lewis?

Yes.

Councilmember Morales?

No.

Councilmember Mosqueda?

No.

Councilmember Nelson?

Aye.

Councilmember Peterson?

Yes.

Councilmember Strauss?

Council Member Strauss?

Yes.

Council President Juarez?

No.

Four in favor, four opposed.

So it fails.

Correct.

Thank you.

And in the future, it would be nice if some of my colleagues would have shared with me what they wanted to do.

We perhaps could have amended or remedied that, but that's not what we do around here.

So that's awesome.

So anyway, the motion fails and the introduction for counter will not be amended and this bill will not be in front of full council with 5 council members on September 5th.

So, with that, madam clerk, can I move on?

We should take a vote on the is presented.

All right, so we move forward then if there's no objection, then the will be adopted.

Correct.

Correct.

Is there any objection?

I do not hear or see an objection to the IRC being adopted.

So with that, the IRC is indeed adopted.

Let's move on to our calendar to the agenda.

There's no objection.

The agenda will be adopted.

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

Let's go to the consent calendar.

And let's see, this is what's on today's consent calendar, folks.

We have the minutes from August 8. We have payroll bill, council bill 120640. We have one appointment of Josh Sattler as court administrator for the Seattle Municipal Court, recommended by Councilor Herbold, who chairs the Public Safety and Human Services Committee.

Are there any items any council member would like to remove from today's calendar or from the consent calendar?

All right, I do not see or hear none.

And hearing none, I move to adopt the consent calendar.

Is there a second?

Second.

Thank you.

It's been moved and seconded to adopt the consent calendar.

Will the clerk please call the roll on the adoption of the consent calendar?

Council Member Herbold?

Yes.

Council Member Lewis?

Yes.

Council Member Morales?

Yes.

Council Member Mosqueda?

Aye.

Council Member Nelson.

Aye.

Council Member Peterson.

Yes.

Council Member Strauss.

Yes.

Council President Juarez.

Aye.

Eight in favor and opposed.

Thank you.

The consent calendar is adopted.

Will the clerk please affix my signature to the consent calendar on my behalf.

Moving on in our agenda, we have six items today in front of us from committee reports.

So I'm going to let the clerk read item one into the record.

Agenda item one, the report of the City Council, Council Bill 120615, an ordinance relating to floodplains, fifth extension of interim regulations established by Ordinance 126113, for additional six months to allow individuals to rely on updated national flood insurance rate maps to obtain flood insurance through the Federal Emergency Management Agency's Flood Insurance Program.

Thank you.

Before I open the public hearing on this item, I'm going to allow Councilmember Strauss, who is the sponsor of this bill, to tee it up for us.

and then we'll go to the public hearing.

Council Member Strauss.

Thank you, Council President.

In July of 2020, we adopted interim floodplain regulations that reflect FEMA's updated flood insurance rate maps for King County.

These updated regulations are necessary to remain in compliance with FEMA policies in the National Flood Insurance Program.

We have extended those interim regulations a number of times to allow SDCI to create permanent regulations.

These permanent regulations have now been drafted but are currently being challenged with a SEPA appeal from the Port of Seattle.

SDCI continues to meet regularly with the Port and expects to issue another SEPA decision in October or November.

If there are no appeals to that decision, we will need one more extension in February of 2024 with the expectation of the permanent floodplain regulations to be moving through the process with adoption of legislation by second quarter of 2024. This legislation will extend the interim regulations for an additional six months to allow us to remain within compliance with the National Flood Insurance Program while the port's appeal is resolved.

It also makes one technical correction to a drafting error in the previous interim regulations.

We are having a public hearing today as required because if we wait, the regulations will lapse.

Council President, would you like me to Do you speak to starting the public hearing or do you want me to pass it back to you?

Nope, that's my job, buddy.

Fantastic.

So with that, I'm going to go with the scripture.

I got one job to do.

I'm going to do it.

As presiding officer, I'm now opening the public hearing on Council Bill 120615 relating to floodplains and a fifth extension of interim regulations.

And I believe we do have one caller in.

We have one public commenter for the public hearing.

That's a remote caller.

Sabrina Bullew.

Ms. Bullew, two minutes.

Sabrina?

She may need to hit star six.

Hey, hello.

Good afternoon, everyone.

My name is Sabrina Bullew, and I'm speaking today on behalf of the Port of Seattle as it relates to Council Bill 120615. for the ordinance to extend an additional six months to establish the FEMA floodplain regulation.

This is a really important piece of legislation, and the port has been working closely with the city, with FEMA, with the Department of Ecology for the last two years to identify a clear path forward.

We are not interested in a further appeal.

We're getting really close to identifying a solution, and it's important that we protect our peers, we protect the working waterfront, and we prevent against sea level rise and climate change.

And we're all working together here and I think we're really close.

So I just want to thank you and thank Council Member Strauss for your leadership.

Thank you so much.

All right.

Is there anyone else, Madam Clerk?

There is not.

All right, then that was our first and last speaker and the public hearing is now on Bill 120615 is now closed.

Council Member Strohs, is there anything you want to say before I make a motion to move it?

Thank you, Council President, just hoping that we can resolve these differences rapidly, please.

All right, I move to pass Council Bill 120615. Is there a second?

Second.

Thank you.

Will the clerk please call the roll on the passage of the bill?

Council Member Herbold?

Yes.

Council Member Lewis?

Yes.

Council Member Morales?

Yes.

Council Member Mosqueda?

Aye.

Council Member Nelson?

Aye.

Council Member Peterson?

Yes.

Council Member Strauss?

Yes.

Council President Juarez.

Aye.

Eight in favor, none opposed.

Thank you.

The bill passes, the chair will sign it, and Madam Clerk, please affix my signature to the legislation on my behalf.

Moving on in our agenda, we have items two, three, and four for Council Member Nelson.

Council Member Nelson, I understand before I have the clerk read them into the record that you're going to speak to all three.

So I'm going to have the clerk read Um items two to four into the record and then my understanding is you will speak to those three Right, correct.

Yes.

Okay.

Good madam clerk.

Go ahead agenda items two through four resolution three two one zero one a resolution to initiate a new business improvement area to be known as the ballard improvement area agenda item three resolution three two one zero two a resolution to with the intention to establish a new business improvement area to be known as the Ballard Improvement Area and fix a date and place for a public hearing thereon.

And Agenda Item 4, Resolution 32103, a resolution of intention to de-establish the 2017 Ballard Business Improvement Area to be known as the Ballard Improvement Area and fixing a date and place for a public hearing thereon.

Great.

Those are all three items.

And Council Member Nelson, these are all three are yours regarding the Ballard Improvement Area.

So I'm going to give you the floor to speak to all three of them.

All right.

Thank you.

All of these resolutions are part of a legislative package to renew the Ballard Business Improvement Area, which is set to sunset on December 31st of this year.

And this package includes an ordinance, which is Council Bill 120634, and these three resolutions.

They initiate a new BIA, state the intent to establish a new BIA and set a public hearing and disestablish the old BIA and set a public hearing.

The ordinance reestablishes the BIA and slightly expands the boundaries and the Economic Development Technology and City Light Committee had a briefing and discussion on this at its regular meeting last August the 9th.

So a possible vote on the ordinance is expected at the committee's regular September meeting.

We're not talking about that right now.

We're just talking about these three procedural resolutions.

Before the committee can vote on the actual ordinance, we have to have public hearings.

And so these resolutions before council today are all procedural and necessary to set public hearings so that the committee can eventually act.

And so just wanting to be sure that folks recognize that these resolutions don't set any policy.

They just create the conditions necessary for the committee having had a briefing and discussion to hold the public hearing and then vote at our next regularly scheduled meeting on September 15th.

Hopefully vote, possibly vote.

That is all I've got to say about these resolutions altogether.

Councilor Nielsen, I've got a question for you.

Regarding three and four, what is the difference?

You have fixing the date and place for public hearing there on for four and Three and four.

So is it going to be at the same time?

Yes.

So one resolution basically says, OK, now we're doing this process.

And the other two, we're going to have one public hearing for the establishment and the disestablishment at the same time.

OK.

Yeah, got it.

Just got it.

Okay.

Thank you very much.

Yep.

All right.

So those are items two, three, and four.

Are there any comments that any, any of my colleagues would like to make regarding items two, three, and four that came out of council member Nelson's committee regarding the Ballard improvement area?

I see council member Strauss has his hand up.

Thank you, Council President.

I will be brief.

I had a robust set of comments at committee regarding the Ballard BIA.

In short and in summary, the Ballard Alliance has been one of the strongest partners in almost every aspect for positive change for local Ballard businesses, neighbors, and community.

They have done an amazing job helping Ballard grow into the more dense nature of the neighborhood.

with the, they really work everything from government relations, to problem solving, to small business support, to neighborhood vibrancy.

And for the large part of the BIA's initial life cycle, they've essentially been a small and mighty team of three and a half staff.

They've been nimble and adaptive, willing to jump in at no moment's notice to get whatever needs to be done, done.

If I gave you every example of our partnership between my office and the Ballard Alliance, we would be here all week.

And just one example is when we reopened the Ballard Commons Park, they organized over 35 businesses, neighborhood groups to help in that celebration.

It's just one example of many.

They do really amazing work for the Ballard neighborhood, and it ripples into other parts of the city as well.

So I'm an enormous champion of the Ballard BIA's renewal and its geographic expansion.

I look forward to the city partnering with the Ballard BIA for years to come.

Thank you, Council President.

Thank you, Council Member.

Is there anyone else?

I don't see anyone else.

Okay.

So with that, what we're going to do, Madam Clerk, then we'll just go through each item and do the vote.

So we'll start with item number two.

and we will have the clerk call the roll on the adoption of Resolution 32101.

Council President, as this didn't come out of a committee, can you make a motion to adopt it?

Oh, I'm sorry.

I thought I did.

I move to adopt Resolution 32101. Is there a second?

Second.

Thank you.

It's been moved and seconded.

And anything else you want to add, Council Member Nelson, before we go to the vote on all three matters?

I would just like to say that the presentation about the new BIA is on, tune into the Seattle Channel video of our last meeting because you will be able to see all the plans for the BIA going forward and we will continue this discussion.

I appreciate everybody's support for these resolutions today.

Great.

All right, so with that, Madam Clerk, is there anyone else?

I don't see anyone else.

Will you please call the roll on the adoption of Resolution 32102?

I believe we're on 32101.

I got it right.

You're right.

I just caught that on Resolution 32101.

Council Member Herbold?

Yes.

Council Member Lewis?

Yes.

Council Member Morales?

Yes.

Council Member Mosqueda.

Aye.

Council Member Nelson.

Aye.

Council Member Peterson.

Yes.

Council Member Strauss.

Council President Juarez.

Aye.

Eight in favor, none opposed.

All right.

The resolution is adopted and the chair will sign it.

Madam Clerk, please fix my signature to the legislation on my behalf.

So we will go to item number three.

I move to adopt resolution 32102. Is there a second?

Second.

Thank you.

It's been moved and seconded to adopt the resolution.

Are there any other comments before we go to a vote?

Not seeing any.

Madam Clerk, will you please call the roll on the adoption of resolution 32102?

Council Member Herbold?

Yes.

Council Member Lewis?

Yes.

Council Member Morales?

Yes.

Council Member Mosqueda?

Aye.

Council Member Nelson?

Aye.

Council Member Peterson?

Yes.

Council Member Strauss?

Yes.

Council President Ores?

Aye.

Eight in favor, none opposed.

Thank you.

The resolution is adopted.

The chair will sign it.

And Madam Clerk, please affix my signature to the legislation on my behalf.

So if we move on to item number four, I move to adopt resolution 3210302nd.

Second.

Thank you.

It's been moved and seconded to adopt the resolution.

Is there any other comments, Council Member Nelson?

Nope.

Great.

The clerk, please call the roll on the adoption of resolution 32103. Council Member Herbold?

Yes.

Council Member Lewis?

Yes.

Council Member Morales?

Yes.

Council Member Mosqueda?

Aye.

Council Member Nelson?

Aye.

Council Member Peterson?

Aye.

Council Member Strauss?

Yes.

Council President Oras.

Aye.

Eight in favor, none opposed.

Thank you.

The resolution is adopted and the chair will sign it.

And Madam Clerk, please affix my signature on my, to the legislation, I'm sorry, on my behalf.

So if we go on to item number five, Madam Clerk, will you please read item number five into the record?

the report of the Economic Development Technology and City Light Committee Agenda Item 5, Council Bill 120636, an ordinance relating to the City Light Department authorizing a 15-year agreement with Whatcom County, providing for payments for general and emergency law enforcement and other governmental services provided by Whatcom County to the city's Skagit Hydroelectric Project generation facilities and residents of New Halem and Diablo.

The committee recommends the bill pass.

Thank you.

Council Member Nelson.

Thank you very much.

So as you all know, Seattle City Light operates the Skagit Hydroelectric Project, which is in Whatcom County.

State law requires that City Light pay the county for services rendered by the county sheriff to protect city infrastructure and personnel at the project and the towns of New Halem and Diablo, including general law enforcement, emergency, terrorism and disaster response services and other services.

We currently have a 15-year agreement with Whatcom County, but that agreement is set to expire in December of this year, and this bill would extend the agreement by another 15 years.

And thankfully, City Light's facilities haven't been damaged as a result of the Sourdough Fire, but that, plus the increase in recent incidents targeting electrical substations in Washington and across the country, illustrates the need for this type of agreement.

This passed the committee unanimously.

Thank you, Council Member Nelson.

Are there any comments?

Any closing remarks, Council Member Nelson?

No.

Okay.

Will the clerk please call the roll on the passage of the bill?

Council Member Herbold?

Yes.

Council Member Lewis?

Yes.

Council Member Morales?

Yes.

Council Member Mosqueda?

Aye.

Council Member Nelson?

Aye.

Council Member Peterson?

Aye.

Council Member Strauss.

Yes.

Council President Juarez.

Aye.

Eight in favor, none opposed.

Thank you.

The bill passes and the chair will sign it.

And Madam Clerk, please fix my signature to this legislation on my behalf.

We move on to item number six, which is also Council Member Nelson.

Madam Clerk, will you please read item number six into the record?

Agenda item six, Council Bill 120637, an ordinance relating to the City Light Department authorizing the department to lease real property to and from private parties for the purpose of installing and operating electric vehicles charging stations and supporting infrastructure.

The committee recommends the bill pass.

Thank you.

Council Member Nelson.

Thank you very much.

So there are 27,000 electric vehicles in City Light Service territory, with some 75% of those in Seattle.

And growth rates are staggering.

And already in Seattle, electric vehicles represent 22.9% of new vehicle sales.

And that's the good news.

The bad is that we don't have enough conveniently located electric vehicle charging stations.

And that inhibits wider adoption.

This ordinance authorizes City Light to lease department-owned property to third parties so those third parties can install and operate electric vehicle charging stations.

And it also authorizes City Light to lease property from third parties so that City Light can install and operate electric vehicle charging stations.

City Light expects to install some 10 to 20 projects in the next two years with more to follow.

And this isn't going to involve City Light property that could otherwise be used to develop affordable housing or obviously transmit electricity.

That's all I've got.

Thank you, Council Member Nelson.

Are there any other comments from our colleagues?

And I'm guessing you're done with your closing remarks as well, Council Member Nielsen.

Well, I do want to mention that these are the last two council bills that were initiated under Deborah Smith's leadership as CEO and general manager of City Light.

And I just want to thank her so much for her leadership.

Right now, Mike Haynes is the acting director and there is a search and a hiring process going on.

But I do want to say that I appreciate her leadership and working with her on all previous in these two pieces of legislation.

There will be one following resolution by the end of this year, but I just wanted to note that these are the last two council bills.

Thank you.

Thank you, Councilor Nielsen.

I feel bad that we didn't get a chance to actually say goodbye to Deborah Smith.

She'd been great.

She came to us by way of Oregon and had done a lot of work in the public utilities and I really enjoyed working with her.

So thank you for making those comments and thanking her for her service to the city of Seattle in the repairs.

Councilor Mosqueda and then Council Member Strauss, go ahead.

Thank you so much and thanks to Council Member Nelson for initiating this line of appreciation for CEO Debra.

I really think that Debra came in to City Council under some tough times, or I should say City Light under tough times, and really appreciate her stewardship of the department as well.

And Mara Berger and the whole team over there just deserve a huge amount of appreciation for all that they're continuing to manage, including increasing access to the utility discount program and trying to address some of the issues that came up with electric metering.

Debra walked into the middle of all of that.

So I want to just extend my appreciation and echo what the council president said as well about our hope that she hears this message of appreciation and look forward to continuing to work with her in the next capacity.

Thank you so much.

Thank you, Council Member.

Council Member Strauss.

seconding all these points about General Manager Smith.

It was just an incredible pleasure to get to work with her.

She helped navigate us through some potentially turbulent times and it was smooth sailing because of her leadership.

Thank you, Council President.

Thank you.

So with that, we are going to move forward with the vote.

Madam Clerk, will you please call the roll on the passage of the council bill?

Council Member Herbold?

Yes.

Council Member Lewis?

Yes.

Council Member Morales.

Yes.

Council Member Mosqueda.

Aye.

Council Member Nelson.

Aye.

Council Member Peterson.

Yes.

Council Member Strauss.

Yes.

Council President Juarez.

Aye.

Eight in favor, none opposed.

Thank you.

The council bill passes and I will sign it or the chair will sign it.

And Madam Clerk, again, please affix my signature to the legislation.

Before we move on in our agenda, it's come to my attention that Council Member Herbold needs to be excused for the remainder of today's meeting.

Is there any objection to Council Member Herbold being excused?

All right.

Not seeing or hearing an objection, Council Member Herbold is indeed excused for the remainder of today's meeting.

All right.

Let's go to items, remove the consent calendar.

None were removed.

Let's go to item number 7 and so Madam clerk again, we're going to, we're going to read items 7 through 9 into the record and allow council member Nelson to speak to them.

So with that, go ahead.

Okay, adoption of other resolutions, agenda items seven through nine.

Resolution 32104, a resolution to initiate a new business improvement area to be known as the Seattle Tourism Improvement Area.

Resolution 32105, a resolution of intention to establish a new business improvement area to be known as the Seattle Tourism Improvement Area and fix a date and a place for a hearing thereon.

And resolution 32106, a resolution of intention to de-establish the existing Seattle Tourism Improvement Area and fixing a date and place for a hearing thereon.

Thank you.

My understanding, Councilor Nelson, is that you are going to speak, as the clerk said, to item 789 regarding the Seattle Tourism Improvement Area.

And I'm guessing in your comments, you'll let us know exactly kind of where that area is.

I kind of understand where some of it is because I'm in your committee.

So with that, I'm going to hand the floor, give you the opportunity to address all three.

and we will vote on each of them separately.

So with that, Council Member Nelson, the floor is yours.

Thank you very much.

These resolutions are effectively duplicates of the three resolutions that Council voted on earlier this meeting, except these apply to the Seattle Tourism Improvement Area, or STIA.

STIA encompasses a downtown, a portion of downtown and its hotels, and those hotels pay an assessment on the per night, per person staying in those hotels and that money goes to promote not just downtown, not just those hotels, but the city as a whole.

And the changes that are being made, you might think, didn't we just do this?

These are changes that are proposed that we'll be talking about in depth that are, I'll tell you what date, but these are changes that are being made to allow for changes to how that money is spent.

and potentially to help with promotion of the Convention Center.

So, don't want to get into too much of those details because then I'm getting into policy and that's not what other business is for.

So, let me just say that these resolutions are part of a legislative package making changes to STEA that include an ordinance, Council Bill 120641, and three resolutions initiating the new STEA.

stating intent to establish a new STEA in setting a public hearing and disestablishing STEA in setting a public hearing.

The ordinance reestablishes STEA with some implications for how funds are collected and how they will be spent.

The Economic Development Technology and City Light Committee plans to address the policies in the ordinance during two committee meetings.

A briefing and discussion at a brief special committee meeting on Monday, September 11th at 9.30.

That will be the only item.

And then a public hearing and possible vote at the committee's regularly scheduled Wednesday, September 13th meeting.

So just like the resolutions that we just voted on earlier, these are procedural and necessary to set those public hearings.

So can I ask you a question, Councilor Nielsen?

Yes.

On item number nine, when we're fixing a date and place for a hearing, that's going to be your regular committee hearing on the 13th.

OK.

All right.

Thank you.

for the Seattle Tourism Improvement Area, item 7, 8, and 9. Councilor Nelson spoke to all three of those.

Are there any of my colleagues that would like to address item 7, 8, or 9?

Well, I just want to thank you, Councilor Nelson, because I know that you've been working on this for a while for the tourism piece, and you're right.

It kind of follows the same flow as the Ballard one, so thank you for that.

So with that, is there anything you want to add before we go to individual vote on each matter?

I would just like to thank you, President Moraes, because this was a, this was late-breaking legislation and you really helped get this on the calendar so that it could be considered before the end of the year and before budget because this could have otherwise been a, you know, another budget item that we're discussing and this could, this really helps in many respects.

So I think that, I really think that thanks go to you for working with us.

with us and with OED to make this happen.

Well, you're very persuasive, Council Member Nelson, and I'll leave it at that.

Yeah, I kind of, yeah.

All right.

Well, we got it done, so that's what's important.

All right.

So with that, I will move the first one.

I move to adopt Resolution 32104. Is there a second?

Second.

Thank you.

It has been moved and seconded, and we had comments.

I do not see any more comments.

So with that, I'm going to ask the clerk to call the roll on the item number seven.

Councilmember Herbold?

Councilmember Lewis?

Yes.

Councilmember Morales?

Yes.

Yes.

Councilmember Mosqueda?

Aye.

Councilmember Nelson?

Aye.

Councilmember Peterson?

Yes.

Councilmember Strauss?

Yes.

Council President Juarez.

Aye.

Seven in favor, none opposed.

Thank you.

Moving on to item eight, I move to adopt resolution 3-2-1-0-5.

Is there a second?

Second.

Thank you.

It's been moved and seconded for this resolution.

Madam Clerk, can you please call the roll on the adoption of resolution 3-2-1-0-5?

Council Member Lewis.

Yes.

Council Member Morales.

Yes.

Council Member Mosqueda.

Aye.

Council Member Nelson.

Aye.

Council Member Peterson.

Yes.

Council Member Strauss.

Yes.

Council President Ores.

Aye.

Seven in favor, none opposed.

The resolution is adopted, the Chair will sign it.

And Madam Clerk, please affix my signature to the legislation on my behalf.

And regarding item nine, let me move that.

I move to adopt resolution 32106. Is there a second?

Second.

It's been moved and seconded to adopt the resolution.

We've already had comments.

So with that, will the clerk please call the roll on the resolution?

Council Member Lewis?

Yes.

Council Member Morales?

Yes.

Council Member Mosqueda.

Aye.

Council Member Nelson.

Aye.

Council Member Peterson.

Yes.

Council Member Strauss.

Yes.

Council President Ores.

Aye.

Seven in favor, none opposed.

Thank you.

The resolution is adopted and the chair will sign it and the clerk please affix my signature to the legislation.

So that concludes our item or resolutions under the 2nd part.

So, let's move on to other business.

This is the consideration of an appeal.

So the city council will now consider an administrative appeal to an exclusion issue to Mr. Alex Zimmerman on July, 25th, 2023. the question is, shall the decision to exclude this individual from attending city council and standing committee meetings.

through October 21st be sustained?

Are there any comments before I give any more direction?

All right, I'm not seeing any, so I'm going to go ahead and share.

During the roll call, council members will either vote aye or yes to sustain the exclusion through October 21st, 2023, or vote no to grant an appeal and remove the exclusion.

And with that, it looks like we only need a simple majority.

So with that, I'm going to ask the clerk to please call the roll on the decision to exclude this individual from attending council and standing committee meetings through October 21st, 2023. Should that be sustained?

Madam Clerk, will you please call the roll?

Council Member Lewis?

Yes.

Council Member Morales?

Yes.

Council Member Mosqueda?

Yes.

Councilmember Nelson?

Aye.

Councilmember Peterson?

Yes.

Councilmember Strauss?

Yes.

Council President Ores?

Aye.

Seven in favor, none opposed.

Thank you.

The motion carries and the exclusion remains in effect.

So let's move on to other business.

First, I'm asking if there's any objection that I would like to excuse myself from from City Council meeting September 5th.

Is there any objection or any, oh, Council Member Strauss, go ahead.

Not an objection, Council President, I was about to follow your lead.

Oh, okay, well, let me, okay, so you're next.

Okay, let me go with Council Member Strauss, go ahead.

Oh.

You want to be as well?

Yes, please.

Okay, all right, it looks like Councilmember Strauss would also like to be excused on Monday.

I'm getting this wrong, Tuesday, September 5th.

I see an objection, it's indeed excused.

Councilmember Lewis.

Thank you, Madam President.

Not a request for being excused.

I guess I would point out there may be quorum challenges on the 5th, given that number of absences.

And if that's the case, we just want to check in with the clerks on whether there's business that would have to be moved to the meeting on the 12th if there's not a quorum to meet on the 5th.

It's just a point of information regarding these absence requests.

Yeah, I'm aware of that.

So thank you for that.

And we were aware, we just weren't sure who all was going to ask to be excused because you are Council President Pro Tem on that day.

All right, I think there's much more I can add to that.

Okay, so before we adjourn, and again, we will let people know what we talked about, what our recess is.

We will be on recess beginning Monday, August 21st.

We will return Labor Day following Labor Day.

So that means that we're supposed to be back on September 5th.

Right now, it looks like we may have a problem with a quorum on the 5th.

And if we do, that will be sent out immediately that we will be canceling the 5th.

But I want to make sure we're clear on those dates because I may change my, my timing as well.

So the next city council meeting, if indeed we have a quorum, will be September 5th.

And if indeed it has to be canceled, people will know that ahead of time.

Council Member Strauss, I see your hand is up.

Yeah, Council President, I'm just sticking very close with you apparently today.

If there are quorum challenges that we need to address legislation, I'm happy to be present.

I just also understand it's the first day back after recess and it's time that I traditionally take to work with my team to prep for the rest of the month.

So if needed, happy to be here, but I also I think that it's better to pass legislation with as many members as possible present.

Thank you, Council Member Strauss, and your commitment to your job.

So with that, we stand adjourned.

Have a great afternoon, everyone.

Thank you.

you