Thank you so much, son.
The January 2nd, 2022 meeting of the Seattle City Council's Public Assets and Homelessness Committee will come to order.
It is 2.02 PM.
I'm Andrew Lewis, Chair of the Seattle City Council's Public Assets and Homelessness Committee.
Will the committee clerk please call the roll?
Council Member Herbold.
Here.
Council President Juarez.
Here.
Council Member Morales.
Council Member Mosqueda.
Present.
Chair Lewis.
Present.
And I see Council Member Morales.
Here.
Chair, there are five members present.
Thank you so much.
First matter on the agenda, approval of the agenda.
If there is no objection, the agenda will be adopted.
Hearing no objection, the agenda is adopted.
Chair's report.
Fortunately, we are going to have a fairly short committee this afternoon, and I'm really happy that we're going to have a group of folks here from Parks to discuss some legislation that is on our work plan and that could probably be dealt with fairly easily here in the earlier part of the year.
So I appreciate Parks flexibility in being able to move this up and have a hearing today to make sure that we can dispense with some of these legislative matters early in the calendar and early in the work plan.
And since that's our only thing on the agenda, should be a fairly short meeting.
We're going to start off as always with public comment.
Can I ask if we have anyone signed up for public comment?
Yes, we have two public comment registrants, but only one available.
Great.
So I will start the public comment session and I will moderate the public comment period in the following manner.
Public comment period for this meeting is gonna be 20 minutes.
Sounds like we won't use the entire thing.
Each speaker will be given two minutes to speak.
I'm gonna call on each speaker by name and in the order in which they registered on the council's website.
Once I call the speaker's names, staff will unmute the appropriate with the appropriate microphone, and the automatic prompt, if you've been unmuted, will be the cue that it is your turn to speak.
Press star six to begin speaking.
So with that, I'm going to hand it over to our first speaker.
San, who is our first speaker who has signed up today?
The first and only caller online is David Haynes.
All right, David Haynes, you have two minutes and are recognized.
Hi, thank you.
David Haynes, District 7. After seeing the article in the newspaper today, it's obvious that we needed an investigation of the service providers who repeatedly get raises while never bothering to show up for work, while government acts like they were successful getting through another winter patting themselves on the back for a few days of work.
Yet recently, it went below freezing with same lack of shelter, while corrupt nonprofits don't even have proper buildings designed to provide proper shelters.
It's obvious Democrats spread social welfare money to help the local economy and their big donors and owners of rundown, obsolete, flawed real estate.
Bill suited for the task at hand as nonprofits are padding the cost, financing their own rundown, remortgage real estate, using homeless for a lifelong career tainted with skin color discrimination.
Why is city council refusing to solve the homeless crisis going on a third winter of COVID while reports of failure in prioritizing repeat offenders who aren't making real effort has proven they're only helping certain people who bother others and yet get priority over innocent, forsaken homeless, racially discriminated against based on skin color priority inside racist city hall and office of housing policy.
Admitted council, The only thing you've managed to ensure is buying off the activists, organizers, and protesters hiding within the non-profits who trade election support as long as they never get scrutinized or investigated.
I think 178 people signed up to help with the last winter storm shelter, yet only something like 18 showed up.
While the same people are guaranteed raises each year, who are on record as complaining they don't want to solve a crisis of innocent homeless suffering, because they're worried they won't have a job.
So they purposely don't make a real effort.
Cheating innocent citizens and taxpayers, misled by counsel, who still run interference for evil drug pushers committing crimes against humanity, Listed non-violent mission.
Your time has expired.
Do we have another person signed in now, Son?
I see in the chat, Alexander Lomas.
Yes, we do.
The second caller is signed in.
Excellent.
And is that Alexander Lomas?
That is correct.
OK.
Alexander, you are recognized for two minutes.
And once you hear the chime, hit star six, and you have two minutes.
All right.
Hi, so I'd like to comment on the agenda item about parking permits.
Essentially, all I want to say is that if the parking permits do cost money and for that fee to be as low as possible for it to run efficiently, and if there are any profits that are derived from the administration of these permits, I would like to implore the committee to use that money to develop or further develop the parking system or the park system in the Seattle area, specifically focusing on those in underserved communities especially.
You know, I think that by doing, you know, by kind of having this process, you can have a pretty self-sufficient income that's able to, you know, help support our underserved park system.
And, you know, over time, as these underserved parks become, you know, better facilitated and, you know, just, you know, better upkeep generally, I believe that those spaces could also be privy to, you know, people wanting to, you know, start their businesses within those areas and start, you know, developing those areas even further, which can, you know, help build greater community bonds.
So I definitely think that this permit system is a great opportunity for Seattle Parks and, you know, is a great opportunity for all of Seattle as our parks are, you know, some of our most important public spaces.
And, you know, I'd really like to see them further developed and supported.
So with that, I excuse the rest of my time.
Okay, and with that, we will close the public comment session and move on to items of business.
Item number one, Mr. Clerk, will you please read the item into the record?
Item number one, Council Bill 120264, an ordinance relating to permits in parks, stating a maximum term for permits in parks, clarifying the nature of permissible commercial activities in parks, and amending sections 18.12.030, 18.12.042, and 18.12.160 of the Seattle Municipal Code.
Excellent.
Before we begin the presentation on this proposed ordinance, can we do a quick round of introduction from our Parks Department presenters?
Great.
Maybe I'll start.
I'm Christopher Williams, Acting Superintendent, Seattle Parks.
Okay, I'll go.
Amy Hamacher, Seattle Parks and Recreation, and I'm a Parks Concession Coordinator.
Joanne?
Joanne Orsucci, Contracts Administration Support Office at Seattle Parks and Recreation.
Great.
And Donnie?
Hi, I'm Donnie Grabowski.
I'm the Finance and Administration Director for Seattle Parks and Recreation.
All right.
Well, thank you all for joining us this afternoon.
Interim Director Williams, should I turn it over to you to the presentation?
Thank you.
Thank you for getting this on the agenda today and happy new year to all of the council members here.
So section 18.12 of the SMC is known as the park code.
This is where rules governing various behaviors and public parks are covered.
We're here today to propose changes intended to clarify rules related to commercial activity in parks.
On one hand we have initiative 42 that expressly prohibits commercial activity in parks except where expressly authorized in writing by the superintendent of parks or his designee or her designee.
Seattle Parks and Recreation is proposing changes to the sale of municipal code as it relates to commercial use.
The intent of these changes is to provide clearer language, matching rather matching with existing concession policies and procedures, and then continuing to, allow park activation that's consistent with our values.
And I think all of this to the extent that vending and commercial activity in parks has a direct benefit to park users, I think is what we're trying to accomplish here.
I will also note that revenues from vending and concessions contribute significantly to the overall park budget.
So at this time, I'd like to ask Amy Haymaker on our staff, who's done a great job working on this issue to come forward and lead you in a presentation.
All right.
Thank you so very much, Christopher, and thank you council members for your time today.
Sorry, I cannot share my video because it impacts my bandwidth, so I'm keeping it off for now and I apologize for that.
So we're here today to address three sections of the Seattle Municipal Code as it relates to commercial activities in parks.
So today I'll provide you with a little bit of background about vending in parks.
I'll explain the proposed changes and why they are necessary, and I'll answer any questions that you might have.
And so if you take a look at this slide, you can see from the photos, this represents some of the diverse commercial activity that you might find in parks.
Next slide, please.
So for many years, Seattle Parks and Recreation has activated parks and enhanced park goers experience through the seasonal concession permitting program.
So we issue short-term concession use permits through a competitive RFP process.
So we open that in January every year and run it for about two months for people to apply.
We're looking for interesting business collaborations that complement and enhance parks.
We do have set criteria for what is allowed and where it is allowed.
So what we're really trying to do with our concession permitting program is match park values, avoid conflicting use of space.
You can see from this slide that 80% of our seasonal concession vendors self-identify as WIMBY.
That number has remained consistent for five years.
So one of the positive outcomes is we do provide opportunities to small business owners.
We reach out, we conduct outreach to community blogs, social media.
A word of mouth is very powerful.
We have flyers that we send to libraries to be posted at community centers.
And we also work with our colleagues and other city departments.
Next slide, please.
So I just want to share with you three pilot programs that we have done to try to activate underutilized parks.
Last year in 2021, we had fee waivers at South Park Plaza, a park that's in pre-construction planning.
So we had fee waivers for two food and market vendors, and they activated the space in a really positive manner.
Secondly, a mobile vending opportunity for Wembe business owners in Southeast Seattle.
And the purpose was we have some parks in Southeast Seattle that for some reasons people aren't bidding on through our request for proposal process, and there aren't necessarily amenities nearby.
So we were trying to add vendors to those particular locations.
And then the third pilot program.
I jump in for just one moment.
Council Member Cobold has a question.
And I realized at the beginning of the presentation, I didn't sort of indicate what my preference would be to accommodate questions during the presentation.
So maybe I just ask Council Member Herbold, is it a question germane to something in a recent slide that would be good to address at this time, or could it wait till the end of the presentation?
Just real quickly, it is about information on this slide.
Just wondering whether or not the fee waiver for the community food and market vendors at South Park are planned to be continued for 2022. Thanks.
That's actually a really good question.
Actually, the construction at South Park Plaza is scheduled to begin next month.
So we're not going to have activation there during the construction phase of the park.
However, we're always looking to do fee waivers or activation at other parks.
So it's possible in 2022, we might look at a different location.
Pritchard Beach is one example where we're usually trying to place somebody.
So we might try to do a fee waiver program there.
Thanks, but with the construction at South Park Plaza and also the closure of the community center in South Park, it just gathering places are at a premium and there aren't very many.
So to the extent that we could work to try to create more of those opportunities for folks to gather.
It's a really great point.
And I have to really, Shout out to the vendors.
We had a South Park this last year because, you know, they take a risk by coming in by, you know, trying something new in an area that, you know, didn't have the park itself was pretty basic and bare.
And so they took a risk by showing up.
And so, yes, definitely.
So next slide.
All right, so I just want to highlight three vendors that reflect different types of permitted commercial activity in the parks throughout the city.
These are vendors that provide amenities consistent with park values.
So on the left, you see LaToya.
She came to us a few years ago with this idea of operating a mobile ice cream vehicle.
And so we worked with her and she identified Seward Park as It's her community, her neighborhood.
So she applied through the request for proposal and received a permit.
And she's been a great addition.
She is very engaged in the community.
In the middle, you see Sergeant Mike.
And he is actually one of the first people to apply for a permit to operate a fitness class in the park.
So this was many years ago.
And he really took pride in kind of being a steward of the park.
He made relationships with grounds and maintenance, really positive early morning presence.
If he saw a light out or a problem, he would notify park staff.
And then on the right is Preswick, who operates at Magnuson Park.
If you've been to Arena Sports, you may have noticed his food truck outside there.
He's very well known in the community.
And what I'd like to say about Preswick is before the pandemic, if there was an event at Magnuson, people would reach out to me and say, can I get PreSwIC's information?
I think people associate PreSwIC with Magnuson Park.
So these are just a few examples of the vendors we've worked with over the years.
Next slide, please.
Okay, so the proposed changes.
So we're requesting three changes to the municipal code.
Number one, section 18.12.30 is we're adding a definition of commercial activity.
We don't currently have that definition in the code.
Section 18.12.42 permit system, we have existing language that states that a permit is required for commercial activity.
We're just adding clarifying language that would include service product or activity.
We've also added some language that permits may be issued for up to a year because the purpose of this short-term vending program really is to create opportunities.
We expect people to apply yearly through the request for proposal process.
We don't want somebody to come in and say I want to be at Magnuson for two years.
So it's really an open process and Most of the people applying are applying for the seasonal months of Memorial Day through Liquor Day.
And then the last change, 1812.160, we're just updating the language to be consistent with the definition and also 18.1242.
If you see the current code, it's titled Sales of Merchandise Concession Contract Required.
So we're removing some unclear language that was in there about right, privilege, tangible or intangible thing.
And we're just updating it to say any commercial activity, which includes a service, product or activity requires a permit in the park.
So next slide.
All right, so why are the changes needed?
So why are we here today to discuss this?
Well, we feel that these changes will result in clear language.
It will match the language with our existing concession policies and procedures, and it will allow us to continue to activate parks in a positive manner that you saw from the earlier slides.
Interest in vendings and park has really increased over the last 10 years.
Indeed, with the pandemic, we've definitely seen more businesses seeking to operate within the park.
And the nature of the requests has changed.
So 10 years ago, people were asking to have their food truck in the park or vending kayaks.
Well, now we're seeing a definite increase in education, nature, art, or fitness classes.
So these code changes really address the changing nature of commercial activity requests and just clarify that includes service products or activity.
We already have a robust and inclusive process that has been successful.
And over the years, we've worked really hard to make an effort to make our internal process clearer and easier to understand.
Years ago, our RFP was, you know, 20 plus pages and had to be handwritten and filled in and sent in multiple copies.
Well, now we allow people to fill it out online.
So we're trying to be clearer.
And I think year to year, we've seen an increase in permitting.
So I think that the clearer that we are, the more accessible the program is to all people in the parks.
And as you can see from the slides, we're working with a variety of people with different backgrounds and experiences.
So just to wrap it up, the purpose of these changes is to clarify and update.
We're not amending or adding authority.
We feel it's good governance to make the law accessible and easily understandable.
And we feel that this clarification allows for greater transparency, consistency, so the permit process will remain robust and inclusive.
Next slide, please.
And then I just wanted to showcase again, two vendors that were new to the parks in 2021, both Winby, both we received very positive feedback from community members when we posted about it on social media.
These two vendors kind of highlight how we try to activate park space while providing park goers with amenities.
The one on the left at Madrona Beach concession stand, but really tried to create a welcoming space and provide affordable options and create a sense of community.
And on the right, that was one of the vendors we had at South Park, Jumpin' Jambalaya, a brand new business owner who just celebrated their year anniversary.
And as a result of her participation in that, she's been able to expand her business and grow.
All right, thank you very much.
Thank you for that presentation.
I have a couple of just quick questions about some of the things in the definition included in this new section six, this commercial activity definition that is in the ordinance.
And then I'm happy to open it up to committee members.
I'm curious towards the end of the definition where it indicates an exception would be services that are provided pursuant to a concession agreement or agreement for services.
And I'm wondering if you could just talk a little bit about the distinction between the permitted commercial activity here and how that might be different from a concession agreement or agreement for services, which wouldn't fall under this commercial activity definition.
Yeah, that's definitely, that's a really good question.
So, These changes are addressing some of our short-term permitting, like these vendors can operate for a few months.
The concession agreements are usually long-term agreements, and you may be familiar with Marination at Seacrest Park or Mary's at Golden Gardens, who have a long-term five- to 10-year concession agreement, and that is legislated through city council.
those are separate type of agreements that are fall outside of this process.
And so I don't know, does that, is that answering your question?
Yeah, no, it totally does.
Cause these are the scope of what we're discussing today are vendor permitting decisions.
The department can just make a client on this legislation, whereas, some of these long-term things that the council itself would have to approve are categorically distinct.
Is that a fair summary?
Okay, great.
Yeah, that is totally clear to me.
Can you provide a good example maybe of some of those long-term concessions we currently have active in some of our parks?
Yep, definitely long-term concessions.
So there's Mary's that's located at Golden Gardens.
Marination at Seacrest Park.
There's Magnuson Brewery at Magnuson Park.
Jefferson Park Lawn Bowling.
Lawn Bowling up on Beacon Hill.
And then Woodland Park Lawn Bowling.
You know, we have others as well.
There's Green Lake Pitch and Putt, which is adjacent to Green Lake Park.
So all of those longer term agreements go through an RFP process as well.
legislated and approved through the concession agreement is approved through, I'm sorry, it's approved through city council and then a long-term agreement is established.
Thank you.
Yeah, I appreciate some further illustration of the point because one of the things I've kind of heard from some folks in the community generally about this legislation is there's always a bit of a tension or not about this legislation in particular, but the general concept of commercial activity in public parks is that there's always sort of a tension between, you know, what the purpose of a park is and, you know, wanting to make sure it primarily stays for, you know, like leisure, contemplation, recreation for the public good and concern about an over commercialization of our spaces.
So I think it's just important to make that illustration that large kind of brick and mortar ongoing kinds of things, like the things you just illustrated, would fall into a more involved council process with more deliberation versus like seasonal pop-up things, which this is seeking to discuss.
And I just wanted to...
you know, follow up on my commitment to some community members to kind of make sure that that point was well illustrated in our discussion.
So I appreciate you sort of expanding on that and making that distinction.
So with that, are there any other questions from colleagues?
Council Member Herbold.
And I appreciate Chair Lewis making sort of the distinction between the short-term lease agreements and the longer-term lease agreements.
But still, in that same vein, as it relates to these short-term lease agreements, I am really interested to know whether or not you expect and are planning for an increased number of applications.
And if so, do you plan to approve an increased number of applications and grant more permits?
I'm sorry, I'm going to go off camera again just because it slows my bandwidth.
But actually, I'm not expecting an increase from this change because the rules are already in the parks code.
We're just clarifying here.
But I will be honest, we have seen an increase due to the pandemic of these type of fitness, boot camps.
So I don't think we'll see an increase just as a result of this change, just more of an increase because of the changing nature of our times.
And then we are very deliberate about where we place things.
So if we have requests for certain park locations, we're not looking to place a food vendor at Green Lake where we already have an existing long-term concessionaire.
So we're trying to activate spaces that are not already utilize or don't have amenities nearby.
And then in the event of a fitness group, we try to place them in parks that are less busy.
We're very deliberate about that.
We don't want to place somebody next to a neighborhood where there's a lot of people sleeping in apartments.
So a 6 a.m.
fitness class isn't a good match.
So we're pretty deliberate about that.
The public really are involved.
We get a lot of compliments about some of these activities in the park.
We also get complaints about unpermitted vending.
So just to be clear we we really try to You know achieve these goals in a careful and deliberate way.
Thank you
And, sorry, Interim Director Williams, do you have something to, Interim Superintendent Williams, do you have something to add?
I would kind of add to Council Member Herbold's question that vending and some level of commercial activity that's consistent with our mission greatly enhances and offsets sort of illegitimate use and creates legitimate positive recreational uses.
So to the extent that we can add more concessions because they promote and legitimize use of parks in a manner that's consistent with public recreation uses, we would absolutely seek to do that, particularly in underutilized spaces.
So I have a question that is maybe somewhat related about just at what point is something sufficiently de minimis that the parks department would not expect it to be permitted?
And an example I might raise that I just kind of see occasionally and kind of reading the definition of you know something that's associated with any trade occupation profession business or franchise uh...
were offered to promote products or services is it you know i do know it's it's like fairly common for people to maybe go and shoot uh...
you know uh...
maybe like a Like a promotional advertisement in a public park that might be for a fairly small local label or someone's store that you know that they might use for their own kind of internal advertising or maybe putting in.
like you know local digital ads or something like that but they still want to parker they take picture in a park uh...
or maybe certain uh...
politicians are running for certain local offices you might uh...
on occasion use a park uh...
with their uh...
with their political consultant issued an ad where parts of it might occur in a park and i guess i just kind of wonder at what point is activity like that kind of the minimus and at what point would there be an expectation that it would be permitted in terms of how the department is sort of envisioning that activity, you know, and like where does kind of the water's edge go, given that at a certain level, you know, we're all kind of entitled to a little bit of de minimis use of our parks for purposes that kind of fall into those gray areas.
And just kind of curious how the department kind of envisions that kind of work.
So we do have people reach out to do videos or shoots, and we usually refer them to the Office of Film and Music.
I hope I have that title right, but they do the permitting for that type of use through their office, and they coordinate with a person at the parks to receive a permit for the film use.
Christopher.
Council Member, there is an awful lot of passes that kind of get biased because we're not staffed 24 hours a day and we just don't see a lot of stuff.
I think what we're trying to discourage is the outright commercial activity that happens over a long arc of time.
But sure, people will go to a park and there's no one there and no one complains about it and it was a one or two day thing and those kinds of things get biased.
and we're not out there trying to track them down or chase them down.
But I think the intent of something like that is far different than the ongoing business operation in a public park in an unpermitted manner.
Yeah, no, I appreciate those clarifications just, you know, in kind of reading, You know, and I know what the intent of the department would be certainly based on those responses, but just from reading the definition of commercial activity, some of it seems like it could be, it could kind of fall into certain de minimis activities and just kind of wondering, but I don't know.
It doesn't look to be like a major issue and I trust the department to be discreet.
Are there any other questions from colleagues about this legislation?
Council Member Mesquite.
Thank you so much.
Thanks for the presentation.
I guess I'm not specific to the legislation, but since we have you, can you talk a little bit more about how we engage maybe with King County and the port in trying to increase and maintain community participation in our food vendors?
Sadly, we had an amazing food vendor who was out of the port property just north of Sculpture Park.
And if you remember him, I'm seeing a nod, okay, Rod.
Rod was his name and he was an amazing community member and are just a real asset to creating a sense of community and culture.
And he unfortunately wasn't able to stay there with the construction that was taking place around the new Expedia and obviously then COVID hit and a lot of changes kind of happened at the same time.
I guess I bring that up as an example to say this was something that paid me to watch it happen.
I know that it wasn't part of our city family who had overseen that specific location.
But in the wake of COVID, as we think about making sure people have economic stability and creating opportunities on our public lands, can you talk a little bit about any maybe strategies that you're thinking of to increase people coming in and having the opportunity to be vendors on our public lands and in partnership with other jurisdictions in the area.
You want me to jump in for a second?
Sure.
Sure.
On that one.
Thank you.
Great question.
At the near the beginning of the pandemic, we did try a couple of pilot programs partnering with SDOT to really make sure that our two departments were aligned when, you know, if somebody came to us, but what they really were looking for was a street location.
We made sure they got in touch and vice versa.
We also provided SDOT with a list of parks that could accommodate that were that could accommodate food trucks and things like that for maybe adjacent to the park because they were not big enough.
Anyway, we had some planning going on with them to cross-reference those and make sure that everybody who was seeking a permit was permitted.
We don't have that program with King County or with the Port of Seattle, but that's definitely something we could look into.
We could talk to their real property folks and their permitting folks and see.
I have never heard of any conflicts or where our properties touch or something, and we might be able to provide an opportunity that the port or the county couldn't, but we could look into that and see what opportunities are out there.
And I would just add to that, that we absolutely recognize that these small vending contracts are definitely an economic development stimulator for the community.
And we regularly put out RFPs encouraging vendors and concessionaires to apply so we could even reach out to that person and let them know that we have these processes that are ongoing and give them some information about the timeline.
Yeah and I will also note that we do work, Joanne mentioned SDOT and that's true, but we also have worked a fair amount with the Office of Economic Development We receive a lot of inquiries from new business owners.
So there are a lot of resources that we share with people, including Washington State Food Truck Association and Seattle Food Truck.
We've worked with them as well.
And the library also had a small business program before the pandemic that we would often refer people to as to try to connect them to resources.
I think your point is well taken if we just continue to explore different avenues to create opportunities to people.
You do have a follow-up Council Member Muskin.
Yes, thank you, Mr. Chair.
Quick follow-up.
Thanks for that answer.
I'm glad to know about the connection within the city family among departments.
And yes, we'd love to hear more about the ongoing connection with King County that you're noted expanding on or creating.
and the port as well.
One of my favorite parks that happens to be Jack Block Park, which is from our port family, but nobody really goes in thinking who's the manager of this park, right?
They're just excited to have parks and green space and open space in the area in which they live.
Thanks for thinking about that connection to these other jurisdictions, because I think it will improve and enhance the quality of life for everyone in our region and our park access generally.
I also wanted to flag, Mr. Chair, as just a reminder for our panel and our viewing public, thanks to this council and the work that we did not only to pass Jump Start, but to preserve it.
And in last year's 2022 budget, we have nearly $20 million that is set aside within Jump Start's total allotment.
that is going to economic resilience.
We did not get a spend plan last year or an implementation plan specific to economic resilience.
And you probably think, oh, that has to do with the Office of Economic Development.
And it does, in part.
But as this council worked on the implementation plan that is codified in statute, we were really explicit that we wanted part of those funds to go to park activation, creating cultural space for folks to sell food and items, goodies.
And so we are very hopeful that the funding that we then in the November budget last year allocated for the next administration to come up with a advisor to pull together stakeholders and departments, we will be able to have a 2023 plan that gets us over into the next 18 years or so.
allows for us to pull together the funding from Jumpstart and really activate parks and create more food vendor opportunities, which is something we explicitly talked about in Jumpstart.
So I just want to flag that for you, some exciting work to come with the new consultant that will be coming on board.
And as you mentioned, additional resources to help make that vision possible.
Excellent.
Are there any other comments from colleagues or questions?
okay seeing none i think that we can safely uh...
move forward uh...
and and uh...
discuss the bill uh...
art it won't first i want to thank our panel for coming here and for giving us a rundown and answering the questions that the committee had uh...
it it had been my intention to bring the bill forward for a vote and i think we're in a position to be able to do that i didn't really hear any uh...
Potential issues get raised for further deliberation or potential amendment.
So I feel comfortable calling for a vote and reporting this bill out.
So if that's the case and we're moving on from the presentation, our panelists here at our virtual table on the virtual second floor are excused from the committee.
So thank you so much for coming by.
Certainly welcome to stick around, but I think we're ready to move forward here.
and consider the ordinance and then adjourn the committee.
So with that, I will move the ordinance to put it in front of us.
So I move Council Bill 120264. Is there a second?
Second.
And that was seconded, I believe, by Council Member Herbold.
The council bill is now in front of the committee.
Are there any comments or statements regarding the council bill from colleagues?
Seeing none, I feel comfortable just going ahead and calling for a recommendation of due pass to the full council.
So I will so move that motion.
Is there a second?
Second.
It's an awkward way to phrase it, I'm sorry.
So hearing a second, Mr. Clerk, will you call the roll on the final passage of Council Bill 120264 to make a recommendation for adoption at the full council?
Council Member Herbold?
Yes.
Council President Juarez?
Aye.
Council Member Morales?
Yes.
Council Member Mosqueda?
Aye.
Chair Lewis?
Yes.
Chair, there are five in favor, none opposed.
All right, well, that will now move on to full council and look forward to considering that at some future date.
With that, there's no more business in front of the committee.
Is there anything for the good of the order before we adjourn?
Seeing nothing, this committee is hereby adjourned.
So thank you, everybody.