Seattle City Council 10/4/2021

Great, thanks so much.

The October 4th, 2021 meeting of the Seattle City Council will come to order.

It's 2 o'clock p.m.

I'm Lorena Gonzalez, president of the council.

Will the clerk please call the roll?

Council Member Herbold.

Council Member Juarez.

Here.

Council Member Lewis.

Present.

Council Member Morales.

Council Member Mesqueda.

Council Member Peterson.

Here.

Council Member Sawant.

Present.

Council Member Strauss.

Present.

Council President Gonzalez.

Here.

Six, present.

And Council Member Herbold has joined us.

Would you mind calling her as well?

Council Member Herbold.

Here.

Seven, present.

Thank you so much.

Presentations, I'm not aware of any presentations for today, so we'll move to approval of the minutes.

The minutes of the City Council meeting of September 20th, 2021 have been reviewed.

There's no objection.

The minutes will be signed.

Hearing no objection, the minutes are being signed.

Will the clerk please affix my signature to the minutes?

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

Hearing no objection, the introduction and referral calendar is adopted.

If there is no objection, the agenda will be adopted.

Hearing no objection, the agenda is now adopted.

We will move straight into public comment.

Colleagues at this time we will open the remote public comment period for items on the city council agenda introduction referral calendar and the council's work program.

I want to thank everyone for their ongoing patience and cooperation as we continue.

To work in this remote environment, we do have the strong intent of the City Council to have remote public comment regularly included on meeting agendas.

However, as a reminder, we do reserve the right to end or eliminate these public comment periods at any point if we deem that the system is being abused or is no longer suitable for allowing our meetings to be conducted efficiently and effectively.

I'll moderate today's public comment period in the following manner.

Today's public comment period was scheduled to be 20 minutes with each speaker having up to two minutes to speak.

However, we have about 30, a little over 30 people signed up for public comment today.

So in an effort to hear from as many people as possible, I'm going to go ahead and extend the public comment period and reduce the amount each person has to address the council from two minutes to one minute.

This should allow us to hear from everyone who pre-registered for public comment today.

So if there's no objection, the public comment period will be extended to a total of 40 minutes.

Hearing no objection, the public comment period is extended to 40 minutes.

Again, I'll call on each speaker in the order in which they pre-registered to provide public comment on the council's website.

Speakers, you must call in from the phone number used for this registration and using the meeting phone number, ID, and passcode that was emailed to you upon confirmation.

This is different than the general meeting listen line call-in information.

Once I call your name, staff will unmute your microphone.

You will hear an automatic prompt if you have been unmuted, and that will be your cue to press star six before speaking.

Again, that is star six before speaking.

You'll hear a chime when 10 seconds are left of your allotted one minute time.

Once you hear the chime, please begin to wrap up your public comment.

If you do not end your comments at the end of the one minute you've been allotted, your microphone will be muted to allow us to call on the next speaker.

Once you've completed your public comment, please disconnect from the line.

And if you'd like to continue following the meeting, you can do so via Seattle Channel or the listening options listed on the agenda.

Public comment period is now open and we will begin with the first speaker on the list.

Again, after you hear you have been unmuted, you must press star six on your phone in order to unmute yourself.

So we will hear first from, excuse me here, gotta go all the way back to the top.

Give me just a moment.

We are gonna hear from Cody Zaleski, followed by Ben Sircombe.

Hi, can you hear me?

We can go ahead.

All right.

Hello Seattle City Council members.

My name is Cody Zaleski District 4 and one of the co-directors of Decriminalize Nature Seattle.

We'd like to extend our deep thanks to the Seattle City Council for taking up our resolution today advocating for the decriminalization of psychedelic medicine.

We are in a mental health crisis treating substance use disorders treating depression treating PTSD.

An increasing body of knowledge demonstrates the efficacy of psychedelic medicine in treating these aforementioned pathologies.

It's time to send a message to state and federal lawmakers that using these medicines are a boon for mental health rather than having a negative impact on society which should be addressed by the criminal justice system.

If Seattle passes its resolution today we would be the ninth and largest city in the country to do so living up to its forward thinking replication by encouraging innovative means of addressing our mental health crisis.

I would strongly encourage the council to approve the resolution.

Thank you and I cede my time.

Thank you so much, Cody.

Next up is Ben Sircombe, followed by Kate Rubin.

And I do want the record to reflect that we've been joined by Council Member Mosqueda.

Ben, please.

Hello, my name is Ben Sircombe, and I'm a union organizer living in Capitol Hill.

Thank you for your time, City Council.

I am speaking today on behalf of Decriminator Seattle in support of our resolution to decriminalize psychedelics.

Psilocybin, coupled with healthy habits and self-care, has completely transformed my life.

The anxiety and stress that once dominated my daily life has completely vanished.

Psychedelics gave me the ability and inspiration to improve and love myself.

Pharmaceutical drugs had left me feeling emotionless and robotic.

The use of psychedelics did not dull me to my depression, but allowed me to investigate the root causes of it and fix it.

You have heard from experts during our symposium how the use of psilocybin and other plant medicine has been proven to help addiction, depression, and end-of-life trauma.

Seattle now has the opportunity to allow folks to access the help that has truly made me a better person.

We have the ability to heal people and help end the suffering of so many city councils.

Thank you, Ben, for calling in today.

Next up is Kate Rubin, followed by Laura.

My name is Kate Rubin.

I am the Executive Director of eSeattle and a renter living in Columbia City.

I'm calling today in support of renaming single-family zoning to neighborhood residential, which more accurately reflects our existing neighborhood.

They're not just freestanding houses for nuclear families.

They have corner stores, small businesses, and households of all shapes and sizes.

I support meaningful zoning changes to the comprehensive plan to end apartment bans.

And this is a great step that acknowledges that historically, our single family zones contained a multitude of residential building types and family types.

I would like to voice my appreciation to council members Mosqueda and Strauss for moving this forward.

As a millennial who has faced two recessions since I entered the workforce, I've been forced to create households with many other people in similar situations.

This name accurately reflects many people like me who are struggling to find their place in Seattle but are still building community and contributing to the neighborhood.

Thank you.

Thanks for calling in today.

Next up is Laura Lowe followed by Brady Nordstrom.

Hi I'm Laura.

I'm calling today on behalf of Share the City's Action Fund.

We work on public broadband digital equity housing justice and land use issues in Seattle and across King County.

We support Seattle's solidarity budget.

Please defund the police by 50 percent and invest in Seattle community.

Today we ask you to vote yes on Seattle's neighborhood residential name change.

Here's what Melissa Hall a District 6 community member wanted to share with you.

Every time I hear single family it feels like you're saying not people like you.

Yeah, I'm lucky enough that the people I live with now are legally considered kin, but that wasn't the case when we chose that label for this kind of housing.

It's a reminder that there are lines, that they're about belonging and class as much as building form.

Changing the name doesn't go far enough to change that, but it at least shows ongoing commitment to making land use about what gets built instead of socially acceptable neighbors.

Thanks to Melissa for allowing us to share her thoughts today.

And thank you council for passing this through.

Thank you for calling in today.

Next up is Brady Nordstrom followed by David.

Hi there, my name is Brady Nordstrom and I'm here today on behalf of the Seattle for everyone coalition, Seattle for everyone strongly supports Council Bill 1201 55 that amends the comprehensive plan to rename single family areas neighborhood residential areas.

We believe that it's important to decouple this designation from past that we can better assess and address our present and future needs and challenges as a city.

Firstly, as others have noted, single-family zoning has become an inaccurate designation, considering the diverse uses and household structures that have evolved in these zones.

And secondly, and also noted, single-family zoning has an exclusionary path that doesn't reflect our values currently as a city.

And this is a path that has done harm.

And there's bountiful research linking single-family zoning to these impacts, not just in Seattle, but around the country.

Land use matters and words matter and we appreciate your commitment to realign our land use designations in with our contemporary values and uses.

Thank you.

Thank you for calling in today.

Next up is David Hain followed by Ray Duby.

Thank you.

Shame on City Council for Resolution 32021 from Andrew Lewis, legalizing more God-forsaken drugs like LSD and poisonous misinterpretations of wrong mushrooms that make you throw up that warp people's minds while Council acts like we live in Portugal, the most pathetic drug addict state in Europe, representing the bottom dwellers of Western society.

Yet more evil laws introduced by Councilman Andrew Lewis, who never prosecuted drug pushers as a prosecutor, presently exempting every drug pusher in his district, causing societal implosion and destruction of lives daily.

Perhaps we need an investigation of city council and how much alcohol they drink in between council meetings, where they come up with policies that implode society, endanger innocent community, and permeate the whole of the neighborhood with privileged hypocrisy that endangers lives and makes living in Seattle an oppressive how.

The city council is the most racist, corrupt leadership, tripping progress in whole nation.

We needed a boycott of Seattle till we kick out

Next up is Ray Dubicki followed by Elise Faye.

Hey, Ray, I'm showing that you're still muted.

Try pressing star six to unmute yourself.

Okay, great.

Try one more time, star six.

One more time, star six.

I'm still showing that you did.

Oh, there you go.

There we go.

Yeah, you got it, go ahead.

Had a whole line of star sixes on my phone now, but my name is Ray Dubicki.

I'm calling in from Ballard and I live in a triplex, the likes of which used to be allowed throughout Seattle.

So I'm asking the council to support CB120.155 to change the name of single family zones to neighborhood residential.

It's a meaningful change that better reflects a lively and livable city, and really the city that has developed over many years before we started putting in place apartment bans and rules that dictate the size and shape of families.

So again, ask the council to support CB 12155. Thank you.

Thanks, Ray.

Next up is Elyse, followed by Howard Gay.

Good afternoon, everyone.

My name is Elyse Bias.

I'm a resident of District 5. As a member of DecrimNature Seattle, I'd like to thank you all for giving me an opportunity to talk about why decriminalizing psychedelic medicine will benefit many in Seattle.

Two years ago, my brother and his wife lost their one-month-old son to SIDS.

The pain from this loss was so heavy that my sister-in-law, who was a NICU nurse herself, began to fall into heavy depression.

As she returned from bereavement and continued to work in the NICU, she would shake in panic when a baby would need emergency attention, nearly reliving the trauma of her son's death.

However, this year, my brother and sister-in-law were gifted with a psilocybin mushroom retreat After taking the mushrooms, my sister-in-law was able to let go years of pent-up emotions and make some progress in the grieving process.

She was able to smile and laugh again.

And for once in a long time, she felt like she wanted to live.

They mentioned that the retreat was a blessing and are continuing to seek treatment with mushrooms.

Because I've seen how psychedelic medicine has helped my family and me, I urge that you adopt our resolution.

Thank you for calling in today.

Next up is Howard Gale, followed by Tatiana Quintanilla.

Good afternoon, Howard Gale, District 7, speaking on the budget and police accountability.

Last week, I shared with the council what happened to retired longshoreman Howard McKay, who was brutally assaulted in his own home by the Seattle police.

When the Office of Police Accountability Director Andrew Myberg investigated McKay's assault, he deemed it, quote, lawful and proper, unquote.

The city just recently settled with McKay for a quarter of a million dollars of our tax money to provide a small measure of justice otherwise unobtainable.

Our current police accountability budget of $10.8 million is $10.8 million for 2022. This means that taxpayers pay twice for police abuse, once to cover it up and a second time to compensate the victims.

The SPD spends another 10 plus million on accountability, and the city attorney's office spends around $17 million for its civil division, much of which is to fight and settle police abuse.

Please, Bring us true civilian oversight, rebudget, take all that money away from the SPD.

Next up is Tatiana, followed by Beth.

Hi, my name is Tatiana Quintana and I live in District 2 and I'm co-director of DecrimNature Seattle.

Our organization has been advocating to decriminalize empty agents for the past two and a half years, and to see this resolution come before council today is a tremendous milestone for us.

I was gifted with the opportunity to have my first psychedelic experience a few years ago, and I had no idea how profoundly this would change my life.

I generally felt emotionally numb before that day and was suffering from anxiety and depression on a daily basis.

The depth of emotions I was able to embody that day helped me to understand on a visceral level that trauma is stored in our bodies and that unresolved trauma can look an awful lot like someone's personality.

And that was true for me.

And I was awakened then to how much potential I truly have and that I was being weighed down by unresolved trauma for my past.

With the help of an experienced therapist, I've been able to move through a lot of that on my healing journey.

And I volunteer with this group because I believe that access to these medicines should not mean the difference between risking a felony or misdemeanor charge or not accessing a medicine that can save your life.

So I just would like to thank council today for considering this issue and I look forward to.

Okay.

Next up is Beth Osborne followed by Chris.

Members of the Seattle City Council.

My name is Beth Osborne and I'm director of public affairs at Sumatra and a Seattle resident.

I'm here to support a valued community partner the Seattle Storm.

I want to share our experience working with them in the arena and in the community and why we believe they deserve your support to build a practice facility that meets their needs.

We are a Storm partner aligned in efforts to promote social justice diversity equity and inclusion and we see their intentional and impactful work to invest in Seattle's women youth and community.

CB120149 is before you today and was supported by the Land Use Committee.

Thank you very much for that support.

And allows them to build a larger practice facility than currently allowed at a site already zoned as industrial and allows sports and recreational facilities.

They're just asking for a little bit larger space.

We really hope you will consider this.

We believe our city is stronger with the presence of the storm, and I'll email you with additional information.

Thank you, Beth, for calling in today.

Next up is Chris Iverson, followed by Vinyak Gaikwad.

Good afternoon, Council.

My name is Chris Iverson, and I'm here to speak in support of Resolution 32021 and ask you to support the decriminalization of plant-based pathogens.

These types of substances are probably some of the most misunderstood by the broad public and yet are some of the most promising.

Growing research is showing that substances like psilocybin and ibogaine, under the right context, can treat many of the mental health ailments of the modern age, such as anxiety, depression, and PTSD.

Cities and agencies around the country such as Denver, Oakland, California, and the state of Oregon have recognized the benefits of psychedelics and have taken similar steps to decriminalize these substances and loosen previously aggressive enforcement policies.

Additionally, it is now well known that the war on drugs has been a failed, expensive, costly, and institutionally racist policy on a national scale.

Seattle should continue leading the progressive push to move away from these stances and be open-minded to new approaches.

Thank you for your time.

Thanks for calling in today.

And next up is Vinayak, followed by Jody.

Good afternoon, Council.

My name is Vinayak Aikwad from Mississauga.

I'm a member of Decriminate Your Seattle, and I'm commenting to support the decriminalization of psychedelic medicines in Seattle.

A recent John Hopkins smoking cessation study reported that participants that took psilocybin achieved an 80% abstinence rate over six months compared to a 35% success rate for patients taking a drug like Shanta.

Firstly, psilocybin mushrooms have helped me quit smoking cigarettes and can confidently say for good after trying countless other methods and having failed.

These fungi have also helped me deal with anxiety, anger, and depression in ways that I've not been able to realize through more traditional forms of therapy or counseling.

In addition, this fungi has the power to help people address past traumas, PTSD, and more importantly, it goes further.

It spurs positive action in the individual that takes it.

It has the power to stop negative behaviors in one's life while deepening social connections with other humans and even nature.

Now more research and studies are coming out showing the other benefits of psilocybin besides treating addiction, anxiety, or depression.

And it also addresses Alzheimer's.

I want to thank all of you for your time and appreciate your support in passing this resolution.

Thanks for calling in.

Next up is Jody Thomas followed by Nick Brack.

Good afternoon.

My name is Jodi Thomas.

I'm here in support of decriminalizing psychedelics.

Psychedelics have healed many aspects of my health, including anxiety and fibromyalgia.

I meet people every day healing a wide variety of their emotional and physical health issues, getting off of meds, prescribed and illegal, including a homeless woman who's now one and a half months clean of heroin using psilocybin microbe dosing, and a man who's paralyzed, took a large dose and got up and walked during his journey.

is now under recovery.

The power of the mind to heal the body is incredible.

These plants unlock the power of our mind to heal ourselves.

They're safe, effective, non-addictive, and nearly free.

Thank you for your time and your attention to this matter.

Thanks for calling in.

Next up is Nick Brattain, followed by Leslie Gacias, and then we will hear from Will Dougherty.

And Nick, I have you up on my screen, and we just need you to press star six.

Sometimes Zoom can be a little prickly, so you might have to do it a few times.

So it's star six to unmute yourself.

Try one more time, Nick.

Still seeing you as muted.

One more time, Nick.

Star six.

There you go.

Okay.

Great.

Thank you for your patience.

Council members, thank you.

I'm Nick Breton representing Fort Terra.

Please adopt the ordinance in agenda item 11 to update the city's transfer of development rights program.

The program has exceeded expectations both in terms of conservation and how much revenue it is generating for public improvements that support growth.

The spirit and letter of the statute is for cities to adopt develop or accept development rights from Pierce, Kane, and Snohomish counties.

By only accepting credits from King County, Seattle is out of compliance with the statute.

The ordinance before you is a simple update that remedies the issue and will open the door to use of transfer of development rights across all three counties.

Continued demand for growth in the city will use the program and also benefit affordable housing.

By adopting this fix, the city will achieve the regional scale of the program as envisioned in state law.

It will also set an example for other cities to conserve our farms and forests.

Thank you and please adopt this ordinance as drafted.

Thank you for calling in.

Next up is Leslie Casias followed by Will Dougherty.

Hi, my name is Leslie.

I'm from District 3, and I'm part of Decrim Nature Seattle.

I'm here today as a chronic pain sufferer and also as a medical professional asking you to decriminalize psychedelic plant medications.

In 2011, I went for a run while living in Texas, and my hands and feet and ears started swelling up, turning bright red, and I felt like I was on fire.

I went to several doctors and ended up eventually at Mayo Clinic, diagnosed with a rare pain condition called erythromyalgia, better known as Burning Man Syndrome.

I could barely walk, hold my cell phone, or work due to feeling like I was on fire.

I eventually had to move to Seattle, Washington to at least feel like I was not in pain.

I found psychedelic medications here, and now I can work, walk, and even start my own business.

Please allow this medication to help others like it helped me.

Thank you for calling in today.

Next up is Will, and then after Will will be Lisa Price.

I am showing Shannon Newsome and Sarah Jane Siegfried as registered but not present on my side.

If Shannon and Sarah Jane call in, we'll make sure to give you your one minute.

But for now, we're going to hear from Will, and then after Will, Lisa Price.

Will, welcome.

Can you hear me?

We can.

Go ahead.

Great.

Good afternoon, council members.

I'm Will Doherty, CEO of Pacific Science Center.

I'm here to comment on the legislation before the council that would allow the Seattle Storm to build and operate a sports and recreation facility in the Interbay neighborhood.

I strongly encourage the council to approve this legislation.

The Storm sports and recreation facility would provide a public benefit to the entire city of Seattle and the surrounding region.

With a focus on youth sports the facility would build future leaders while promoting the health and well-being of the entire community.

The facility and the programming enables would broaden and deepen the impact of the Storm's Force for Change initiative that promotes progressive social change including voter education BIPOC youth and businesses and the LGBTQ community.

Seattle is well known for strong support of men's professional sports.

Our women's teams deserve and need just as much support.

Pacific Science Center and I are excited to support this, and we encourage the city council to help make this possible.

Sorry about that.

I realized I was muted.

Next up is Lisa Price, followed by Eric Pettigrew.

Hello?

Go ahead.

Oh, hello, everyone.

Good afternoon.

My name is Dr. Lisa Price.

I'm a licensed naturopathic physician, a National Institute of Health Research Fellow, and also a clinical research investigator.

I'm testifying in support of this resolution to decriminalize psilocybin-containing mushrooms.

For the last decade, research facilities such as John Hopkins University, Yale, University of New York, University of California, San Francisco, and University of Maryland, et cetera, demonstrate the safety of psilocybin and are in the process of researching its efficacy to pathophysiology such as antidepressant, resistant depression, cluster headaches, nicotine and alcohol dependence, obsessive compulsive disorder, and many other conditions.

This resolution begins to open the door to therapeutic and compassionate use, but also to research in the Pacific Northwest, particularly to our for our fellow citizens suffering from medically orphaned conditions.

So I am testifying in support of the decriminalization of.

Thank you so much for calling in.

Next up is former representative Eric Pettigrew, followed by Alice Blockhart, and then we'll hear from Maria Barrientos.

Thank you.

Thank you, Madam President, distinguished members.

of the City Council for the record my name is Eric Pettigrew I'm the VP of Government Relations for the Seattle Kraken Hockey Team speaking on behalf of Todd Leibwicki our CEO and the Seattle Kraken Hockey Team in support of Council Bill 12149. You know community engagement is key to any partnership.

The proposed amendment increasing the maximized size from 10,000 square feet to 50,000 square feet in industrial zones will continue that standard of support.

for sports teams in Seattle for being responsive to youth recreation and BIPOC businesses going forward.

The Seattle Storm have been an incredible role model for all sports teams in the Puget Sound especially in those areas and continue to be a leader for all of us in community justice.

Thank you so much for calling in today.

Okay, next up is Alice Lockhart, and then we will hear from Maria Barrion.

Hello, Council.

I'm Alice Lockhart for 350 Seattle, and we wholeheartedly support neighborhood residential.

It's a great first step toward a just and equitable comp plan process that will help end racist zoning and allow the changes that will allow, sorry for the wording, all our neighborhoods to support transit ready density, much more workforce housing and the services we all need to thrive.

Also, speaking of comp plan, we really deeply appreciated council's conversation with OPCD during last Friday's budget deep dive.

The thoughtful questions that council members made seeking to ensure that we completely fund a deeply equitable comp plan process and and also fund a sufficiently broad and deep EIS were really great to hear.

And so were OPCD's ready and thoughtful and surprisingly detailed responses given, you know, they were on, it was in-person questions.

This is good government.

Really appreciate it.

Thank you.

Thank you, Alice.

Next up is Maria Barrientos, and then we will hear from Shannon Newsome.

Thank you.

You are one of the few people who always pronounce my name right.

Maria Barrientos, District 7. I am in support of the proposed ordinance, Council Bill 120149, to maximize the size of use and size of use and minimum parking requirements for indoor sports and recreation uses.

This code amendment allows for the possibility to provide badly needed equity for women and women of color in the sports world.

A place for women and girls to be treated as important and equal members of the sports community.

This is a huge win for the city for women and will serve to enhance the immediate community.

Thank you for this opportunity to share my thoughts.

I have another head on that I'll quickly speak to and that's Seattle for Everyone.

I'm also in support of Council Bill 0155 residential name changes.

Thank you.

Thanks so much, Maria.

Okay, next up is Shannon Newsome and then after Shannon will be Peter Condit.

There you go, Shannon.

Go ahead.

Hello, this is Shannon Newsome.

I'm in District 7 in Seattle.

My testimony is about psilocybin.

I'm from Decrim, Seattle, Nature, Seattle.

I'm interested in seeing psilocybin be accessible to the general population.

Whenever a medicine or a practice or technology is well respected and used in society in general, the more of us with mental health conditions can access those technologies.

That way I can access those treatments without fear of stigmatization or missing out on accommodations and access.

authorizing the next advances in medicine like psilocybin removes the glass ceiling to my independent living.

I have a high respect for heritage and ancient traditional practices.

In social work school, I learned about intergenerational trauma and cause of intergeneration and erasing the heritage and traditional practices like psilocybin has been within one's culture for traditional religious and medicinal practices used in ritual.

So I ask that traditional users qualify and be respected in writing this legislation.

Thank you so much.

Okay, I'm still showing Sarah Jane Siegfried and Connor Waters and Jim Stafford as being pre-registered but not present.

If you call in, I'll make sure to give you your minute.

Next up is Peter Condit and then Matt Hutchins.

Sorry about that, Richard.

We looks like we called you up a little too early.

We're going to hear from Peter Condit and then Matt Hutchins.

Go ahead, Peter.

Hi, thanks.

This is Peter Condit, an abolitionist in District 6. I'm speaking today in support of Council Bill 12155, which changes the name single family zoning in the city's comprehensive plan.

Before I start, though, I want to also say I support the Solidarity Budget, which defunds SPD and the municipal court by 50%, and I support the Decriminalize Nature of Seattle Resolution, and I support Ordinance 120-149 for women's indoor sports and recreation.

I'm a privileged single-family homeowner in an exclusionary zoned area of Green Lake, and I personally think apartments of all heights should be legal everywhere.

I care about this because I believe the most important way to make our city more equitable, just, and safe is by providing more access to deeply affordable housing in all parts of the city.

Housing Everyone is the most effective way to keep people safe and work towards abolishing the harmful Seattle Police Department and criminal legal systems.

Thank you to Councilmembers Mosqueda and Strauss for moving this forward, and thank you all for listening.

Thank you for calling in today.

Next up is Matt Hutchins, followed by Michael Murphy.

Hi, my name is Matt Hutchins and I'm calling to support CB 12055 to change the title of single-family zoning to neighborhood residential.

Our land use code is stuck in the past and it doesn't really reflect the character of our neighborhoods.

It preferences a car-dependent land use pattern, codifies exclusion, and views new housing and diverse housing types, corner stores, mixed uses as an affront rather than the very backbone of what makes our neighborhood special.

Changing these two words is just the beginning to address critical issues of equity, affordability, and climate change.

And by making our land-use code more open-ended, we can start here and keep going.

I also want to add a pitch to adequately fund OPCD's community outreach for the comp plan update.

Let's build a strong foundation for the future, and that's a great first step.

Thank you very much.

Thank you.

Next up is Michael Murphy, followed by Richard Seguin.

Go ahead, Michael.

Thank you, President Gonzalez and members of the council.

Thanks for the opportunity to comment today.

My name is Michael Murphy.

I manage King County's Transfer of Development Rights Program, and I'm here today to speak in favor of the regional TDR legislation on the agenda, which is Council Bill 12081. Transfer of Development Rights achieves multiple Growth Management Act goals of protecting forests, farms, and other rural areas that we'd like to see permanently conserved.

and focusing new growth in urban centers like downtown, Denny Triangle and South Lake Union.

The effect of this legislation is to open the door for Seattle developers to purchase TDRs from Pierce and Snohomish County as well as King County, which will help benefit conservation outcomes in Snohomish and Pierce County as well.

We believe that conservation is a regional endeavor and I urge your support for this legislation.

Thanks much.

Thank you for calling in today.

Next up is Richard followed by David Heldreth.

My name is Richard Sagan.

I'm a business owner and resident of Seattle, the director of Decriminalize Nature Seattle.

I'm on the Decriminalize Nature National Board and Sustainability Committee.

And I would like to comment on the exclusion of peyote from the definition of entheogens and resolution 32021. i'm asking council to include peyote in the definition of entheogens because of its vulnerable ecological status and depletion in the wild decriminalization should include personal peyote cultivation and reduce demand for illegal harvesting and trafficking into our city and state and promote the recovery of this plant and also the criminalization of peyote is also financially entangled with a minority group that is trying to monopolize that plant nationwide so i would just like to uh...

to see a city council include peyote in the decolonization of entheogens.

Thank you for calling in today, Richard.

Next up is David Heldreth, and then we will go back to Sarah-Jane Siegfried.

Hi, this is David Heldreth, and I'm speaking in support of the entheogen proposition.

I actually first want to speak in support of the peyote exclusion.

Indigenous rights should be respected, and also due to the fact that peyote, better known as Lapa Fora Wayensai, is needed for protection due to the environmental decline of the species, allowing it to be legally included in this bill or proposition would actually create a problem because there's no way to differentiate whether or not a specimen someone has would be wild-kept and stolen from the wild or legally obtained, if you allow it.

As such, I do not believe that peyote should be included, as all of the Native American churches have pretty much spoken in support of the exclusion as well.

Similarly, I also want to speak as a researcher for psychedelics, I believe that they should be protected and decriminalized for personally

Thank you for calling in today.

Next up is Carlo.

Oh, I'm sorry.

We're going to go back to Sarah Jane.

Uh, and then after Sarah Jane will be Carlos.

Hi, this is Sarah Jane Siegfried.

I live in Lake city and I just completed an in-law apartment that I rent affordably.

So I'm all for adding density, but with consideration for tree canopy and for neighborhood character.

A better name for this would be low-density and medium-density.

That would make much more sense than changing on the one hand, taking the word family out, and on the other hand, leaving it in.

Neighborhood character, I know, is a no-no to mention, but it's real.

You can travel anywhere, and for example, Jane Jacobs' beloved Lower East Side, and it's the consistency of height, setbacks, and scale that makes the neighborhood walkable and attractive.

I'm all for adding duplexes and triplexes, which we did in the ADU law, but I ask that you call on further changes until we have data about the need for capacity.

We have plenty of zone capacity for all the growth that's coming, I believe, but any further up zones should be based on data, not value.

Thank you for calling in.

Next up is Carlos Plazola, and then we will hear from Connor Waters.

Good afternoon, members of the council.

My name is Carlos Frizzola.

I'm chair of Decriminalize Nature National.

I'm also indigenous from the state of Jalisco in Mexico and speak on behalf of myself and Angelica Valadez, which is Wixarica from the state of Jalisco as well.

We'd like for you to understand that only four out of 400 Native American churches support keeping peyote criminalized.

All the others want to have cultivation of peyote decriminalized.

because for 100 years plus we've had peyote criminalized and it's only led to its decline.

The four groups that are supporting keeping it criminalized for cultivation are entangled with capitalists who are trying to corner the market on peyote.

And we'd like for you all to consider this and please change the way we relate with peyote by decriminalizing personal cultivation of peyote.

And also we support the entheogen decriminalization measure on your schedule.

Thank you.

Thank you so much Carlos.

Next up is Connor Waters followed by Larry Norris.

Hello.

My name is Connor.

I am a member of District 6. I'm commenting to support the decriminalization of psychedelic medicines in Seattle.

A little bit about me.

I am a final year naturopathic medical student soon to be doctor.

I personally have benefited from psychedelics in my life to overcome trauma as well as anxiety and depression.

I find that the use of these plant medicines in a safe and responsible manner has allowed me to experience relief from these chronic complaints, especially as I have also combined them with psychotherapy.

I have also experienced increase in function and in optimism from this combination.

Now, as a medical provider, I would like to be able to guide my patients towards legal use, and I would like a similar legal framework for care as Oregon currently possesses with their Measure 109, which allows use of psilocybin therapy in supervised facilities.

I've seen friends experience benefit of reduced anxiety as well as alleviation of depression.

And...

Thank you for calling in, Connor.

Next up is Larry Norris, and then we will hear from Joanna Colon.

Thank you city Seattle City Council members for hearing this important issue today to decriminalize natural entheogenic plants and fungi with resolution 32021. But I would like to add for the inclusion of personal cultivation of peyote.

My name is Dr. Larry Norris.

I'm the co-founder of Decriminalize Nature National which began in Oakland in 2019. We've now passed decrim nature related policy in seven cities across the U.S. and aim to pass in three more cities before the end of the year.

And there have been no reports of emergencies in any of the cities where DN has passed.

In fact there are many anecdotal reports of incredible healing.

When we began decriminalizing in 2019, one of the first issues we wanted to address was the sustainability of peyote.

By criminalizing the cultivation of peyote, this inhibits the opportunity for people to grow their own and therefore reduce the impact on endemic regions where peyote grows.

How can we advocate for throwing someone in jail for growing any sacred plants which are gifts from Mother Earth?

These punitive approaches to environmental sustainability are archaic and need to change.

Criminalization is not a conservation strategy.

We urge you to take this into consideration and allow for the personal cultivation of peyote so it does not go extinct in the endemic regions in addition to decolonization of other antigenic plants and fungi.

Thank you for your time.

Thank you so much.

Our last speaker who is registered and present is Joanna Colon.

I am showing that Jim Stafford is registered but not present.

Jim, if you call in in the next couple of minutes, we'll make sure to hear from you.

Joanna, please.

Joanne, I'm showing that you're still muted, so just hit star six.

You might have to do it a few times for it to stick.

There you go.

You're unmuted now.

Go ahead.

I'm Cullen.

I live in the Central District.

I'm here to comment against CB 12155. It does not rename the whole city.

It targets only areas like the Central District, Rainier Beach, and Ballard.

Ending exclusionary zoning means being able to have density throughout the entire city and being able to push back against issues of gentrification and displacement that we've seen in neighborhoods like Rainier Beach, the Central District, Ballard, where the majority of the density has been concentrated.

So, really, this does only does those neighborhoods.

It does not do the whole city.

And we, in order to have equity, it must be shared through the whole city.

And this targets the whole, this does not target the whole city.

And I urge you not to do this until you can do the whole city.

Thank you, Joanna, for calling in today.

Okay, I am not showing that I have any other public commenters that are registered and present.

Just asking our IT folks to confirm that nobody is in the waiting room.

That is correct.

Great, thank you so much.

Okay, we are going to go ahead and close out the period of public comments and move into other items of business on our agenda.

First up is payment of the bills.

Will the clerk please read the title?

Passable 120185, a property managed to pay, sorry, the claims for the week of September 20, 2021 through September 24th, 2021, and ordering the payment thereof.

Thank you, I move to pass council bill 120185. Is there a second?

Second.

It's been moved and seconded that the bill pass.

Are there any comments?

Hearing none, will the clerk please call the role on the passage of the bill.

Herbold?

Yes.

Juarez?

Yes.

Lewis?

Yes.

Morales?

Mosqueda?

Aye.

Peterson?

Aye.

Sawant?

Yes.

Strauss?

Yes.

President Gonzalez?

Aye.

Eight in favor, none opposed.

The bill passes and the chair will sign it.

Will the clerk please affix my signature to the legislation on my behalf.

Will the clerk please read the short title of item one into the record?

Agenda item one, Council Bill 120182 relating to the tenant relocation assistant ordinance, clarifying that a tenant relocation license is required before the removal of a rent or increased restriction.

Thank you so much.

I move to pass Council Bill 120182. Is there a second?

Second.

been moved and seconded to pass the bill.

Council Member Sawant, you are the sponsor of this item.

So I'm going to go ahead and hand it over to you to walk us through the report.

Thank you.

Just give me a minute.

The bill has been moved and seconded, I believe, or do I have to?

Yep, already done.

We already did all the procedures, so now you can go ahead and just talk about the bill.

Thank you.

This bill is a legislation from the City of Seattle Department of Construction and Inspections, clarifying that the Tenant Relocation Assistance Ordinance applies to buildings that exit the Multifamily Tax Exemption Affordable Housing Program.

The ordinance, which is known as TRAEO, which is its acronym for SHARD, requires building owners to pay relocation assistance when they displace vendors through a no-fault eviction in order to demolish or remodel the building or a similar change of use.

This bill is for clarifying purposes and is pretty straightforward, making it clear that exiting the MFTE program, the multifamily tax exemption program, counts as that sort of change of use.

There are a couple of buildings in Seattle that are expected to exit the MFT program this year.

The department walked through one such building and estimated that approximately 10% of the tenants there would be eligible for relocation assistance because the ordinance has extremely restrictive means testing that even count the income of your roommates against you.

While this clarifying language will only help a small minority of renters, residents of some affordable homes are expected to be eligible for it this year.

So I appreciate Council President Gonzalez's willingness to send this bill directly to full council, to the city council today, and I urge council members to vote yes.

Thank you.

Thank you Council Member Sawant for that report.

Are there any additional comments or questions on the bill?

I'm not seeing any hands raised.

I do want to note for the record that we have been joined by Council Member Morales.

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

Herbold?

Yes.

Juarez?

Aye.

Lewis?

Yes.

Morales?

Yes.

Mosqueda?

Aye.

Peterson?

Aye.

Zawad?

Yes.

Strauss?

Yes.

President Gonzalez?

Aye.

Nine in favor, none opposed.

The motion carries, the bill passes, and the chair will sign it.

Will the clerk please affix my signature to the legislation on my behalf?

Will the clerk please read item two into the record?

Agenda item two, resolution 32021, declaring that the investigation, arrest, and prosecution of anyone engaging in etriogen-related activities should be among the city of Seattle's lowest law enforcement priorities, and stating the council's support for full decriminalization of these activities.

Thank you so much.

I move to adopt resolution 32021. Is there a second?

Second.

Thank you.

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

Council Member Lewis, you are the sponsor of this resolution, so I'm going to hand it over to you to address it.

I do understand that you have a substitute version of this amendment, so If you'd like to move the substitute version so that we're having a conversation about the substitute, that would be the first step that you would need to do is make that motion.

Thank you, Madam President.

I move to amend Resolution 32021 by substituting Version 2A for Version 1.

Second.

Been moved and seconded to substitute the resolution as reflected in Version 2A.

I hand it back over to Council Member Lewis to walk us through the substitute.

Thank you, Madam President.

The substitute, just to flag to everybody, there's not really any substantive changes.

It just reflects feedback in terms of some of the wording around the Office of Intergovernmental Relations' interaction with this policy based on feedback from the department.

At the time of initial introduction, it did not reflect the nuance of how OIR would prefer their advocacy at the state level to be framed.

Specifically, the original resolution instructed them to write legislation.

We have other partners who will write the legislation.

We will more be in a position of supporting it.

That level of detail mattered a great deal to the Office of Intergovernmental Relations, rightly so.

So that is the only significant change.

Otherwise, it generally reflects the substance of version one.

And, uh, Madam President, I don't know if you are we gonna vote on the adoption now, and then I'll I'll speak to, um, the resolution more broadly after that.

Yeah, so we'll vote on the on the substitute version first, and then I'll hand it back over to you to make comments about the resolution.

Generally, are there any additional comments on the substitute version?

I just want to say thanks, Councilor Lewis, for being responsive to our request to talk to the Office of Intergovernmental Relations to make sure that their concerns were addressed.

Really appreciate your quick work on that and your willingness to engage with them.

So thanks for that.

I don't see any other hands raised about the substitute.

So will the clerk please call the roll on the adoption of the substitute?

Herbold?

Yes.

Juarez?

Aye.

Lewis?

Yes.

Morales.

Yes.

Mosqueda.

Aye.

Peterson.

Aye.

Sawant.

Yes.

Strauss.

Yes.

President Gonzalez.

Aye.

Nine in favor, none opposed.

The motion carries and the substitute is now adopted.

I'll hand it back over to Council Member Lewis to address the amended resolution.

I'm thank you madam president I appreciate the opportunity to for us to take this first legislative step as a body in what has been a fairly long process engagement on this.

Certainly something we can't be accused of rushing.

much of the consternation of some of our stakeholders on this.

But I do think that the result has been a really good deep dive into the nuances of the policy around these substances and the current policy of our local prosecuting attorneys, as well as the Seattle Police Department.

I want to thank Councilmember Herbold for her leadership as chair of the underlying committee throughout this process, which began in earnest in the spring with our discussions with folks over at Decrim Nature Seattle and then became more formalized with a letter written by this council in June to urge the Overdose and Recovery Innovation Task Force to study this issue throughout the summer and then promulgate back to us recommendations.

We did receive those recommendations in August.

as the council may recall, to adopt a resolution or an ordinance or some other representation of city policy to emphasize to the extent of our power as a municipality that law enforcement around entheogens is the lowest priority for the use of municipal officials to enforce the law in regards to those substances.

And this resolution before us today is a way for us to go on the record in support of these policy goals before our budget process really gets rolling and before the state legislature convenes in January to holistically consider drug policy as the ongoing conversation post the Supreme Court's Blake decision.

The policy in front of us is limited to natural substances uh...

most famously uh...

throughout this process a little sidemen ayahuasca have been the most cited of these natural psychedelics uh...

it is not inclusive of synthetic psychedelics that are manufactured uh...

an example of that would be uh...

lsd uh...

this has been a really interesting process not to really learn more about the substances and things that i did not know until meeting with Deep Grim Nature Seattle and really deep diving into this.

Obviously, this is part of a broader policy conversation nationally and following on the heels of similar resolutions.

that have been passed in cities like Denver, Colorado, Washington, D.C., Oakland, California, among other jurisdictions.

And then, of course, wholesale state law changes in Oregon, just to the south of here, that passed with a convincing margin in recent elections.

I just want to note a little bit for the viewing public just some of the things that have really driven me to take a keen interest in this and how I think this resolution really sets the stage as the first significant action in the state of Washington to move this policy forward, affirmed by any government, local or state or county.

And that's to really state that these non-addictive natural substances have real potential in clinical and therapeutic settings to make a really significant difference in people's lives.

And this is really the thing that personally through the process motivated me was meeting with constituents and people who have had experiences with these substances that have really materially helped them overcome addiction.

helped them overcome severe depression or other behavioral mental health conditions that have really made a difference in their lives to the point where they don't know where they would have been without the access to treatments or therapies connected to some of these substances.

Given that Seattle is also host to one of the world's premier medical research universities, at the University of Washington and given the strong support throughout this process from many of the clinical faculty at the University of Washington in psychiatry and behavioral mental health and medical research, it has just made it really evident that Seattle really could be a place where In the long term, we really are a hub for innovation around what possibility these substances could produce in terms of our ongoing struggle as a civilization of people against a lot of these really debilitating conditions.

I do want to briefly address at the end of my remarks here, and we heard a little bit in the public comment of the discussion around peyote, and I do want to want to just address it briefly that this resolution.

is not as currently worded inclusive of peyote.

Our local chapter of decriminalized nature did not want to include it.

because there is, as we heard, disagreement over the inclusion of the substance.

I want to thank the national chapter of decriminalized nature for their letter that was distributed to this council last week advocating for the inclusion of peyote.

And there's no doubt or disagreement that peyote is a sacred resource.

to the indigenous people of the southwestern United States who lived in good relation with peyote for thousands of years.

But because there is disagreement among the best method to reverse the century-long decline in peyote and the appropriate use of it, and whether increased access or isolation is the best approach, for now in this resolution, myself and the stakeholders at DecrimNature, our local chapter of DecrimNature, have decided to keep peyote out of it.

However, for forthcoming, any potential forthcoming council actions, for example, if some of this were at some point manifested into a formal ordinance for a policy with more permanency, I think it's certainly a conversation I'm willing to continue to have as someone leading on these issues at the council.

because it does have to be crafted with very careful consideration for its impact, and we need to be sensitive on the divisions around the policy related to peyote.

So I did just want to make those comments that we're certainly sensitive and look forward to continuing to look into it, but this current resolution does not touch on it.

So with that, I don't have any additional comments, Madam President, and certainly I'm excited to get this over the line and do it before we, budget takes up more of my life.

So thank you.

Thank you so much.

Appreciate those remarks.

Are there any additional comments on the resolution?

Council Member Salant, please.

Thank you.

I'm, of course, voting yes on this resolution.

My office has been, from the very first moment we heard from the activists, the criminalized nature and Many of the clinical and the medical experts, actually some of whom, some of the most prominent ones who actually incidentally reside in district three.

Since that very moment, my office has been in strong support of decriminalizing psychedelics.

I mean, the research seems just absolutely overwhelming as the public comment today has testified to.

And I also appreciate specifically The individuals who testified from personal experience, I really appreciate that.

However, as I mentioned in council briefing last week, I am a little confused by this resolution because it is a resolution and not an ordinance.

And why this resolution is being passed when there is an ordinance from my office and it has been available for months.

The resolution asked the police to quote unquote codify policies to effectively decriminalize psychedelic drugs.

But we know resolutions can only make requests.

Of course, my office strongly supports resolution.

In fact, we have advocated for and won resolutions in the past, but we have not pushed for resolutions in place of ordinances when it is possible and realistic and necessary from a political and moral standpoint for the council to have an ordinance passed.

to decriminalize psychedelics in fact in fact rather than just in rhetoric would require an ordinance and it is this city council not the police department that has the authority to pass such an ordinance council members will remember that on june 29th three months ago my office sent for introduction a council bill that would have done just that and uh just in response to some of the public comment today on an issue that has not been resolved.

If you are listening, I really welcome activists from the whole spectrum of viewpoints on the question of peyote to discuss with my office so that we can understand if there are any amendments to be made.

to the ordinance that we have put forward, and I would really like to learn more about that issue.

And I certainly appreciate those who spoke in public comment about it.

The bill from my office was transmitted to Councilmember Herbold, who is the chair of the Public Safety Committee.

Unfortunately, The bill has languished on the chair's desk for the last three months.

And this council has not.

I mean, today in the comments so far that ordinance has not even been acknowledged its existence has not been acknowledged.

And I think that.

But the only things I've heard from council members is, well, you know, some things were not resolved.

Well, let's resolve those things.

But why do a resolution?

Let's do an ordinance.

And I just don't, I fail to see what the plausible reasons are for council members who claim to support this issue to let an ordinance which takes concrete action, sit in the city's computers unintroduced and instead push a resolution which only has the power to make requests.

And as I said, I'll be voting yes on this resolution and I'm really grateful to all the activists.

I really urge you all to keep mobilizing and organizing for this but please understand that we will need an ordinance to be passed by this council for for real action to be taken for actual changes to be seen in the city of Seattle on the issue of psychedelics and decriminalizing psychedelics and I would urge all council members who say they support the issue to co-sponsor the ordinance with me and let's discuss if there are any amendments that needed to be made based on local and national activists' input on various issues.

Thank you.

Thank you.

So I appreciate the Customer Salon has introduced, or I don't actually think it's been referred to my committee yet.

I think we held it and did not refer it yet.

So I don't think it's true that it's been languishing on my desk, but nevertheless, After some discussion about whether or not the bill should be referred to my committee, we agreed as a council that we were going to hold taking any action until we receive recommendations from the Overdose Emergency Innovative Recovery Task Force.

Partially, this is because we're aware that there are going to be efforts in the wake of the Blake decision and in the wake of legislation that was passed last session to respond to the Blake decision.

There's going to be, I think, a really robust discussion at the state level about enforcement of not just athenogens, but enforcement around possession of other drugs that are possessed for personal use.

So I think we're trying to be really sensitive to those discussions that are about to occur on a statewide level.

And that's why we asked the task force to give us recommendations.

Because again, this task force is not going to be just working on the issue around psychedelics.

They're going to be working on this broader issue of enforcement of drug laws that are impacting communities with disparate impacts across the spectrum of drug law enforcement and have for decades, for generations.

And so the recommendation that we received from the task force was specifically that municipalities in the state of Washington and elsewhere that have independent ordinance criminalizing psychedelics should repeal them, and those that don't should direct their law enforcement agencies, local prosecutors, and municipal courts to deprioritize enforcement and should publicly communicate this as municipal policy.

When I reached out to the police department to make a determination of whether or not we needed to communicate this, lowest law enforcement priority to the police department.

Um, based on my understanding of the police department's, um, communication to, um, out the department is not only is it not the lowest law enforcement policy, but that officers have been instructed to no longer detain nor arrest individuals under RCW 6950 and officers will no longer confiscate drugs from an individual based only on a violation of RCW 69504013. Now we know that policy might change.

This is the existing policy of the Seattle Police Department.

We as a City Council are expressing our support for this continued policy, and I recognize that at a later date, depending on.

what happens at the state legislature, what happens with under the leadership of a new mayor or new police chief or a new city attorney that we may need to look at a different legislative action than what we're taking today.

But I'm very appreciative of Council Member Lewis and bringing this resolution forward.

Thank you Council Member Herbold, Council Member Sawant.

Thank you, I just wanted to clarify, just for the record, I'm just quite surprised by Council Member Herbold's response on the question of the process for the ordinance from my office.

The bill has indeed been on Council Member Herbold's desk as chair of the Public Safety Committee for three months.

Council Member Herbold might remember, and other council members might remember the discussion we had during council briefing three months ago when I pointed out that Ted Verdone from my office had called her office 23 times about it, asking their office to click the one button in Legistar, which is the city's legislation management software, to allow the bill to be introduced, the ordinance to be introduced.

None of those calls were returned, and all of this discussion happened in public, but It seems from what Council Member Herbold said at the beginning of her comment just now, it was implied that there was somehow an agreement among the council that the bill should not be introduced.

But that's not true.

There was no vote.

I have not certainly not agreed to.

I want the bill to be introduced, debated, discussed, and voted on as soon as possible.

I have not complained about all of this at any great length because I was hoping that Councilmember Lewis would bring an ordinance.

Because I've seen this many times, when my office brings an ordinance, the Democrats will bring their own ordinance.

For us, the issue is more important, not who's in the city's legislation management software.

But it is a tangible failure at this point to bring forward an ordinance, regardless of whose name is on it.

And that is why I feel like I need to raise this issue, because that is not how it happened.

What happened was that my staff and I followed up assiduously wanting the ordinance to move forward, but often these kinds of sort of bureaucratic channels are used to block it.

And that's fine, that's your decision, but let's be open about it.

Thank you.

And I hope that there is an ordinance moving forward.

And again, I restate my invitation to council members to add their name to the ordinance and let's discuss whatever remaining outstanding issues that are, and let's pass the ordinance.

Thank you.

Thank you, Council Member Salant.

Your objection is noted for the record.

I would like for us to refocus our comments and debate on the resolution that is before us, as opposed to a ordinance that is not before us at the time.

So if we could recommit to just focusing our comments in on the amended resolution that is before us, I appreciate it.

Again, appreciate that Council Member Salant has expressed concerns about about a resolution first over an ordinance, it is noted.

Let's go ahead and finish up our debate on the resolution.

I am gonna give Council Member Lewis the last word, but before he has the last word, I see that Council Member Mosqueda has her hand raised, so I would like to close out debate after Council Member Mosqueda's remarks.

Thank you, Council President.

Your comments and direction is exactly the type of comments I was hoping to make today.

I did want to center our conversation back on the recommendations that come directly from community, from the task force that has been working with folks who have been researching these issues, who have been exploring the possibility of the benefits of these substances and wanting to make sure that we have an understanding of why.

To me, this really comes down to a public health approach to helping those who may see some benefits of having some of these substances be available to them to treat things that are so near and dear to my heart.

As many folks know, my sister suffers with multiple sclerosis and in terms of trying to find opportunities to address the inflammation and the trauma that her brain and her body go through, I'm excited for any opportunity that allows for her to have a healthy and safe life and to experience joy and and not only for her mind, but for her body as well.

I see that there's a lot of possibilities from the conversations that we've had with folks about those who have experienced traumatic brain injuries, folks who are dealing with immunocompromised systems, folks who have been suffering from PTSD, people who also have depression and anxiety.

Any opportunity that we can, especially in the wake of COVID, to help find solutions for folks in a safe way in a way that helps people access safe substances is something that I'm going to support from a public health perspective and appreciate the incredible amount of research that has gone into this from those who have been supporting this type of research and advocacy for years and again just one additional way for us to relieve stress and anxiety and the physical and emotional symptoms of some of these complications within our mind and body.

I'm going to be supporting this resolution and look forward to future work with all of you to see how we can advance these commitments today.

So thanks again to the community for making this possible and centering us back on those who are potentially going to benefit from access through this public health main makes me excited about the opportunities in the future.

Thank you Councilmember Mosqueda.

Councilmember Lewis, any closing remarks?

Thank you, Madam President.

I actually don't have anything else to add.

I think Council Member Mosqueda's comments are a great thing to go out on here, so I'll just leave it there.

I appreciate that.

OK, folks, will the clerk please call the roll on the adoption of the amended resolution?

Herbold?

Yes.

Juarez?

Yes.

Lewis?

Yes.

Morales?

Yes.

Mosqueda?

Aye.

Peterson?

Aye.

So what?

Yes.

Strauss?

Yes.

President Gonzalez?

Aye.

Nine in favor, none opposed.

The motion carries.

The resolution is adopted as amended, and the chair will sign it.

Will the clerk please affix my signature to the legislation on my behalf?

Will the clerk please read the short title of item three into the record?

Item three resolution 32020, setting the public hearing on the petition of Grand Street Commons LLC for the vacation at the alley in block 14, Josie Kinnear's edition.

Thank you so much.

I move to adopt resolution 32020. Is there a second?

Second.

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

I'm going to hand over to Council Member Peterson, who's the sponsor of this item, to address it.

Thank you, Council President.

Colleagues, Resolution 32020 simply sets the date for a public hearing on whether to vacate a city-owned alley to benefit a proposed affordable housing project called Grand Street Commons located in the Mount Baker neighborhood.

All street vacations go through the Transportation Committee, but due to budget season, this public hearing would take place at a full city council meeting on Monday, November 8. Thank you.

Are there any additional comments on the resolution?

Council Member Skate, I see that you have your hand raised.

Thank you very much.

I want to thank Chair Peterson for their work on the Transportation Committee, always looking for opportunities to partner transportation and housing and walkable, livable Seattle.

So thanks for your work on this legislation here today to move this more quickly forward.

I do want to thank you for your work to understand your work quickly to move this as we understand the project is ready for groundbreaking.

in December and needs the street vacation in place before then.

And just flagging that this is one of several affordable housing projects that I've learned of recently that requires street vacations from the city, while typically projects are required to compensate the city for the appraised value of the land, which can be anywhere from several hundred thousand dollars to upwards of a million dollars.

And in these cases where it is an affordable housing project, that is trying to be built.

It's precious time and limited public resources for building affordable housing that I want to make sure is not just going back to the city to pay for the street vacations, which I think we all agree makes no sense.

I'm excited for this step today.

I think that the issue overall was brought to our attention by Pastor Seals, who I also want to thank, who we're working with on an affordable housing projects such as church-owned sites in the Central District.

and looking forward to continuing to work with Pastor Seals and the Mt. Baker Community Housing Office to work on future legislation to help continue the process of making sure that street vacation fees for affordable housing projects are something that those who are developing affordable housing don't have to go through.

And I see this as complementary to that larger vision.

So thank you so much for your work on this, Councilmember Peterson, and look forward to working with you, central staff, and Aaron House in my office, who's been a who's been doing a lot of research to get to the bottom of how we can avoid that sort of revolving door of funding back to the city to really just expedite creating affordable housing and utilizing our public land efficiently.

So just teeing up more conversations to come in the post-budget conversations in December and next year.

And thank you, Council Member Peterson, for all of your work in the future.

Any additional comments on the resolution?

Council Member Peterson, anything else to add?

Okay, I'm hearing, I'm seeing a no thank you.

So will the clerk please call the roll on the adoption of the resolution?

Herbold?

Yes.

Thank you, Juarez?

Aye.

Lewis?

Yes.

Morales?

Yes.

Mosqueda?

Aye.

Peterson.

Aye.

Sawant.

Yes.

Strauss.

Yes.

President Gonzalez.

Aye.

Nine in favor, none opposed.

Motion carries.

The resolution is adopted.

The chair will sign it.

Will the court please affix my signature to the legislation on my behalf.

Will the court please read items four through eight into the record.

Agenda items four through eight.

Appointments 2047 through 2050 and 2053. Reappointments of David A. Goldberg, Patience Manzazula-Malaba, Julio A. Sanchez, Rose Lu Sai-Li Woodson, and Richard E. Mohler as members of Seattle Planning Commission for term to April 15th, 2024. Thank you so much.

I move to confirm appointments 2047 through 2050 and appointment 2053. Is there a second?

Second.

It's been moved and seconded to confirm the appointment.

So I'm going to hand it over to Council Member Strauss, who is the sponsor of these appointments.

Thank you, Council President.

Colleagues, the Seattle Planning Commission advises the Council and Mayor on urban planning and development, including making recommendations on amendments to the Comprehensive Plan like the ones we're going to consider later today.

The five appointees before us today are all being reappointed to the Commission.

David Goldberg is a project ombud for WSDOT with more than 20 years of experience in urban growth and planning issues, including naming and creating the framework for complete streets that we use today.

Patience Malaba is the advocacy manager at the Housing Development Consortium, which represents nonprofit housing developers building the needed affordable housing we discuss so often.

Julio Sanchez is a consultant and facilitator who has worked with the King County Equity and Justice Office, as well as the Puget Sound Clear Air Agency.

Rose Whitson is a biologist with the Jacobs Engineering Group who leads environmental permitting tasks and conducts field assessments of streams, wetlands, and wildlife habitats.

And finally, not least, Richard Moeller is a teacher at the University of Washington and an architect with more than 30 years of experience in urban advocacy in Seattle.

I urge a yay vote in all of these appointments.

And to everyone who may be listening, thank you for your service to our city.

Thank you so much, Council Member Strauss.

Are there any additional comments on the appointments?

Hearing none, will the clerk please call the roll on the confirmation of appointments 2047 through 2050 and appointment 2053. Herbold?

Yes.

Juarez?

Aye.

Lewis?

Yes.

Morales?

Yes.

Esqueda?

Aye.

Peterson?

Aye.

Sawant.

Yes.

Straus.

Yes.

President Gonzalez.

Aye.

Nine in favor, none opposed.

The motion carries and the appointments are confirmed.

Will the clerk please read item nine into the record.

Agenda item nine, appointment 2051, appointment of Mariko Park as member of Historic Seattle Preservation and Development Authority Governing Council for term to November 30th, 2021.

Thank you, Amelia.

I move to confirm appointments 2051. Is there a second?

Second.

It's been moved and seconded to confirm the appointment.

I'm going to hand it back over to Council Member Strauss, who is the sponsor of this appointment as well.

Thank you, Council President.

Colleagues, Historic Seattle is a preservation and development authority dedicated to saving historic places through education, advocacy and preservation.

Mariko Park is an interior designer at Bassetti Architects and is filling a position that is appointed by Historic Seattle Constituency Group.

We recommend a yay vote.

Are there any additional comments on the appointment?

Hearing none, will the clerk please call the roll on the confirmation of the appointment?

Herbold?

Yes.

Juarez?

Aye.

Lewis?

Yes.

Morales?

Yes.

Mosqueda?

Aye.

Peterson?

Aye.

Sawant?

Yes.

Strauss?

Yes.

President Gonzalez?

Aye.

Nine in favor, none opposed.

The motion carries and the appointment is confirmed.

Will the clerk please read item 10 into the record?

Item 10, appointment 2052, appointment of Elliot H. Sun as member of Seattle Chinatown International District Preservation and Development Authority Governing Council for term to December 31st, 2023.

I move to confirm appointment 2052. Is there a second?

Second.

It's been moved and seconded to confirm the appointment.

I'm going to hand it back over to Council Member Strauss, who is the sponsor of this appointment.

Thank you, Council President.

Colleagues, the Seattle Chinatown ID Preservation and Development Authority, or SCIPTA, works to preserve and promote the International District through affordable housing, commercial property management, real estate development, and economic development.

The appointee today, Elliot Sun, is the Director of Asset Management at Blanton Turner and is being reappointed by the Governing Council.

We recommend a yay vote.

Thank you so much.

Are there any additional comments on the appointment?

Hearing none, we'll quickly call the roll on the adoption on the confirmation of the appointment.

Hergold, yes, Juarez, I Lewis, yes, Morales, yes, Mosqueda, I Peterson, I so want.

Yes.

Strauss.

Yes.

President Gonzalez.

Aye.

Nine in favor, none opposed.

Motion carries and the appointment is confirmed.

All right.

Part two of the council member Strauss show continues.

Will the clerk please read item 11 into the record?

The report of the Land Use and Neighborhoods Committee agenda item 11, Council Bill 120181, amending section 23.58A.044 of the Seattle Municipal Code to facilitate the transfer of development rights from Pierce and Snohomish counties to Seattle.

The committee recommends the bill pass.

All right, back over to Council Member Strauss, who's the chair of the committee and is recognized in order to provide the committee's report.

Thank you, Council President.

Do I need to move or second this bill before discussing it?

Nope.

It's coming to us straight from committee, so you can just give the committee a report, and then we'll go ahead and call the roll.

Fantastic.

Council President, colleagues, this is possibly one of the biggest bills that we will take up this year that has caught no attention or limelight.

And that's and the reason I say that is because Council Bill 120-181 will allow for regional transferable development rights program to work with Pierce and Snohomish County.

As many of you know, we already have a TDR, transferable development rights program here in the city of Seattle, working with King County.

And we do not have that program set up to work with Snohomish and Pierce counties.

For instance, when we stand in Seattle and look east to the mountains, we now see many different suburban developments on the foothills before the cascades.

A regional TDR program allows us to preserve that farmland and forest land and turn that development capacity and put it in buildings in downtown and South Lake Union.

Said another way, If we had TDR programs set up years ago, we would be able to look east from the city of Seattle to the Cascades with uninterrupted views of the forest land.

Now, for us to be able to retain our uninterrupted views of forest and farmland from Seattle to Mount Rainier or to Glacier Peak, we need this program.

And this program has not been in place.

And that's why I say it's one of the biggest things we've done with the littlest amount of fanfare.

Again, I just want to kind of highlight the aspects of this bill.

Currently, Seattle's TDR program allows receiving sites only in certain parts of our city, such as downtown and South Lake Union, to buy additional development capacity by purchasing credits from eligible sending sites, the farmland or forest land, such as landmark properties on First Hill or farmland and green space in rural King County.

The program allows us to accept more growth in our urban centers while preserving green spaces, agricultural lands, and historic properties that make our region so beautiful.

As the supply of TDR credits from Seattle and King County slows, this legislation before us today allows for additional credits to be purchased from Pearson, Snohomish County, encouraging preservation in more of our region while allowing for the continued growth we need in Seattle.

Throughout the consideration of this legislation, we've heard from King, Snohomish, and Pierce Counties about the importance of this change, as well as from conservation groups such as FORTERRA.

Again, this is probably one of the biggest little things that we will do all year because the impact is so incredible, yet we have to do very little to achieve preserving farmland, forest land, and undeveloped land in our suburbs, and creating more density here in our cities.

Thank you, Council President and colleagues.

That is the committee's report.

Thank you so much, Council Member Strouse.

Are there any additional comments on the bill?

I don't see any hands raised, so will the clerk please call the roll on the passage of the bill?

Herbold?

Yes.

Juarez?

Aye.

Lewis?

Yes.

Morales?

Yes.

Mosqueda?

Aye.

Peterson?

Aye.

Sawant?

Yes.

Strauss?

Yes.

President Gonzalez?

Aye.

Nine in favor, none opposed.

The bill passes and the chair will sign it.

Will the clerk please affix my signature to the legislation on my behalf.

Will the clerk please read item 12 into the record.

Agenda item 12, Council Bill 120155, relating to land use and zoning, amending the comprehensive plan to change the name of single family areas to neighborhood residential areas as part of the 2020 through 2021 comprehensive plan amendment process.

The committee recommends the bill passes as amended.

Thank you so much.

Well, it is my absolute pleasure to hand this back over to Council Member Strauss, who's the chair of our Land Use and Neighborhoods Committee to provide the committee report on the bill.

Thank you, Council President and colleagues.

With such enthusiasm with the vote just a moment ago, I bring to you another small and important change.

The legislation before us amends the comprehensive plan to change the name of single-family areas to neighborhood residential areas, which is a more accurate term describing the areas in which they cover.

Neighborhood residential reflects the reality on the ground today as our so-called single-family areas include houses with multiple families or unrelated roommates as well as attached and detached dwelling units.

Legacy duplexes and legacy apartment buildings all built before our current zoning rules took effect as well as multi-family units apartment buildings that are built in areas that no longer allow them to be built.

Thus neighborhood residential reflects the reality we feel on the ground that there are many different types of buildings that make our residential areas vibrant and many different building types that are already in what we know now as single family zones.

This name change was recommended to us by the Seattle Planning Commission in 2018. The city council has placed this proposal on the table for consideration as part of the comprehensive plan docketing process in 2019, 2020, And earlier this year, I want to thank Council Member Mosqueda for her work before I came into office on this, because this has been a long anticipated change.

I have heard some concern from community members that these changes do nothing more than, let me take one step back, I've heard I've heard concerns from community members that this leads to so many different things.

What I think we need to be grounded in today is that what we have before us is a bill that changes the name of these zones.

It does not change the zoning.

It does not change the uses.

It does not change the height, bulk, or scale of buildings in these areas.

It simply changes the name and what we call areas of our city.

We have held two public hearings on this proposal in July and September and notified all affected community councils of the change over this last summer.

In the Planning Commission's recommendations for this round of comprehensive plan amendments, they shared strong support for this change.

In committee, we adopted one amendment, which was suggested to us by Councilmember Herbold.

Thank you for that correction, Councilmember Herbold, well received.

And that amendment removed awkward language in both the Morgan Junction and Northgate community plans that would have resulted from this change.

I was more than happy and glad to work with Council Member Mosqueda on this change and happy and I feel lucky to get to work with her as she's been leading this effort for so long.

And I look forward to continuing a conversation about our growth strategy as we lead up to the 2024 comprehensive plan major update.

Thank you, Council President, that is the committee report.

Wonderful, and I know that Council Member Mosqueda is a co-sponsor of this effort with you, so I do want to give her an opportunity to also make introductory remarks on the bill before we open it up for comments from others.

Council Member Mosqueda, please.

Thank you, Madam President.

I do want to thank the Land Use and Neighborhoods Committee Chair.

Thank you very much, Council Member Strauss, not just for your co-sponsorship of this proposal, but also for your leadership throughout this process.

As you noted, there have been multiple public hearings, committee conversations that we've had.

We also, through with Council Member Morales' office, had a conversation that rooted our conversations today with the research that we received from the Racial Equity Toolkit.

Many discussions were had in community, including making sure that the 17 neighborhood plans who currently have references to single-family homes were directly reached out to, and that those individual neighborhoods knew about the potential change.

We received over 400 individuals and organizations who wrote into us with comments about the 17 neighborhoods and appreciated making sure that I'm clarifying for the record how much public engagement was done on this with those 17 directly affected neighborhoods.

And again, as Council Member Strauss has accurately summarized, once again, for the record, the importance of the name change, but also centering us on the fact that this is just a name change to address a misnomer, a misnomer that is still in statute, that I think is continuing to misrepresent the city that we want to be in the future and currently misrepresents the fabric of our neighborhood right now.

I will just include three comments here that came from letters of support from community members today.

The first comes from the Seattle Chamber of Commerce.

The letter states, it is true that this legislation is a simple name change.

but Seattle must take this first step of passing Council Bill 120155, as well as continue to address the historic and ongoing impacts of exclusionary zoning through changes to existing policies.

The other letter that we received today came from the Housing Development Consortium.

The letter states, with this amendment, you are laying the groundwork to create more opportunities for diverse housing in neighborhoods in Seattle in the upcoming comprehensive plan update.

This is a down payment on a purpose for opportunity and more opportunity for people in the city, families and children to have access to wonderful neighborhoods across our city.

And finally, from Habitat for Humanity, from Seattle King County's Habitat for Humanity, they say one example of the kind of change we can see Even more by passing this type of proposal is our work in South Park.

On Saturday, we were blessed to have the opportunity to celebrate the completion of our most recent development on this site where we turned one single family home into 13 permanent affordable homes.

Today, there are now 13 families living in South Park in part because of the zoning flexibility that is required.

By authorizing this legislation, you are taking one step, an important step, in continuing to move Seattle to a place where everyone has a place to call home.

I raise these three letters as examples of the diverse type of comments that we've received, the diverse type of entities that have written in to support this important but simple piece of legislation in front of us.

As we propose neighborhood residential, we are in all aspects recognizing that language matters.

We are recognizing that neighborhoods are diverse homes to housing and commerce, diverse homes to parks and services.

diverse homes to neighborhood amenities that can make our communities more walkable, climate resilient, that help us achieve our 15-minute commitment so that everyone can access all things they need without ever having to get into a car.

The reality is that, quote, single family only.

doesn't reflect the current use and makeup of our neighborhoods that really have duplexes and triplexes, row houses, connected homes, courtyards, and apartments.

Again, like the one that I lived in in Queen Anne that has been zoned out and currently banned from being in existence.

So I want to thank finally the members of the housing, excuse me, of the Seattle Planning Commission, who, as we've talked about before, have recommended year over year, every single time the Planning Commission has sent recommendations to council and to the mayor since 2018, they've requested for this proposal to be included.

I spoke with members of the Planning Commission from before 2018, and they said, we made that recommendation far before 2018 as well, but very happy that they are very happy to see it finally move into action.

And in addition to the 400 individuals and organizations who we were working with on getting feedback from those 17 neighborhoods, letters and communications were sent to all community affected, and this included deep conversations, especially here in District 1, at the Morgan Junction Community Association in July, where we met, where members of my office met with Highland Park, Morgan Junction, Alki, and other West Seattle neighborhoods.

And I bring these up to show how important these conversations are right now with just the simple name change, because we're going to be calling upon those same individuals, organizations, folks who have differing opinions, to really set the stage for our 2023 comprehensive plan.

Throughout 2022, we will build on the discussions that we've had this year to make informed policy discussions, root decisions rooted in what community is informing us of.

So I'm excited about those conversations being able to start from a place of shared understanding of what the current fabric of our city currently is.

Again, thank you to Council Member Strauss.

And I have to say thank you, Council Member Juarez.

I know she's loving this thank you piece as I lead into The other thank yous for Representative Macri, Representative Fitzgibbon, Representative Chopp, the Housing Development Consortium, Southside Chamber of Commerce, Seattle Chamber, Seattle Sierra Club, AIA, the Institute of Architects, Share Our Cities, 350 Seattle, Seattle for Everyone, Habitat for Humanity, Seattle Planning Commission, Seattle Tech for Housing, Lish Woodson, Central Staff.

And no on from Councilmember Strauss his office and Aaron house for my office who have just been incredibly instrumental with helping to shape this policy in front of us.

And we know we're going to look ahead to these major changes coming as Councilmember Strauss said we're not getting ahead of those discussions in today's piece of legislation that is narrow and scoped.

in its effect.

But those conversations over the next two years, I'm very excited about that we are going to be able to result in meaningful policy discussions and decisions that help us get at exclusionary zoning on creating more diverse housing choices and on combating displacement, setting the stage and setting the narrative that is rooted in language that is meaningful and reflective of our neighborhoods is critical.

So I'm excited for this first step.

And thank you very much, Councilmember Strauss, for shepherding us through a very inclusive conversation with community.

Thank you so much, Council Member Mosqueda.

Are there any additional comments on the bill?

Council Member Herbold, please.

Thank you.

I just wanted to, though, Council Member Strauss very graciously thanked me for the amendment that I had flagged, even though I'm not a member.

I want to thank Council Member Strauss for bringing it forward, and I want to thank the Morgan Junction Association for identifying it as a tweak that was necessary for readability.

I really appreciate their fine eye towards towards making sure in a piece of legislation that's all about creating more clarity about what uses are allowed.

I really appreciate their paying attention to that level of detail.

Thank you.

Thanks so much, Council Member Herbold.

Any additional comments on the bill?

Well, I'll put myself in the queue here.

You're on mute now, Council President.

Apologies.

The host muted me.

wasn't it?

Yeah, I'm starting to think that Council Member Juarez has taken host responsibilities.

I have.

Well, you'll be pleased to hear that my comments are very short.

I was just going to say that I'm very excited to vote in support of this bill.

As the sponsors of this bill have mentioned, we've heard from many stakeholders for a long period of time on this name change and I also believe that this will better reflect and include residents of a neighborhood.

It's my hope that our zoning will also move forward in the near future to reflect the reality of our city's rapid growth in the last decade and look forward to continuing to support the council's work in allowing more neighbors and the density that will be necessary to invite those additional families into all of our all of our neighborhoods.

So much thanks to Council Member Strauss and Mosqueda for your important work.

That being said, Council Member Strauss, would you like to have a last word?

Just echoing the thanks to everyone.

Council Member Herbold called it out well.

Council Member Mosqueda called it out well.

And Deputy Clerk Schwinn, adding to the conversation here, I appreciate all of you and thank you all for your great work.

And Noah and Erin House, thank you for all you've done.

Appreciate that Deputy Clerk Schwinn's Small nudge to keep it moving along.

With that being said, will the clerk please call the roll on the passage of.

Herbold?

Herbold?

Yes.

Thank you.

Juarez?

Aye.

Lewis?

Yes.

Morales?

Yes.

Mosqueda?

Aye.

Peterson?

Aye.

DeWant?

Yes.

Strauss?

Yes.

President Gonzales.

Aye.

Nine in favor, none opposed.

The bill passes and the chair will sign it.

Will the clerk please affix my signature to the legislation on my behalf?

All righty.

Will the clerk please read item 13 into the record?

Item 13, Council Bill 120154, relating to land use and zoning, amending the Seattle Comprehensive Plan to incorporate changes proposed as part of the 2021 Comprehensive Plan annual amendment process.

The committee recommends the bill pass as amended.

All right, I'm gonna hand it back over to Council Member Strauss to walk us through.

Thank you, Council President and colleagues.

Two more bills and I promise we'll be done.

Council Bill 120154 amends the comprehensive plan as part of the 2021 annual amendment process.

As we just discussed, this leads us to the major update.

And these amendments we considered a year ago.

If I have that right.

Noah, text me if I have said that incorrectly.

This legislation makes other changes to the comprehensive plan as part of the 2021 annual amendment process.

As a reminder, state law allows us to amend comprehensive plans one time per year.

The council engages in a two-year process for amending the comprehensive plan, first by passing a resolution that sets the docket of amendments to be considered, and then considering said amendments the following year.

The amendments in Council Bill 120154 were docketed last year.

There are two amendments being made as part of this legislation.

The first is a proposal from community members to add a half block in the U district to the university district urban center.

The second is a set of changes from the office of planning and community development for early implementation of the key aspects of the 130th street station area plan to encourage denser housing near the future transit station that is on schedule.

Thank you to Council Member Juarez.

This legislation as transmitted also includes amendments related to manufacturing and industrial areas as part of the Mayor's Maritime and Industrial Strategies recommendations.

Those amendments had to be removed in committee because SEPA has not been concluded on those proposed changes.

The mayor's office has shared its intention to conduct an environmental impact statement on most of the proposed changes, which could allow the amendments to be considered next year.

The Seattle Planning Commission and OPCD recommended all the amendments included in this legislation be added, and the committee urges a gay vote.

Thank you, Council President Collins.

Great.

Are there any additional comments on the bill?

I'm not seeing any other hands raised.

Oh, I see one hand raised.

Council Member Sawant, please.

Sorry, it took me a while to get my...

I just want to make sure this is item number 13, am I right?

The amendments to the comprehensive plan.

Yes, this is item 13.

Thank you.

I will be voting yes on the comprehensive plan amendments this year because I do not object to any of the amendments this bill contains.

But the fact that yet again, council members have left out developer impact fees is just stunning, and it's completely unacceptable.

Developer impact fees are the fees that the city could charge corporate for-profit developers to raise tens of millions of dollars in progressive revenue to fund roads, parks, and public transit.

And in fact, other cities in Washington State charge developer impact fees.

As an illustration, developer impact fees in Seattle could have funded $40 million worth of public transit expansion.

I want to quote what I said on September 29th of last year, one year and five days ago, quote, I want to be clear that I object to what has been left out of the bill.

In particular, there is no mention of developer impact fees.

Developer impact fees can only be passed into law after they are put into the city's comprehensive plan And the comprehensive plan is amended only once each year.

So the fact that the developer impact fees are not included in this bill means that we have to wait another year to for the opportunity to make developers, big developers pay, corporate developers pay for the impacts they have on our city's infrastructure.

Unfortunately, there is a long and bureaucratic process for establishing developer impact fees.

Before they can be passed, they need to be in the comprehensive plan, and before they can be put in the comprehensive plan, they need to be studied under the State Environmental Protection Act, SEPA.

Outrageously, even though developer impact fees were included in the resolution council passed last year, listing the issues that should be studied for this year's comprehensive plan, the mayor refused to do that study.

If we had developer impact fees available this year, we could raise the funds to reverse all the cuts to metro buses, end quote.

And keep in mind, these are quotes from my comments last year, so when I say this year, that meant last year, and last year meant two years back.

Here we are, Once again, one year later, and again, the State Environmental Protection Agency Act study, the CPAR study, has not been done to allow it to be included in the comprehensive plan, despite the fact that it was placed on the list of things that would be done to prepare for this year's comprehensive plan, and despite many, many false commitments from council members.

In fact, and from successive councils, you know, from past council members and from the current ones.

In fact, in July of last year, the council voted yes to include an amendment from my office to a transportation funding bill that added the following whereas clauses, and I quote, whereas developer impact fees could be established as early as 2021 to increase funding to buy bus service hours from Metro and whereas developer impact fees are a progressive funding source paid for by large corporate developers, and whereas the Seattle City Council intends to complete in 2020 any required SEPA analysis to enable developer impact fees to be enacted in 2021, and whereas the Seattle City Council is committed to enacting developer impact fees in 2021 to raise not less than $44 million, which would allow Seattle to increase funding for Metro bus hours, end quote.

This is from the amendment from my office that was accepted by the council to a transportation funding bill.

Unfortunately, that CEPA analysis requires the chair of the council committees that consider land use to prioritize impact fees for the central staff time for their committees.

And it's clear that neither Council Member Peterson nor Council Member Strauss, who chaired their committees, have agreed to do that this year.

But as a matter of fact, The council as a whole, the Democrats on the council as a whole have not prioritized developer impact fees in any way.

This is a clear demonstration of the inordinate power big developers have in Seattle's politics and how much Democratic Party politicians bend to that despite the endless rhetoric that we hear.

The mayor's office refused to do the CPAR analysis on developer impact fees in 2020. Then in 2021, it was deprioritized by council members.

And all of this happens behind closed doors.

So the public does not even know whom to blame and why things are not moving forward.

Why is it that a completely sensible idea like developer impact fees is not going forward.

I mean, the reality is it's all political.

Developer impact fees are hated by corporate developers, not surprisingly.

And that is why you see the inaction on the city council in the absence of a real campaign, a real grassroots campaign, a real momentum on the ground to push for it.

like the Amazon tax, like $15 an hour, like the many renters' rights victories that the renters have won this year because we built independent campaigns to win them.

So the overall result is that years have gone by and corporate developers continue to make double-digit profit rates, just humongous profits, without paying anything resembling their fair share in taxes.

And we can see that developers, contractors, big banks, big corporations, all of whom are making big bucks from construction and development.

They are also the entities responsible for denying basic fair contracts to construction workers.

And we are seeing courageous union carpenters on strike for a fair contract for themselves.

And so all of this is in the mix here.

I voted yes on the previous agenda item, changing the name of single family zones to neighborhood residential.

But let's be crystal clear, that bill was nothing more than a name change having absolutely no material impact.

That is where the political establishment chose to put their time and energy, fighting to introduce developer impact fees.

They want us to focus, or they want to focus everyone on symbolic issues, ignoring the struggle to make developers pay their fair share.

As I said before, I will be voting yes on the comprehensive plan amendments because I do not object to those amendments in particular, but I urge members of the public who want, if we want to win developer impact fees, if we want big developers to pay anything resembling their fair share, particularly to urgently expand transit hours in Seattle, then we will need to build a campaign independent of the- Council President, point of order.

Thank you.

Thank you so much.

Thank you, Council Member Strauss.

I appreciate it again.

Colleagues, our city council rules do require us to keep our comments focused on the legislative matter that is being debated.

as opposed to generalized comments about unrelated legislative matters or only tangentially related legislative matters.

So I'd appreciate your help in staying true to the requirements of the city council rule just to make sure that we are staying efficient and

To be clear, Council President Gonzalez, all my comments were 100% related to the comprehensive plan, so I do not agree or appreciate your claim that it was tendential or peripheral in any way.

Council Member Sawant, I am, for the record, disagreeing with your characterization that all of your comments were 100% related to the council bill before us, which are In my understanding, routine amendments to the comprehensive plan that have been in the works for a year.

I agree that you would like to see the move be more robust, and you have an interest in advancing the legislation that you just described, but that is not the matter that is before us.

The matter that is before us is contained within this council bill.

Your objections are duly noted.

And again, just want to make sure that we are being efficient and effective with the time that we have together.

And I'm just asking for you all to work with me in being able to achieve that.

Any additional comments on this bill?

I'm not seeing any other hands raised.

Council Member Strauss, would you like to close out debate?

Thank you, Council President.

Colleagues, just to respond to some of the things that have been said on the record just a moment ago, understanding that impact fees have been previously docketed and have been docketed for a number of years.

Being docketed is a request to have the executive and executive departments study the issue at hand.

And not only that, but Council put forward the resources.

And when I say study it, that means to have SEPA conducted on the policy proposal.

Furthermore, the City Council has put forward the resources to have impact fees studied, so there is no.

We have made the request of the executive to have SEPA conducted.

We have put forward the resources needed to do so.

At this time we are waiting for SEPA to be concluded and before we can amend the comprehensive plan to to include impact fees.

That is the schedule of land use items.

It is out of our control at this point because that is the schedule in which it needs to be completed.

And so as we are waiting for SEPA to be conducted or concluded at that, once SEPA is concluded, we would be able to take it up for consideration.

Thank you, colleagues.

That is the committee report.

Thank you so much.

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

Clerk will.

Yes.

Juarez?

Aye.

Lewis?

Yes.

Morales?

Yes.

Mosqueda?

Aye.

Peterson?

Aye.

Sawant?

Yes.

Strauss?

Yes.

President Gonzalez?

Aye.

Nine in favor, none opposed.

Thank you, Madam Clerk.

The bill passes and the chair will sign it.

Will the clerk please affix my signature to the legislation on my behalf.

We'll click these read item 14 into the record.

Item 14, Council Bill 120149 relating to land use and zoning amending maximum size of use limits and minimum parking requirements for indoor sports and recreation uses, amending sections 23.50.027 and 23.54.015 of the Seattle Municipal Code.

The committee recommends the bill pass.

Thank you so much.

I'm going to hand it back over to Council Member Strauss

Thank you, Council President.

The last bill of the day Council Bill.

I'm just double checking to make sure I have this right.

Yes, Council Bill 120149. This legislation increases the maximum size limit for indoor sports and recreation uses in industrial general two zones.

It also places certain restrictions on the higher size limit, including that the site must be 500 feet from shorelines close to neighborhood commercial or Seattle mixed use mixed zones and not within a mile of another such facility.

Indoor sports and recreation uses are defined in the code as including things like practice facilities, but not including spectator venues that could drive large increases in traffic and visitation.

In total, this legislation could allow for the development of such a facility on one of about 45 different parcels throughout District 6 and District 7, mostly in Interbay and in Ballard as well.

There have been some speculation in the press that this proposal constitutes a spot rezone after consulting with the city attorney's office, OPCD, the mayor's office, And my colleagues, I'm co does not meet those crite And it does not allow new uses.

So again, it does not rezone land.

It does not allow new uses in that zoning.

It simply adjusts the maximum size of a use that is already allowed in this zone and applies that change to many properties across the area.

As a strong supporter of protecting our industrial areas, I've spoken with stakeholders in the BNMIC about this proposal to ensure that they were aware of it and do not have any concerns.

In addition to these conversations, we have received many letters of support.

including from Todd Legwicky, the CEO of the Seattle Kraken, Chuck Arnold, president of the Seattle Seahawks, Diane Sigamora, the former directing of planning and development for the city of Seattle for over 14 years, Luis Chernin, former president of the Greater Seattle Business Association, as well as from Swedish Health Services, Symetra, BECU, the Pacific Science Center, Carter Subaru, and Rise Above, an organization focused on empowerment of native youth through basketball.

As we have heard in public comment and elsewhere, the Seattle storm could apply for permits to build their own practice facility if this flexibility is established.

While a different party could ultimately submit the proposal, I do believe that a storm practice facility or any other practice facility would have a positive impact on our city.

Creating more spaces for sports and recreation benefits all of us.

the kids, families, neighbors, and fans alike.

Local governments oftentimes support the Seahawks, Mariners, Kraken, and Sounders, and it is important that we, as the city, also have the Seattle Storms back, as they are the most winningest team, and they have had Seattle's back for so long.

As Sue Bird shared at public comment in committee, teams can lose their star players when they don't have the infrastructure to support their players.

For instance, practice facilities.

If teams do not have a good place to practice and hone their skills off of the competition court, they may lose those star players.

Currently, the Seattle Storm is practicing at Seattle Pacific University's gym facilities.

And if a player wanted to spend extra time shooting, practicing, or playing, they could have that time interrupted by a university student hoping to also use that facility.

This month, the Seattle Kraken's new facilities in Northgate and at Climate Pledge Arena are a reminder of the positive impacts that sports and sports facilities can have on a city when they are done right.

when we are using private dollars to create these institutions so that the public is not spending money and the city of Seattle and the general public are benefiting from these programs, players, and teams.

This is another opportunity to allow for a sports facility that will benefit Seattle and to allow our women's professional sports team to invest and deepen their roots in Seattle.

This is another moment where we get to tell our four-time championship team that Seattle's got their back.

Thank you, Council President.

That is the committee's report.

Thank you so much.

Are there any additional comments?

All right, I'm not seeing any hands raised.

Oh, there we go.

Council Member Herbold, please.

I just want to say for the record, when I first heard about this legislation, I have concerns because how it was described, it made me think that we were changing the zoning in contradiction to several votes that the council had taken as related to proposed changes from industrial zone for this lot in the comprehensive plan.

And when I learned that the legislation does not change the underlying zoning and maintains the current industrial zone, my concerns were And I just wanted to kind of get that on the record.

Thank you so much, Council Member Herbold, appreciate it.

Any additional comments?

All right.

Any closing remarks, Council Member Strauss?

Just a sincere thank you to my colleagues and especially Council Member Juarez, who is a longtime supporter and champion of the storm.

Excellent.

All right, I'm not seeing any additional hands raised, so will the clerk please call the roll on the passage of the bill?

Herbold?

Yes.

Juarez?

Aye.

Lewis?

Yes.

Morales?

Yes.

Mosqueda?

Aye.

Peterson?

Aye.

Sawant?

Yes.

Strauss?

Yes.

President Gonzalez?

Aye.

Nine in favor, none opposed.

The bill passes and the chair will sign it.

Will the clerk please affix my signature to the legislation on my behalf?

Is there any further business to come before the council?

All right, I'm not seeing any hands raised.

So colleagues, this does conclude the items of business on today's agenda.

Our next regularly scheduled city council meeting is on Monday, October 11th, 2021 at two o'clock p.m.

I hope that you all have a wonderful afternoon.

We're adjourned.

Thanks so much.

you