Governance, Accountability and Economic Development Committee 2/27/2025

Well, good afternoon.

I'm sure that we're all looking forward to today's meeting.

It is Thursday, February 27th, and the Governance, Accountability, and Economic Development Committee will come to order.

It is 2.03 p.m.

I'm Sarah Nelson, Chair of the Committee.

Will the clerk please call the roll?

Council member Rivera.

Present.

Council member Solomon.

Present.

Council member Hollingsworth.

Here.

Council member Kettle.

Here.

Chair Nelson.

Present.

Five and present.

Thank you very much.

Okay, today's agenda.

We've got a possible vote on Council Bill 120933, which would amend the provisions of the land use code to allow residential uses as a conditional use in the stadium transition area overlay district.

as was stipulated in the mayor's preferred alternative of the final environmental impact statement that was produced for the 2023 industrial land strategy and zoning legislation.

To be very clear, I want to make this point before going further.

Our committee vote is a recommendation to full council.

That's what it is.

It is non-binding on the council and therefore is not an action under SEPA.

And I say this in case you were a little bit nervous about some of the things that the port was saying about a legal challenge if we take action.

Personally, I view that as a last ditch effort to intimidate this committee from taking a vote today and their tactics of meddling in the legislative process of a separate jurisdiction are unfortunate.

given the workforce housing, manufacturing jobs, and improved public safety at stake.

So for the viewing public, the legislative history of this legislation is that Council Bill 120933 was introduced on January 14th and discussed in committee on January 24th.

And then a full month later, next we heard from 52 in-person speakers and 11 remote speakers at the standing room only public hearing this past Monday, February 24th, as well as a panel of opponents representing the port, the Northwest Seaport Alliance, ILUW, Washington Area District Council, Seattle Freight Advisory Council, and the Washington Public Ports Association.

So that's what brings us to today's actions here.

So if there is no, oh, I also must mention that before we go into the questions and comments about the legislation, we will also have a presentation from Council Central staff member analyst Lish Whitson, who will go over the legislation one more time because it's been a while since people heard the specifics of what it would do.

Okay, with that, if there's no objection, the agenda will be adopted.

Hearing no objection, the agenda is adopted.

Okay, we'll now go into the hybrid public comment period, and public comment must be directed to matters within the purview of the committee or listed on the agenda.

We are joined today by Port Commissioner Feldman and State Representative Julia Reed, virtually, and it is our Practice tradition to have elected speak first before we go into the the list of public commenters But before before you go ahead and start talking Commissioner, how many other speakers are signed up?

We have 38 in-person public commenters and 10 remote public commenters, Council President.

Okay, we will give everybody one minute to speak and after our elected speak, we'll go back and forth between in-person and remote speakers.

And you can just briefly give the introduction and then we can begin.

Thank you.

I'll call on speakers in the order they signed up to speak, starting with the in-person commenters.

Speakers will have one minute.

When you hear the chime, you will have 10 seconds left.

If you exceed that time, your microphone may be cut off so that we can move on to the next speaker.

If you're offering remote comment, please make sure to press star six to unmute yourself.

First, we'll start with Board Commissioner Feldman.

Give me a second.

All right, thank you.

We're on.

Council President and committee members, thank you for this opportunity to testify once again in opposition to Council Bill 120933. I'm Port Seattle Commissioner Fred Felleman.

I serve on the Port's Industrial Lands Committee and I'm a managing member of the Northwest Seaport Alliance.

70 coalition members have been reiterating their opposition as they're thinking we had a deal back in 2023 when the council passed the Maritime and Industrial Lands Protection legislation.

While proponents of housing in the SOTOMIC claim that the past EIS supports this ill-informed initiative, they failed to acknowledge that it was a programmatic analysis which did not evaluate this specific proposal.

Furthermore, the current proposal removes the 200-foot buffer around truck routes, which was one of the key mitigations cited in the EIS.

Such mischaracterization is no way for a jurisdiction with shared economic goals to work with each other.

While the port welcomes the opportunity to partner with the city to create prosperity, we're exploring our legal options if you continue to pursue this unfortunate effort that will undermine the port's mission.

The best way to make this city more affordable is to protect the industrial lands that enables the port to continue to support employers who pay higher wage jobs without requiring higher education.

Please table this bill.

Thank you very much.

Thank you, and when you hear that chime, that means you've got 10 seconds to finish it.

Hey, we're not gonna do this.

That is disruptive behavior.

I don't like to come down like that, but please.

The council, I asked repeatedly on Monday not to clap in between speakers, and I wanna keep it that way.

So please, both sides, please follow the direction not to disrupt during the public comment period in between speakers.

Thank you.

Go ahead, who is the next elective assigned up?

Next, we'll jump to the remote commenter.

We'll have State Representative Julia Reid.

Please press star six to unmute yourself.

Thank you so much for hearing me.

Should I just start when I'm ready?

Yes, go ahead, whenever you're ready.

Okay, thank you.

For the record, I'm State Representative Julia Reed.

I'm one of 31 lawmakers from across our state, both Democrats and Republicans, who have written to the council to respectfully oppose this bill, which supersedes many years of hard-won compromise around the city's maritime industrial lands.

work that I myself participated in when I was a mayoral staffer with the city.

I applaud the desire to increase housing in our city.

That's been a high priority for our legislative delegation, but there are many places in the city where new housing and density can and should be added, and there will be many more when the comprehensive plan work is complete.

However, there are few and shrinking places where maritime industrial activity can take place, which is essential to unionized family wage livelihoods the supply chain and emergency resiliency in our entire state.

Building residences in these areas may generate economic activity for some people.

Maintaining good paying jobs and our maritime industrial economy generates economic activity for a lifetime and for generations in the entire region.

Thank you so much for giving me an opportunity to speak.

Thank you.

Now we'll go back to in-person commenters, starting with, I'm going to call three at a time.

We got, and I apologize in advance if I mispronounced your name.

We got Jordan Royer, followed by Brandon Brent, and then Ryan McFarland.

Come on down.

Good afternoon.

It seems like only yesterday that we were together.

I'm Jordan Royer with the Pacific Merchant Shipping Association.

We represent marine terminal operators and shipping lines that serve the West Coast.

I'm also on the board of the Washington Maritime Federation and the chair of the new organization, the Manufacturing Maritime Industrial Association.

Unfortunately, I'm here to oppose this bill.

The whole idea of the agreement in 2023 was that we wanted to send a signal to developers that it was not going to be easy to come and buy a cheap piece of industrial property and upzone it and then sell it and make a profit to degrade our industrial areas.

And so that's really my main concern.

There's lots of places to build housing in Seattle.

If you just look, Across the street, there's a big empty lot that's been empty for about 20 years.

Seems like that'd be a good place to build some housing.

So we do have places to do that.

But these kinds of industrial lands, once they're gone, they're gone.

They don't come back.

You can't relocate a rail yard in somebody's yard.

Thank you.

Thank you, Jordan.

All right, next we got Brandon Brent and Ryan McFarland to follow.

Council members, my name is Brandon Brent, Manager at SSA Marine.

SSA Marine is a leading independent marine terminal operator with activities at more than 250 locations throughout the world.

We are proud to be headquartered here in Seattle, and we have a long-term commitment to the Port of Seattle, where we have been operating for decades.

Today, we and our partners manage operations at Terminals 5, 18, and Pier 91. We want to express our concerns regarding Council Bill 120933. The working waterfront is the economic backbone of the City of Seattle.

Our industrial maritime waterfront is foundational to our state status as a global leader in trade.

We must not sacrifice freight mobility in the precious industrial land near our deepwater seaport.

These industrial lands are unique and irreplaceable.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Next, we got Ryan McFarland.

Following Ryan, we have Beth Swanson, Kurt N, and Kyra Elise.

I'm Ryan McFarland, Director of Government Affairs at the Northwest Seaport Alliance.

You've been hearing how critical your port is to the state economy, but actually it has nationwide significance.

Half our imports are destined for regions beyond the Northwest.

We handle exports from all 50 states and are number two in the country in agriculture exports.

Council members, you recently received a letter from Federal Maritime Commissioner Max Vekic expressing opposition to this proposal.

In his letter, he says these industrial lands are vital to our nation's economic security.

The West Coast has few ports that can handle the large ships that move our nation's cargo.

End quote.

Converting industrial port lands, while profitable for some, will inevitably compound the shortage of space available to handle cargo volumes, which are forecast to double within 26 years.

Please do not underestimate the magnitude of this proposal and the potential harm you could cause.

Vote no.

Thank you, Ryan.

Next, we got Beth, Kurt, and Kyra.

Kyra.

Hi, I'm Beth Swanson.

I'm from Walla Walla, and I'm representing Tri-Cities Intermodal, a private company that is exporting goods using the ports of Seattle.

And we have been open about a year.

And in case you didn't know, 80% of the state exports come from Eastern Washington.

And the investors, we opened this company in Tri-Cities because of the Port of Seattle.

It is a global port.

And our farmers and our egg partners, agricultural partners in Eastern Washington, we need a global port to get our product to market to China, to Japan, to Korea.

And that's what Port of Seattle does for Eastern Washington.

It helps with jobs.

It helps bring businesses to our area.

And it's a really exciting time in Eastern Washington for us.

You might not know, but potatoes, onions, frozen French fries, all hay, all go over to feed the global market through the ports of Seattle and ports of Tacoma.

Thank you.

Thanks.

Thank you, Beth.

All right, next we got Kurt, Kira, and then Allie.

Come on down.

Hello, Commissioners.

My name is Curt Nucitelli.

I'm the owner and president of Spirit Transport Systems, a local trucking company that was founded in 2005 in Georgetown.

We operate in and out of the ports of Seattle and Tacoma, in and out of the railroads, And there's tens and tens directly of family jobs that would be directly impacted negatively by this legislation.

We're opposed.

I'm also here as the sitting board chairman of the Washington Trucking Association and Immortal Council, and so I'm representing actually businesses, trucking companies throughout Washington State.

And as you've already heard that this has an impact across our state, across our country and internationally.

The amount of blue collar jobs and families that would be impacted by impacting the corridor here would be exponentially impacted negatively by this legislation.

So we ask you to vote no.

Thank you.

Next we have Kyra, Kyra, followed by Ali and then Leith.

Thank you.

I'm Kyra Leith, Director of Real Estate Development for Port of Seattle.

Given the promise that affordable housing in SOTA would come at no cost to the taxpayers, I urge city leaders to consider the total cost of converting industrial lands to affordable housing.

I have extensive experience converting industrial sites to housing as the development director in Pittsburgh.

The public sector and taxpayers will bear the cost of infrastructure upgrades as required by city code.

This alone could take a decade.

So does electric, water, sewer, and IT infrastructure outdated.

Parking sidewalks, parks, open space must be built, not to mention seismic upgrades.

Health and safety requirements for affordable housing differ vastly from industrial requirements.

Has the Council considered these public financial and health costs?

The promise of affordable housing at no cost to the public is likely false and is unlikely to be financially feasible in this location.

However, the port stands ready to participate in a SOTO-wide infrastructure upgrade analysis to support the future of the green economy.

Thank you.

Next we got Ali Leif and then Charlie Bendok.

Ali, Ali, Ali Al Ghazali.

And apologies in advance if I mispronounced your name.

Hi folks, I'm Ali Al-Khazali, working with the Spirit Transport System since 2005, for almost 20 years.

And we need more respect for our, as I'm a driver, truck driver.

We are issue for safety and also for traffic.

Most of the time we stand up or we line up from the port all the way to the freeway on the bridge.

with a thousand stands of trucks.

So we need at least a yard to stand by.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Next we got Leith Kahl, Charlie Bendok, and then Nick Sten.

So we got Leith.

Hello, my name is Leith Call.

I've worked for the last 20 years as a longshoreman in the great port of Seattle.

I think you all know what's at stake here, so I'll try to be brief.

Your seaport was the first economic engine that made you into a great Emerald City metropolis.

The success of the report gave rise to Boeing, the success of Boeing gave rise to Microsoft, and you can have much more success.

Only about 12% of your industrial land base that supports maritime takes up space in your city, but it pays about 30% of your tax revenue.

Do not cut off, do not shut off, the original economic engine that made the Emerald City a great metropolis.

That would be a huge mistake.

All right, next we got Charlie Bendock, Nick Sten, and then Carlin Smith.

Charlie?

Yeah, hello.

My name is Charlie Bendock, and I'm a Seattle longshoreman.

Ladies and gentlemen, we live in dark times of cynicism and greed.

And no, I'm not talking about DC.

We had a deal.

But a billionaire and at least one duplicitous council member would rather screw over the entire region.

It's not just about the thousands of us who work at the port or the tens of thousands in related jobs.

It's bigger than Seattle.

It's bigger than the state.

Communities all across the region rely on our port.

Everything we need for survival depends on food, clothing, shelter, medical necessities, all depend on a robust supply chain infrastructure.

And we just saw how fragile ours is during the last pandemic.

We need to protect our port and supply chains so our communities are connected, resilient, and able to get the help and supplies they need when disasters strike.

We had a deal, killed us today.

Thank you.

Next we got Nick Sten, Carlin Smith, and Christian Carlot, or Christina Carlot, my apologies.

Good afternoon, counsel.

I'm Nick Sten, proud ILWU member and resident of District 1. I've lived in Seattle my entire life, other than the four years that I was in the Navy.

Thank you, shipmate, for everything.

Hey, we see that you're a man of integrity, and it must not be easy.

We see how they're treating you up here, brother.

It must not be easy being surrounded by this corruption that we're seeing.

Speaking of corruption, Sarah...

We've been fighting Chris Hansen for 20 years now, all right?

We've done it three times.

We had the stadium, then we had the entertainment district.

Now we're supposed to believe that a billionaire cares about low-income housing.

You've mentioned breweries or hops or whatever 10 times in the last three meetings because the only person that's guaranteed to get an artesian workspace down there is you and your beer company.

I mean, it's absolutely...

Seattle is the sixth largest economy on the planet, and that's the gateway right there.

We can't get the trucks through the door.

I know you want to sell $12 IPAs to hipsters, you know, but...

Hey, thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

All right.

Go ahead.

Hello, cancel.

My name is Carlin Smith.

I'm a Seattle resident and a Seattle voter.

I asked this council to vote no on this infringement on industrial lands.

This council is setting a horrible precedent.

We had a deal for a decade, and here we are two years later fighting givebacks so that a billionaire can make more money.

Council President Nelson should be ashamed of herself for being a billionaire lackey and the lack of leadership that she is showing.

Our public ports are assets to be protected.

They should be providing, they have been economic engines and providing family wage jobs for generations.

We support affordable housing.

We support affordable housing, of course, in Seattle, for our brothers and sisters in labor to have lots of work in neighborhoods that have the things that families need.

This is not that.

Heavy haul trucks and housing are not good neighbors.

Your actions are strangling the port and it will die a death of a thousand cuts.

Thank you.

Next we got a Christian Carlot or Christina Carlot, Paul P. Lindsey Dorvac.

And my apologies.

Good morning, council members.

I'm here in opposition to this resolution.

As a worker on the waterfront and a proud union member with ILWU, I hope the council will preserve the industrial lands that we have.

Thank you.

Can you say your name for the record, sir?

Christian Curlott.

Thank you.

Thank you, Christian.

All right, next we got Paul P. Lindsey Dorbach and then last name S-M-U-L-L-S.

Thank you.

We got Paul.

Paul, Paul Pemberton?

Come on down, Paul.

Paul Pemberton here.

I've been working on the docks for on and off almost 40 years.

And I wanna say that we could use a little thought experiment on this process.

We have a big area of land that's not seeming to be used at its highest level.

and we just wanna turn it into housing willy-nilly.

Well, there's several other kinds of properties in the city of Seattle property that have that kind of context.

We have 12 golf courses that the city has determined are underutilized.

Oh, I know, it's insane.

But this property is producing jobs.

This property is the edge of our industrial district.

To violate our agreements that we have made is a tilt towards a corrupt use of public monies.

We do not need this.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Next, we got Lindsey Dorbach, Alamo Smalls, and Sarah Etch.

Good afternoon.

I'm Lindsay Dvorak, a second-generation longshore worker.

I rise in strong opposition to Council Bill 120933 and urge you to vote no.

Vote no to support the 58,000 jobs that are supported directly by marine cargo operations.

Vote no to honor the industrial land use agreement that was agreed upon just two short years ago.

Vote no to ensure our city's natural deepwater port remains a vital part of the Seattle economy for generations to come.

I hope to be able to support affordable housing in a maker's district somewhere in a more feasible, quieter and cleaner location, but this is not the location.

Thank you for your time.

Thank you.

Oh man, his name.

How many have spoken already?

It's me. 15 as of now, council president.

Okay, let's then go to 20 and we have to go to the...

Yeah, online people.

Go ahead.

That's okay.

That's going to be sweet and short.

You ready?

Yeah, go ahead.

I just asked you guys to lose your common sense.

That's it.

You know, these guys need what they want.

Some people don't want it, but just use your common sense.

That's all I ask.

Just use your common sense.

What's right is right, wrong is wrong.

You know, positive and negative.

That's how this world works.

Just use your common sense.

What's best for the people matters.

That's all.

Other than that, common sense.

Thank you.

Thank you.

All right, next we got Sarah S., Erin McCray, Angie Watkins, and then Mia Jacobson.

Sarah?

Hi, I'm Sarah Esch and I'm a Seattle Longshoreman.

I'm still against this proposal.

Let's talk mitigation cost of putting residential units into this industrial area.

Given the liquefaction zone, how far down will they have to drill for supports?

After decades of diesel and other contaminants leaching into the land, the soil remediation efforts will be hefty.

All units will be required to have sound insulating windows, permanent air cooling and balanced ventilation systems, and all residents most certainly will be required to sign covenants, acknowledging the conditions into which they are moving.

I'm not a developer, but given these costs, affordable housing doesn't seem to pencil out.

So let's say you do succeed in pushing this through.

Sounds like it might be pretty quiet and clean in your new unit until you want to open a window or go outside for some fresh air.

Residents in this area will deal with more than 9,000 truck trips per week and will be boxed into the east and west by busy rail yards.

And did I mention that Amtrak has plans to add five to seven new tracks against South Holgate Street?

This is my favorite quote from Monday morning's hearing.

With all those conditions, doesn't that point to the incompatibility of those residential and industrial areas?

Thank you.

Thank you.

All right, next we got Aaron, Angie, and then Mia.

Come on down, Aaron.

Hello, my name is Aaron McKay, and I've been a Longshoreman for 20 years.

I've worked down there.

My dad's worked down there.

And this truck route is a crucial truck route for the port.

And if it gets choked off, the port dies.

We cannot compete with the other ports in other cities.

They're going to move the cargo to them and we're not going to get it.

We're going to lose thousands and thousands of jobs.

And if we lose this, they're gone.

The building trades, you know, it's great the building trades want this work, but they're only going to be working for maybe two years and they're going to be gone.

And our job is a whole entire career.

And I think that's all I got to say.

Thank you very much.

I hope you voted this down.

Thank you.

Thank you, Aaron.

All right, next we got Angie Watkins and then Mia, Mia Jacobson.

Yes, Council President.

Hi, I'm Angie Watkins.

I'm a longshore casual of Local 19. I'm speaking in opposition to this bill.

The reason we're so impassioned about this is it seems like there is a big gamble on behalf of the city council.

There is a possibility, if there's even a possibility, that infringing on that space and slowing down freight traffic could adversely impact trade and the viability of our port and their trade partnerships, That's too much of a gamble.

When there are places already zoned for housing, when there are places where our brothers and sisters in the trades can do their work and can get to work, I ask you all to possibly think creatively about other spaces that don't have such prospective adverse ramifications.

on our jobs the local economy the state economy we've heard from farmers in eastern washington speaking i don't think it's unreasonable to ask you to be 100 certain that you don't that you know that this will not slow down traffic when a thousand people live there and their cars thank you thank you angie thank you all right next we'll have mia jacobson and then we'll transition into the remote commenters mia jacobson

Hi, my name is Mia Jacobson.

I'm a third generation longshoreman.

I've worked in the industry for about 15 years.

And looking at this room, brothers and sisters, it breaks my labor heart to have a proposition set before the people that seems to put us in opposition for the benefit of a capital investor.

It seems very suspect that years of collaborative work, extensive work, has been pushed to the side for the sake of what sounds like a really terrible plan, honestly.

I've been speaking to my brothers and sisters trying to figure out the opposing argument, and they want jobs.

We want jobs.

We're all in the same boat here.

And especially in the context of this current administration and the types of attack that labor is experiencing, it is astonishing to me that this council would consider an action that could hamstring Local 19, strongest union on the West Coast, as we enter into this conversation where we're all under threat.

And when this gentleman said common sense, you're not gonna get common sense without our input.

Thank you, thank you, Mia.

All right, we're gonna transition into the remote commenters.

Just as a reminder, I'm gonna call on the speakers in the order they signed up.

When you hear the chime, you will have 10 seconds left.

If you exceed that time, your microphone may be cut off so that we can move on to the next speaker.

If you're offering remote comment, please make sure to press star six to unmute yourself.

First person we're going to have is Alberto Alvarez.

Alberto, please press star 6 to unmute yourself.

Hello.

Today, the Seattle Office of Labor Standards published their year in review for 2024. In their data, they highlight financial remedies for Seattle workers for last year.

One was wage theft ranging in the $1 million area.

By comparison, paid sick and save time to gig workers at around $774,000 last year.

Seattle's pay-up provides tens of thousands of gig workers with the time needed to stay healthy, recover from illness, and the peace of mind that their financial well-being will not be severely impacted or simply taking care of themselves or loved ones.

There is more information from OLS to publish, most likely by summer.

For now, this is one of the first data points available which showcase the success of payout.

Thank you and have a good day.

Thank you.

Next, we'll go to Eric Fitch.

Eric, please press star six to unmute yourself.

Thank you, Chair Nelson.

Members of the committee, Eric Fitch, Washington Public Ports Association, here again to ask you to put down Council Bill 120933. First, on Monday, there were questions about whether traffic really impacts freight.

Look no further than the $65 million spent by the federal government, the city of Seattle, and the port on the Lander Street overpass, or the multiple ports in central Washington, who are exploring major investments in rail transfer facilities to speed the delivery of containers to the urban core.

Next, regarding the compromise in 2023, no one got everything they wanted.

The port accepted housing in every other urban industrial zone, just not the one located on a heavy haul corridor across from a cargo terminal.

It is extremely dubious to suggest that putting low-income housing on a freight corridor would benefit public safety.

Lastly, bipartisan agreement is at a premium these days.

You are holding a letter from 31 state lawmakers from both parties asking that you will close the bill.

Please vote no.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Next will be Deanna Keller.

Deanna, please press star six to unmute yourself.

Deanna Keller, Port of Tacoma Commissioner and managing member of the Northwest Seaport Alliance.

The Seaport Alliance is a formal joint venture between the ports of Seattle and Tacoma to manage the marine cargo terminals to both harbors.

The Alliance was formed to strengthen economic opportunities for the region rather than compete against each other.

The success of our organization relies upon the support of partners, other governments, and a variety of stakeholders from across the state.

We're in a complex business.

The supply chain is dynamic, something that is reflected in activity at our terminals.

Our ports are more than just local assets.

40% of Washington jobs depend upon trade, much of which moves through the seaports.

For agricultural shippers, efficient access to and from ports often makes a difference in whether their products are competitive in global markets.

Manufacturers need efficient ports for reliable supply chains and for getting their goods to markets.

We need your support in attracting more business.

Terminals, not policies that turn them turn them away.

Please vote against Council Bill one two zero nine three three.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Next we'll have Tim.

Sorry, Tim McGreevy.

Tim, please press star six to unmute yourself.

Tim, please start.

My name is Tim McGreevy.

I'm the CEO of USA Pulses and the U.S.

Dry Pea and Lentil Trade Association.

We represent the farmers, processors and exporters of dry peas, lentils, chickpeas and dry beans.

I want to thank you for the opportunity to express our strong opposition to Council Bill 120933. The national headquarters of USA Pulses is in eastern Washington and northern Idaho.

Our industry exports over 50% of its production, and we rely on the timely shipment of our crops to our overseas customers.

The Seattle port is vital to the U.S. pulse industry.

Adequate space is needed to meet the growing needs and challenges of a rapidly expanding global shipping market.

I need you to know that rural farmers and shippers in the state of Washington The Pacific Northwest and across the United States rely on the Port of Seattle.

You need to know that decisions regarding the Port of Seattle have consequences on the rural families and communities whose livelihoods depend on its functioning as a top tier global market.

We oppose any plans to expand and please oppose.

All right.

Next, we have Jamie Gowen.

Jamie, please press star six to meet yourself.

I'm Jamie Gohan, Executive Director of Alaska Bering Sea Crabbers, a trade association representing crab fishermen.

I'm speaking today in opposition of this bill.

Many of the 55 vessels in the Bering Sea crab fleet come to Seattle for services, and most of the king and snow crab that we harvest comes through Seattle ports as frozen product on container ships.

Alaska's fisheries are the top U.S. producer of wild seafood, more than all other states combined, and contributes over $15 billion to the U.S. economy.

Much of that seafood is coming through Seattle's ports to reach other destinations across the U.S. and beyond, and with it comes jobs, services, and taxes benefiting Washington State.

Key to maintaining the function of this economic engine is the movement of freight through our region.

Our region is known for its incredible seafood.

We ask that you stand strong and support the industrial lands package that was passed in 2023, voting no on this bill.

And keeping Seattle as the maritime industrial center of the Pacific Northwest.

Thank you.

Thank you.

All right.

Next, we have Chad C. Please press star six to unmute yourself, Chad.

All right, Chad, we'll come back to you.

We're going to then jump in.

Sorry, Chad.

Go ahead.

Sorry about that.

Hi, my name is Chad C. I'm a valid native, board president of the Washington Maritime Federation and executive director of the Freezer Lawland Coalition, part of the North Pacific Fishing Fleet.

I also serve on the board of the Sail and Marine Business Coalition.

I wish to express my strong opposition to Council Bill 120933. I had the honor to serve on our city's stakeholder committee on the zoning of our industrial lands.

I am proud of that after many years of work, we had a deal.

We should not be revisiting this agreement and creating new uncertainty and challenges for our industrial workforce.

Today, seafood and agricultural stakeholders alike are facing multiple challenges to our livelihoods.

The seafood industry alone supports thousands of working families in Washington.

Changes in land use in the stadium district impacts the movement of goods from across our state to our largest port gateway.

We should not be creating new roadblocks to the work of our fishermen and farmers.

We support affordable housing, but we need a board of works.

I urge the council to not move this action forward.

All right, thank you, Chad.

Next, we'll have David Haynes.

David, please press star six to unmute yourself.

David Haynes, thank you.

Instead of being concerned about impacts on the port, we need to focus on mitigating impacts the port subjects the rest of the community to.

Because going from the port to the highway should not be an express priority for the road rage speeding through.

They need to be more respectful and considerate.

Also, we need noise abatement walls around port operations.

And maybe we need to shut down the port during game time and raise the NAFTA port race and put a federal injunction on the port authorities to keep getting shaken down, played one against another, offering a better deal at taxpayers' expense, forced to welfare-subsidize offshore industrialists, giving away our sovereignty.

And yet councils would rather sleep covenants and equitable servitude than the fine print of a contract on a lease that guarantees the oppressed poor won't have any rights to break the lease or sue to get their money back due to unbearable living conditions.

As belligerent port employees remind us, they'll over dramatically say anything to get paid quickly a couple hours off to come embellish their concerns.

Thank you, David.

Next, we'll have Jim Peschel.

Hey, Jim, please press star six to meet yourself.

Hi, my name is Jim Peschel.

I'm a tugboat operator here on Harbor Island, and I rely on the industrial district for support of our businesses.

This includes our vendors, our repair vendors, and the ability to have freight mobility through this corridor.

Once land is changed from industrial to residential, it'll never go back.

People may consider it quaint to live in an industrial district, but it can be loud, noisy, 24 hours a day, and it's certainly not safe for pedestrians to walk that area.

Keep jobs in the industrial district and vote no for converting this to housing.

Thank you.

Thank you, Jim.

Next, and this will be the last remote commenter this afternoon, is Peter Schrapen.

Peter, please press star six to unmute yourself.

Good afternoon.

My name is Peter Schrapen, and I serve as the Vice President for the American Waterways Operators, which is the advocate, resource, and united voice for the tugboat, towboat, and barge industry.

Our industry, which supports thousands of family wage jobs in Seattle and Washington State, serves as a vital part of Washington's supply chain, opposes this bill.

As you've heard from numerous speakers, once these industrial lands are replaced with homes, they're gone forever.

You received our coalition letter that ended with a simple message, and I'll conclude with the same ending.

Quote, this is not just about protecting what we have.

It's about building a future where our maritime industry thrives.

Our workers succeed, and our state continues to lead in global trade.

End quote.

Thank you for your time.

Thank you, Peter.

Council President, that concludes remote commenters.

May I continue for the remaining in person?

All righty.

All right.

Next, I'm going to call in threes.

We're going to have Aaron Pritchard, Waylon Roberts, and Andrea Ornelia.

And I apologize for mispronouncing her last name or first name.

Good afternoon, Aaron Pritchard, Chief of Staff, Port Commissioners.

It's with a heavy heart that we deliver that Port delivers this letter to the Council of our legal objections to this legislation.

The fight will not be over if this legislation passes.

The fight will have just begun.

I would much rather deliver you the plan we are working on with GSP, with the city's OED, with Maritime Blue, with the Chamber, with the Hydrogen Hub, with the Fuels Collective, the Clean Trucks Collaborative, to attract marquee green industry partners, to deliver electric trucks, to bring clean maritime fuels, and to revolutionize our green economy.

Let's do this together.

Our current MOU, on the future of Soto assigned by the city, the state, the county, Sound Transit, Muckleshoot, and Suquamish, and lays out a clear path for negotiation.

But this legislation imperils all of those conversations.

This legislation has split the council, has divided our community, and damaged the image of what one Seattle looks like.

The table to lift up the maritime industry and deliver jobs for construction workers, janitors, maritime, electricians.

Indeed, this is the mission of the Port of Seattle.

Thank you, Eric.

All right, next we got Waylon Roberts followed by Andrea and then Angela Wynn.

Good afternoon, council.

My name is Waylon Robert.

I'm a merchant seaman, a renter in District 3, and political director of the Sailors Union of the Pacific.

SUP has been on the Seattle waterfront since 1885. Our industry has been the most consistent contributor to our city's tax base for over 100 years.

Our port is four hours closer to the world than Tacoma.

Pier 46, right over there, has the deepest draft of any terminal on the west coast.

We can always have this industry if we protect it.

We've already heard concerns about getting freight to our docks.

I ask that you, kill this legislation, that my members have a future here, and that we continue to have viable access to our docs.

Thank you.

Thank you, Aylin.

Next we have Andrea Ornelius, Angela Nguyen, and Adam McKay.

Afternoon, council members.

I'm Andrea Ornelas.

I'm a member of IUNA 242, and being that this is my third time testifying, I'm pretty sure you guys know what I'm gonna say.

So I just wanna bring to your attention the potential impact on the community that'll be demonstrated by your commitment in fostering growth, creativity, and opportunity.

So I want to say that I appreciate your efforts in carefully weighing in all aspects of this proposal for the benefit of Seattle's future.

I respectfully ask for you to support the Makers District.

Supporting the Makers District aligns with Seattle's broader vision of being a progressive, inclusive city that encourages creativity, entrepreneurship, and sustainable development.

The Makers District offers the potential for long-term growth that benefits the city's residents, business, and overall economic growth.

and some please vote to move forward with one two zero nine three three so that seattle can continue to grow as a dynamic creative and forward-thinking city thank you thank you uh next we have angela winn adam mckay and then alan smith the a's

Good afternoon, council members.

My name is Angela Nguyen.

I'm here on behalf of the Alliance for Pioneer Square, and we're here to express our support for the creation of the Stadium Makers District.

Pioneer Square and the surrounding areas have long been home to innovation, industry, and craftsmanship.

This initiative represents a forward-thinking approach to economic development and one that builds upon our city's industrial legacy while creating new opportunities for small-scale, manufacturers, artisans, and local businesses.

This proposal is well studied, carefully balanced to support existing industrial uses, and by activating this underutilized space, we can generate jobs, support entrepreneurship, and expand affordable housing.

a vibrant makers district complements existing stadium activity and ensures year-round active engagement that benefits the city and improves public safety the alliance for pioneer square urges you to pass this bill and help shape the future where seattle's creative and industrial spirit thrives thank you so much thank you angela uh next we have adam mckay alan smith and then michael clyde adam

I'm going to make this brief because some of my brother carpenters here probably got to get home to Sheilis or Snohomish County or something.

Because I'm a Seattle resident, lifelong.

And I live here, and I work here, and I vote here.

I've worked down there 20 years.

And the most important thing to say is we've got to protect this port.

This is a deep water port.

This is a rare thing on a global scale.

OK?

It must be protected.

Now, what we need to do is we need diversity.

We don't need developers.

We have a developer in the White House.

We need diversity of jobs.

We need white, we need blue, and we need collar, work together.

Save the port, okay?

The city can't survive on tech alone.

So what we need to do is protect the port, protect this asset, and thank you for your service.

Thank you.

Next, we got Alan Smith, Michael Clyde, and Joshua Curtis.

Come on down, Alan, Michael, and Joshua.

Hello, my name is Alan Smith.

I've been a longshoreman going on almost 20 years now.

Worked without a McKay forever.

I'm disheartened that you have put us here, pinning labor against labor here.

It's very disheartening.

Unfortunately, brothers in the building trades, houses, makers, districts, all these things can be built in other locations.

Ports cannot be moved or rebuilt.

That's not possible.

So the financial impacts of putting in some low-income housing are you're going to lose way more giving up the port.

It affects the entire state.

It affects the entire country versus just a few small businesses in a few random houses that are supposedly going to be affordable.

So I urge you to please kill this legislation.

We're up here again and again.

We're tired of fighting this.

Please kill this.

Thank you.

Thank you, Michael.

Oh, sorry, we got Michael Clyde, Joshua Curtis, Ally V. Come on down.

Hello, I'm Michael Clyde.

I work at the Port of Seattle.

And since I've started there seven years ago, I've looked into the impact on shipping in this area and how Seattle is built on shipping and the importance of the economy around that.

As Councilman Strauss pointed out last time, he called it the backbone of Seattle's economy and 30%, and the reason you were able to balance your budgets.

There are so many jobs associated with this.

I'm proud to work in a diverse group of people that cover all ages, races, everything.

It's a wonderful place to work.

And we have great jobs for lots of people.

And we go out into the community and spread that around.

I sat at lunch.

I see us after work.

And we support housing.

We want better housing, more construction.

hampering the backbone of our economy is not going to help us as the city of Seattle.

Strongly oppose this.

I hope you make a good decision.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Next, we got Joshua Curtis, Ali V, and then John H.

Good afternoon, council members.

My name is Joshua Curtis.

I'm the executive director of the Ballpark PFD.

I want to thank you all for your consideration of the legislation in front of you.

More than that, though, I want to acknowledge how hard your jobs have been.

We have all been at this for a while.

Passions are clearly running high.

I'll admit, I've been pretty frustrated.

As we have witnessed what I can only describe as a flood the zone strategy, I've been caught off guard, and frankly, my head has been spinning.

Last night, I spent more time than I'm willing to admit trying to figure out how many red herrings I could address in one minute.

Instead, I'd like to step back for a moment.

This is the good news.

OPCD has already studied all of this.

The EIS lays out in very clear language what the impact would be.

It includes in its preferred alternative the 995 units of housing, 50% of which would be affordable for 75 years.

So as you try to make heads or tails of the myriad claims and legal threats, I encourage you to do what should have been done a year ago.

Trust the department whose job it was to analyze this.

Thank you.

Thank you.

All right, next we got Ali V, John H, and then Mariana H.

Hi, I'm Ali Vekic.

In a time when the working class is under attack and it is becoming harder and harder for everyday Americans to afford to live, in this area especially, why would we risk any kind of harm to one of our region's top economic engines?

The experts on the ground, the people that live and breathe maritime, are telling you that this housing development in this location is a bad idea.

Believe us.

Washington is one of the most trade-dependent states in the country.

We are famous for our quality exports of some of the best commodities in the world, wine, Christmas trees, salmon, cherries, apples, beer, and french fries.

The legislation in front of us puts our port's viability at stake and with it threatens so many other sectors and family wage jobs.

Please protect our rich trade economy, which I am so proud to be a part of.

Please vote on 120933 to protect good maritime and agricultural jobs in our town and across Washington State, the greatest place in the world, thank you.

Thank you, all right.

Next we got John H, Mariana H, and then Jesse C or G, my apologies.

John Hitzfelder, District 7 voter, longshore worker since 2011. We have fast crane operators here in Seattle, as fast as anywhere, faster than the robots yet.

Our trouble with the port is getting containers in and out of the ports on the roads, and this change would only make that worse.

and it puts people at risk.

The waiver for placing housing near the traffic corridor is a mistake.

We don't allow pedestrians in the terminals, and we wear high-vis vests.

We're trained to keep our heads on a swivel, and all our equipment has better visibility and lower speeds than the road trucks and trains out there.

Those trucks account for a higher proportion of fatal collisions than other traffic.

Building tradespeople know you don't allow civilians on construction sites.

This would be like that, adding all that traffic to the corridor.

This waiver is contrary to the Vision Zero goal of no pedestrian deaths in the city.

Thank you.

Thank you.

All right, next we have Mariana H, Jesse C, and then Monte A. Come on down.

All right, good afternoon, council members.

My name is Mariana Haik, political coordinator with the Western States Regional Council of Carpenters, which supports over 18,000 members alone here in Washington State, and a proud member of Local 196, which is the pile of drivers and divers.

I stand before you today to voice my strong support for the Makers District housing project, a crucial investment in community's future.

With over 15 years spent in apprenticeship and pre-apprenticeship programs, I've seen how essential skilled tradespeople are in building our very foundation of the city.

This project will provide well-paying union jobs that not only support current workers, but also invest in the next generation through apprenticeships and high-quality training.

More importantly, the Makers District directly addresses Seattle's housing crisis, particularly for those who keep the city running.

Trades people, teachers, first responders, and service members, many of whom can no longer afford to live in the city they helped build.

By integrating housing with industry and makerspaces, this project will allow more working families to stay rooted in Seattle.

This is more than just about jobs and housing.

It's about strengthening our local economy, creating sustainable community.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

All right.

Next, we got Jesse C. Monty A. And then Steven Stephan K. Jesse, come on down.

Thank you, council.

My name is Jesse.

Go ahead, please.

Jesse C. I'm the lead representative for the Western States Regional Council of Carpenters, representing Local 206, which is in the city of Seattle, which we have over 6,000 members just alone in this city.

This isn't just an opportunity about livable wages, but look at the economy.

Unemployment is up.

Washington state is a $24 billion deficit.

If we keep turning down livable wages and good paying jobs, we're just gonna continue down the spiral that we're currently heading to.

This is about creating a future for generations and not displacing us to where we have to live in Chehalis or down south in Pierce County.

We wanna be able to live where we work and be able to create generational wealth and community wealth.

This is about good paying jobs and having the ability to live where you work.

Also, you know, we have 25 members that are here in support of this project.

We urge you to move forward with this, and it's the right thing to do with Seattle.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Next, we got Monty A, Steven K, and then Ming Ming T.

Good afternoon, council members, and thank you, Sarah Nelson, for bringing this forward.

I want to let you know that usually we go back and forth here with pro and con, and I'm sorry that there was an event up here and we didn't sign up in time, so I'm sorry if some of our messaging got lost earlier, but I just want to reiterate the thing that we always talk about here is facts.

There was no way, being a professional in the craft that I do, I would ever do anything that I thought would harm the port.

We've gone through this for over a year.

We've looked at all the EIS, and I've yet to see anything that would say that they put these people in harm.

I get the idea around preserving the port.

I worked at the port myself, at the Port of Seattle, for over a year.

I get it.

But the idea that messaging that isn't always...

maybe gets out there and sometimes muddies the water.

So I'm here to say that I support all the workers that are in the room, and I wouldn't be here beside you asking for your support on this if I didn't think it was a viable idea.

Thank you.

Thank you, Monty.

Thank you.

All right, next we got Stephen K., Ming Ming T., and then Estella M.

Hi, council.

Thank you for having me.

My name's Steven Kirsten, and I'm at Local 206, Journeyman Carpenter.

I've been with them for about eight years.

And we are for the Stadium Makers District proposal.

I see a lot of people here opposing it.

But honestly, I mean, if it's telling me here that it's not going to make much of a difference for the freight times, and if I sit in traffic, I've lived everywhere in Seattle, was born and raised.

I vote for you.

And if it doesn't affect the traffic like it already, I mean, traffic's already horrible.

I've lived also in New York and LA.

Okay, so I mean, trust me when I tell you traffic's bad here, it's just we're not built for it.

So if we're gonna be doing something, developing an area in the industrial district sounds like a great idea to me.

I mean, someone who lives in the downtown area, okay?

And to build the affordable housing, I know that my rent goes up every year, couple hundred bucks, right?

So affordable housing for 75 years, I hope these signs can go from we had a deal to we have a deal.

Thank you.

All right, next we got Mingming T, Estella M, and then Mark O. Come on down, everyone.

Hello, council member.

My name is Mingming Tung Edelman, founder, executive director of nonprofit called Refugee Artists Initiative.

We create a green job for refugee immigrant women upcycling materials locally.

In the beginning of pandemic, when you couldn't find masks, we were able to upcycle Amazon return bed sheets, turning into over 80,000 masks, keep our community safe.

And recently, we're taking the vinyl billboard material, turning into recycled bags that distribute over thousands of families to encourage them to recycle.

So my message to you is that we create green jobs and wild diverted material out of landfill.

So this bill is really important because it creates local manufacturing jobs that's equitable and allow people to live in other poverty for our residents of refugee immigrant women.

So I'm here asking for your consideration of women for both in the environment and our community.

Thank you.

We've got Costello M. Mark O.

Hi, my name is Estella Martinez.

My business is Askitoo Bakery in Belltown neighborhood of Seattle.

We are the only bakery in the state of Washington and one of three on the west coast that makes allergen free baked goods and foods in a dedicated space serving those with severe food disabilities.

I'm here today as a member of Seattle Made to ask the council to support this bill 120933 for a stadium makers district.

Maker businesses expand opportunities for local ownership and employment, contributing to the vibrancy and uniqueness of our city, and helping build our region's long-term resiliency by keeping dollars circulating in our communities.

I have struggled for the last two years looking for a larger space so that I can expand my business to include wholesale and hire more people so that we can serve more of those people who live with food disabilities.

So I hope you can support this.

Thank you.

Thank you.

All right.

Next, the last three, we have Mark O'Reilly, Ron Manuel, and then Peter Grishrew.

Come on down, y'all.

I'm Mark O'Reilly, a longshoreman for 18 years.

After years of negotiating this deal, we've given our new council members a month to decide on this thing.

Members of this council have stated they don't understand the reasons specific compromises were made or what led to them because they weren't there.

How could any of our new counselors possibly understand all that went into this deal in a month?

This is exactly why voting no on this should be a simple decision.

Best I can tell, a few people's private financial goals are being used to mobilize creative, hardworking people into overlooking the significant benefits this port brings to the city.

For over a century, this port continues to provide income for hundreds of thousands of workers across the state and provides important funds for our city.

Every choke point, big or small, is another reason for global shippers to go elsewhere.

Vote this down, build these maker spaces where it makes sense, and keep learning about how special our port is.

Then help everyone by introducing legislation that improves this corridor for shipping.

Thanks.

Thank you, Mark.

All right, last two public commenters.

We got Ron Manuel and Peter Grishrew.

Come on down, Ron and Peter.

Hi, my name is Ron Manuel from Local 19. I've worked on the Seattle waterfront for over 37 years.

In that time, I've seen the aftermath of countless injuries and deaths from accidents involving heavy equipment and people, semi-trucks and people.

On the docks and the freeways, I'm adamantly opposed to building housing in the industrial zone and eliminating the 200-foot setback of housing from the heavy haul corridor It is literally akin to having children play on the freeway.

It is a dumb and ill-thought scheme to enrich one man.

I urge a no vote.

We had a deal.

Honor that deal.

I don't want to see any more people hurt or killed by trucks or equipment on roads that were not designed for that when we had a deal that kept housing out of the one most important area for the port.

There was a question asked Monday about why we were so adamantly opposed in this area where we weren't on other areas because this particular spot is particularly important to the port and the international container terminals right across the street.

We are opposed to it.

Thank you.

Thank you.

The last commenter for this afternoon is gonna be Peter Grishu.

Go ahead, Peter.

Good afternoon, council members.

My name is Peter Grishuru.

I am the presidency of African Chamber of Commerce.

Been around Seattle for over 60 years.

Went to a day high school.

I'm a member of the African community in Seattle, which is one of the fastest growing community.

number of our members who make a living moving containers in and out of terminals.

In fact, estimated to be over 400. We say no.

Let's not interfere with anything that will interfere with those jobs.

It's very important and we say no.

Thank you.

Thank you.

And that concludes public comment, Council President.

Okay.

We have come to the end of our public comment period.

Thank you so much for coming out for the second day this week.

I appreciate your engagement.

And there's nobody else signed up on the list to my knowledge, so the public comment period is now closed.

Let's see, so we do have a, we will have a presentation from council central staff.

I will first basically say a couple opening comments, and then we'll go into the presentation, and then we can have questions and statements.

But, yes?

Pardon me?

Oh, yeah.

Please read the item into the record.

Agenda item number one, council bill 120933, an ordinance relating to land use and zoning amending sections 23.74.002 and 3.74.008 of the Seattle municipal code to allow residential uses in the stadium transition area overlay district for briefing discussion and possible vote.

Okay.

I'll first move this and then we can go into our discussion and presentation.

All right.

Um, I move that the committee recommend passage of CB120933.

Is there a second?

Second.

It's been moved and seconded to recommend confirmation of CB120933.

And I do that just because there are not any amendments.

So this gets the procedural step out of the way, which I am at risk of forgetting to do at the end.

So there we go.

Okay, so colleagues, I've explained my reasons for putting this forward in the past, but just to recap, this bill would incentivize the construction of Workforce housing and small spaces for local independent light industrial small business in a downtown neighborhood plagued with serious public safety concerns.

That's why it's so strongly supported by the Pioneer Square and CID residents and businesses, as well as the public stadium authorities.

It would guarantee good union jobs through project labor agreements and that is why over 173,000 workers represented by the Seattle Building Trades Unions as well as the Western States Carpenters and UFCW 3000 and SEIU Local 66 and Unite Here.

And that's why it's backed by the MLK Labor Council.

For me, I do, before going on, that is why I put this legislation forward.

And I do want to respond before getting into the meat of the presentation because there are good reasons to be pro and con this legislation, and we might get into some of them again during this discussion, but I want to address the...

The implication that a deal was breached, the we had a deal comments, because it does get to the integrity, not just of the people here on the dais that are gonna be voting for it, but the people, the broad, broad coalition of the folks that have supported this legislation.

And so you're right.

Somebody said that we weren't here when this was being deliberated in 2023, and that is true.

So I'm not gonna read this whole timeline, but basically, The comprehensive plan amendment was submitted to remove the STAOD from the Duwamish Manufacturing Industrial Center in May 19. There was a maritime advisory, an industrial and maritime advisory council that was convened in 2023 after that in November.

In two years later, well, One and a half in May, the Advisory Council concluded its work and recommended 11 broad strategy statements.

And strategy eight reflected the Advisory Council consensus that any limited adjustments to housing allowances in transitional zones would be determined after additional study of potential impacts, including an environmental impact statement.

So that work began in the summer of 2021. The EIS did study possible zoning changes.

That work began then.

In September 2022, it was actually September 29th, The final EIS was published and 990 housing units were studied for the stadium district or the STOD.

That gets to one of the issues in the in the ports letter.

The preferred alternative is included in the final EIS and recommends housing in the stadium district, providing an exception to the urban industrial rule that no housing should be built within 200 feet of a major truck street.

And so October 2022, the window to appeal the FEIS closes.

That's not a lot of time I recognize.

In any case, so that was all in 2022. Between October 2022 and March 2023, there was a lot of the stakeholder group that I believe represented the range of interests, including maritime and industrial businesses, labor, residents of adjacent neighborhoods, stadiums, teams, developers, and a city council member.

So that stakeholder group was not brought back together again after the FEIS, but there were a lot of conversations between the mayor's office, OPCD, and individual stakeholders.

And it was after those discussions that legislation was sent down to council for for actual deliberation in April of 2023. That's when the legislation was transmitted.

So I understand that there is the thought that a deal, we made a deal toward the end of this process when we passed legislation and now we're starting it up again.

I'm just saying that there is a deal There is the thought on the other, the coalition side that the FEIS was published and housing was in the preferred alternative.

And so therefore, and so from their perspective, they thought that it was gonna be in the legislation and it wasn't.

And so I just wanted to represent that there are two sides to the idea of what was gonna come forward before council and ultimately be voted for.

I just wanted to put that out there because I think it's important that people realize that there were a lot of conversations going on.

Some were all together and some were with sort of one-on-ones.

And so that is, I think, why both sides feel they might have had a deal.

Okay.

With that, let's remember, I would ask you to go through the presentation so that we know what the legislation does, and then we can proceed with questions and comments.

Just a second, checking my screen to see if Council Member Solomon, nope, okay, just wanted to make sure there were no hands up.

All right, and would you please introduce yourself again, although we all...

Liz Schwitson, Council Central Staff.

So I am going to very briefly go back through the presentation you saw in January.

It basically focuses on this legislation and what it says.

A little bit of history that you've already heard.

The Stadium Transition Area Overlay District was created in 2000 in order to provide a transition, as the name of the district says, between downtown Seattle and the stadiums and the industrial area to the south.

In 2023, as you've heard, new industrial zones were mapped across the city, including the urban industrial zone in this area.

As a result of those amendments for the stadium transition area overlay district, lodging became a permitted use.

The floor area ratio for the district was increased to 4.5 FAR.

street level sales and service, medical service, eating and drinking establishments and lodging were exempted from floor area ratio limits.

And, um, unlike other urban industrial zones across the city, housing was prohibited, um, in the stadium transition area overlay district.

Um, The light blue on this map is the industrial zoning.

Purple is downtown zoning.

And the dark black outline shows the stadium transition area overlay district.

You can see that this area is really at the crossroads between downtown Seattle and the industrial area.

Most of it is zoned urban industrial.

The urban industrial zone was intended to provide a transition between residential and industrial areas or commercial mixed-use areas and industrial areas and support a range of industrial uses that can be compatible with their neighboring uses.

It also allows housing as a conditional use with a long list of conditions.

First, that housing has to be part of a mixed-use development, so just an apartment building with no other non-residential uses is not permitted.

At least half of the housing needs to be affordable for 75 years at income levels of 60 percent to 90 percent of the area median income, depending on the size of the units.

Sound insulating windows and air conditioning are required for units in the urban industrial area, and there must be a covenant stating that residents know that they are in an industrial area as one of the conditions for opening housing in this area.

Permitted density is up to 50 dwelling units per acre.

And generally, the urban industrial zone prohibits housing within 200 feet of a shoreline and within 200 feet of a major truck street.

This bill would remove the prohibition on housing that currently exists in the stadium transition area overlay district, removes the limit on housing within 200 feet of major truck streets in the urban industrial zone, and has been mentioned this change was studied in the industrial maritime final environmental impact statement that was published in 2022. That's it.

Okay, any comments on the actual bill and what it would do?

Okay, I will open the floor for comments to my colleagues, questions?

That we're leading into that, yeah, because we've already moved it.

Well, other people might have questions, but do you have any questions?

I don't have any questions.

Okay.

Go ahead.

Council Member Kittle.

Thank you, Council President.

I appreciate the opportunity.

I understand we have no questions, so basically remarks, comments ahead of the vote.

Like I said last time, I want to thank everyone who's come out.

for all the public comments for and against.

I really appreciate it.

I also want to thank the two panels that we had, to include the one that we had earlier this week.

Again, it's very important to have those presentations.

I will note that I have In addition to public comment, I've gotten a lot of comments directly to me, emails across the board, and comments from different groups.

And I really appreciate that because it informs and gives insight to the issues that we're facing with this legislation.

I also appreciate very much on a more higher level the op-eds.

I really appreciate the Seattle Times op-ed written by the editorial board.

I should say editorial by the editorial board that really goes into, and this one was table poorly vetted plan for more housing near Seattle stadiums.

It's very important to have these kinds of, in this case, editorial, but also op-eds, like this one from former commissioner now Director of Maritime for the Department of Commerce for the State of Washington, Stephanie Bowman, how we make Washington more resilient for the next Trump trade storm, which kind of goes to the issues related to the port.

These are really important pieces that need to get out into the public domain, because I'll be honest with you, as much as I love the award-winning Seattle Channel, not everybody actually sees it.

So having these types of op-eds and editorials are important, but it's not just limited to to the Seattle Times, we also have the Urbanists, you know, with Commissioner Ryan Calkins.

Op-ed, SOTO is for Industry, Seattle Should Reject Rush Housing Push.

And this is from Commissioner Calkins from the Port of Seattle.

And surprisingly, not only from the Urbanists, but also from Publicola, a great op-ed that titled, The City's Maritime Industrial Area is No Place for Housing.

Great insight onto the issues that are there and very important.

And then on top of that, and this kind of goes to some of the dynamics, you know, letters of support from none other than the 37th Legislative Juristic Democrats.

I want to thank them for their support of the position that I and others are taking in opposition to this bill.

That kind of input is key as we're trying to do our democratic process.

Now, that informs me, but also my former career, my past, my perspectives that I've gained really informs my position on this bill.

And I just wanted to say that our nation needs the Port of Seattle and the Northwest Seaport Alliance One of the things I've said recently more than once is that imagine if the LA fires were to the south, not in the Palisades and other areas to the north of downtown LA, but to the south, to the LA and Long Beach ports.

What happened if those ports were out for three, six, nine, 12 months?

What would be the impact?

I will say that our nation would need Seattle to step up.

Our nation would need our port to be able to stand up.

That's very important.

On the federal level, I want to thank the Federal Maritime Commission for their letter that was given in support of our position in opposition to this bill.

Again, great insight given to this.

And all these will be, you know, presented for the record for what we're doing here in this council meeting.

Next, our state needs the Port of Seattle and the Northwest Seaport Alliance.

As mentioned many times, and I think everybody knows this is accepted, that we are a very trade-dependent state.

And as you may or may not know, international trade is maritime trade.

And Seattle is that portal to that world, to that international trade.

And I ask that we in Seattle think of the exporters from, as I said last time, the Near East.

you know, Bellevue, Redmond, Kirkland, maybe to the south, Kent, Renton, Eamonclaw.

Or the Middle East, Wenatchee, or the Tri-Cities.

I talked to an exporter from Moses Lake and the importance that the port played for his business.

Or the Far East, as you can guess, Spokane, or Liberty Lake, where my brother-in-law lives.

You know, they need the Port of Seattle.

They need the Port of Seattle.

The state needs the Port of Seattle.

As mentioned by Representative Reed, the letter from the legislators, dozens of signatures in support of our position in opposition to this bill.

To include some that, you know, it's shocking that they, you know, to participate, they'd never do this, but they were so, found this so important that they put their signature to this bill.

And I want to thank Representative Reed, A, for calling in, but I really want to thank Representative Reed for, basically leading the Maritime Caucus in Olympia and looking to protect our maritime future here in the state of Washington.

But also at the state level, and I want to thank this letter that came out from organizations across the state, again, in opposition to this bill.

And the list of organizations on this is incredible.

You know, I'm talking about Washington, just the Washington section.

I got three columns.

I won't go through the whole thing.

Washington, no, just the Washington segment.

Washington Apple Commission, the Washington Association of Wheat Growers, the Washington Cattlemen's Association, the Washington Farm Bureau, the Washington Friends of Farms and Forests, Washington Grain Commission, Washington Maritime Federation, Washington Potato and Onion Association, Washington Public Ports Association, the Washington State Dairy Federation, the Washington State Democratic Department of Agriculture, the Washington State Hay Growers Association, the Washington State Potato Commission, the Washington State Water Resources Association, and the Washington Trucker Trucking Association.

And by the way, I appreciate not only having ILWU, but having the Teamsters coming out in terms of opposition to this.

So there's a lot of different groups, whether it's labor or businesses and the very types of businesses, those that produce products or those that produce agricultural products.

It is breathtaking, the number that we have here.

And what we have now in terms of opposition to this and to build on the 2023 industrial maritime legislation is an opportunity to reset the relationship of the city, not just with the port of Seattle, but between Seattle and the rest of the state.

I was just in Olympia last Thursday.

So often Olympia, people may go against something that may be good for Seattle because it's Seattle.

We talk about 800 pound gorillas like with the Coast Guard here in the port, but in a way we have that same role in the state.

But if we look out for the state, if we look out for the port, we can have that reset of relations by being responsible and looking out for those producers, those labor unions that are on the other side of the mountains, for example.

That is so important.

I would also note that our city needs the Port of Seattle and the Northwest Seaport Alliance.

As mentioned many times, approximately 30% of the revenue, in good times and bad.

There's a lot of talk about tax, different types of taxes.

My view is that we should be looking at those base type taxes, the B&O, the REIT, the real estate taxes, but the taxes, the revenue that we gain from the port.

We should be looking to strengthen this revenue source as we look at spending and the like to ensure that we are strong in terms of our fiscal position.

And this is really important.

Our city needs the Port of Seattle too because the port, and I'm thinking of my time on the World Affairs Council Board, because we were that connection between the world in Seattle and the Seattle back to the world.

And that's what the port does as well.

It's a gateway for Seattle to the world, but also the world to Seattle.

It's so important for our businesses.

I talk to the hotels across downtown, across the city, the restaurants, what the impact of all the people that come into Seattle through our maritime gateway.

I think of the retail impacts of that, having all those people there, the arts and culture, sports.

We talk about creating a thriving and vibrant city.

This is what we do.

We support our port because if we help the port, the port helps us.

bringing those people in, all that that happens throughout downtown and elsewhere in the city.

I also know our city needs the Port of Seattle and Northwest Seaport Alliance.

But importantly, the Port of Seattle needs the city of Seattle.

That is so key.

And I get this in terms of letters that I've received from the Port of Seattle, but not just that.

And I believe you, I have been everywhere.

I've talked to the different unions.

I've been to the port itself, you know, the different parts.

I've been to the Marine Exchange, which also sent the letters in support of our opposition, which gave great insight to me.

I've been digging into this for a long time, prior to my becoming a council member, and that insight is key.

And going to that point, and it's brought up in the last meeting earlier this week, the port is a discretionary port in a cutthroat shipping industry that craves an atmosphere of certainty, stability, and reliability.

The headwinds facing the port are strong, and competition means very little freeboard or leeway is available.

And I think this is a point that's not really understood by those that are in favor of this bill.

The challenges that the port faces to be viable are difficult.

The headwinds are strong.

And we as a city should not be adding to those headwinds.

I think that's really important.

And can I just say too then now that I support the makers.

I support having a makers district.

I support having, you know, workforce housing and affordable housing.

The issue is just the location.

That's it.

And that informs my position on the comprehensive plan, that informs my position on other projects that are throughout the city that are coming up, that in combination dwarf what is gonna be going to our south under this bill.

I think it's really important for us as a city to be looking to set up the port for success, not failure.

I'm looking, trying to do this across the board in my service here on the council.

In the public safety realm, I'm looking to set up our accountability partners for success, not failure.

And this is what we need to do as a council, as a city, as a one Seattle city, We need to be looking to support the Port of Seattle.

So as we talk about environmental impact statements, how about industrial impact statements, maritime impact statements?

What is the impact on our freight logistical lines?

Logistics is key, and it's vital to the port.

And it's also key to our Seattle transportation plan and the levy, the freight program, the idea of a 15-minute city.

You know, these are the freight pieces that are important, but it's not just Seattle.

It's for the jurisdictions across the county, the Puget Sound region, and our state, and generally the region and other parts of the country as well.

So our city needs to find housing sites, but not in our industrial zone with the challenges that represents, and that's been spoken to quite well, but also not in an emergency preparedness problematic area that specifically with the liquefaction zones that we have.

You know, we talked about environmental concerns before.

I mentioned Love Canal.

I'm from Western New York.

As a 12 year old boy, I used to read the Buffalo Evening News talking about Love Canal.

Now, I don't think we have a situation like that with the Love Canal here.

But we do have those challenges.

And let's just take noise and air as just a baseline.

That in itself is enough.

But we also have other challenges.

And this is something that we've been dealing with as a city.

And sewer and wastewater.

We just finished our Ship Canal project that really deals with the combined sewer overflows, the outflows.

Massive program.

Well, we have the same issue to the south in this region.

You know, I received a briefing from the King County Wastewater Treatment Division, and they're talking about the mouth of Duwamish project and all the work that needs to be done because of a consent decree.

We don't have a consent decree solely for the Seattle Police Department, but Seattle Public Utilities also has one.

And this is because of the pollutants that go into the waterways, the Duwamish and or the Bay.

This consent decree is under the Department of Justice, and it's key that we understand that.

And to remediate, it's a $3.4 billion project.

And there's different pieces of this.

Four of them run up the East Waterway to include in this area.

And to fix this, we have to create a small version of the West Point Treatment Center.

And so King County Wastewater, they will need 48, when I say need, they will get 48 acres of soda to do this, similar to what we have in Georgetown.

And we have maps for this that show exactly where these places are.

In this area, I don't necessarily think it's gonna be right here where we're looking for the housing, but 48 acres of soda for this, and this impacts $3.4 billion.

huge and it's gonna have huge impacts, nevermind what happens with this bill by the way.

And that's something that we need to work with in terms of mitigation and the like.

And these are the things that we need to think about in terms of this very complex area as we go through this port, this bill that we're looking at right now.

On my last page, so I just wanted to conclude that our city does need housing.

but not in industrial emergency preparedness challenge areas.

I spoke to the environmental concerns, but we also have emergency preparedness, earthquakes, tsunamis.

And I know some will kind of dismiss this because of the EIS talking about improved building codes and the like.

And by the way, the engineering challenges of doing this wastewater treatment are huge because of the landfill.

All those pieces that we talk about generally with this building housing, Difficult engineering in terms of building that combined storm, sea water, storm water outflow project.

It's incredible.

But, okay, you have a house.

You have some housing that's been, you know, from a code that's great.

But, you know, I have two Karen Terriers.

How about if you're walking your dog in this little area, in this little neighborhood?

You know, what happens then?

What happens if you're trying to play catch with your kid or you're trying to bring in your groceries?

basically code enforced building is not going to help you when you're out there walking the dogs.

And in terms of liquefaction, it's really well documented in terms of zooming into our area.

And I'll leave this again for the record.

Red, this liquefaction zone is huge.

And this little project is right here, right in the middle of this massive liquefaction zone.

And this is key as we look to move forward.

And part of this is, too, taking the big picture.

You know, when Katrina hit New Orleans, I was like, oh, my God, because I saw pictures of the dyke system and the levee system.

And I would see these houses next to a massive wall with water on the other side.

And I was like, oh, my God, how can they do that?

What were they thinking when they built that housing?

Well, it was affordable.

It was cheap land.

And they did it.

And they thought that, you know, Corps of Engineers, that this would be a once whatever.

But it happened.

Point of order, can you?

I could go into the official rule of 10 minute limit after an item is moved.

I'm in my last section right here.

So we don't want 20 years ago, if this earthquake and tsunami to hit, to look back and say, what were they thinking in 2025?

So our city needs to embrace our status as a major port city with a beautiful natural deep water port and how that adds to making Seattle beautiful.

We need to reset our relationship with the port and in turn can help us reset our relationship with jurisdictions in King County, Puget Sound, and the rest of the state.

We can show leadership.

And speaking of leadership, we've seen leadership on this issue.

OPCD, as mentioned earlier, OPCD could have looked into the industrial maritime's land, but they considered it not to be part of the comprehensive plan.

They said no. this is phase one, that legislation was the beginning part of the comprehensive plan.

And so they did not make any changes in the comprehensive plan that's coming in the one Seattle comprehensive plan.

And that is, that is important to note because I know it's been commented, you know, regarding OPC previously, but when push comes to shove, it was not included here.

And so at the end, you know, We need to show leadership.

Oftentimes, we talk about West Coast blue cities and this, that, whatever.

My goal is to show that Seattle is responsible and looking at its needs and showing great leadership.

Great leadership for the city, but also with the port and the region and our state.

And I think that is very important.

And this all combination leads me to ask my colleagues to reject this bill and to vote no.

Thank you very much, Council President.

Councilmember Rivera.

Thank you, Council President.

I just really very much appreciate you bringing together all sides to have a conversation throughout the consideration of this bill.

I very much also I also very much appreciate the port and our labor partners who came out to public comment today.

and earlier in the week.

As you said earlier, Council President, since our legal department has not raised any concerns with the committee taking a vote today, I would respectfully request that we move forward with the vote for your consideration.

Noted.

Thank you very much.

Council Member Hollingsworth.

Just, just, I'm sorry.

Just a quick question, are we voting, are these our final comments before the vote?

Yes.

Okay, if Councilmember Kettle told me no, I was like, you have more notes?

No, just playing.

Just playing, wanted to light up the room.

He has a lot of notes up here, and I cannot read his handwriting, so I didn't know when he was ending.

Thank you, Council President Nelson, for bringing this to committee.

And I also wanna thank you all for being here.

I've had the pleasure of meeting with a lot of you and connecting with you and meetings, briefings.

I also know that some of you took off work to come down here.

And so I just wanna really thank you for that because that means that you're giving up money to come down here to advocate for something.

So I wanna really just say thank you for that.

I also appreciate the opportunity to sit on this committee to hear this important topic.

And I also want to acknowledge that my time on council before this, this subject of this parcel of land had a long history.

I think we have seen that it had a long history being on this council because there have been meetings, briefings, one-on-ones, discussions about this without I WANT TO TALK ABOUT ANY OF MY COLLEAGUES WHO ARE NEW.

SO WE HAVE BEEN GETTING UP TO SPEED ABOUT THIS.

I ALSO VOTED ON THIS BILL TO BRING IT TO THIS COMMITTEE BECAUSE I SAW VALUE ON HAVING A VERY THOUGHTFUL DISCUSSION AND CIVIL DISCOURSE REGARDING THE MAKERS DISTRICT, ITS POTENTIAL IMPACT, THE PORT, ALL THESE THINGS.

My intentions were also to listen, to hear, to talk to all sides, to really get a holistic approach and perspective, from talking to the trades unions, to driving a big-ass crane with ILW19, which was incredibly fun, to walking the blocks, lands, and understanding what we were considering to vote on today.

Here's my breakdown.

So from the stadium district, I wanted to know more about the economic impact data and information.

I also wanted to know about your potential successful partnership that you've always had with the port.

I wanted to learn more about the potential sites of this magnitude within the city that could be potential other options instead of just this parcel of land.

I also wanted to get information about the timeline of the project and why the addition of housing to this zone, and why not just the entertainment and mixed zone?

From the port, and I think Council Member Kettle alluded to it, not just an environmental impact study, but also a maritime impact study and also a port study, because I wanted to know who would bear the cost of the potential environmental impacts to people living close to the port with You know, are we putting up wall barriers?

Are we doing low noise equipment?

Are there time restrictions regarding when you can use heavy equipment?

Are we now pushing for electric vehicles or enhanced air monitoring or green buffer zones?

Who's bearing those costs?

I wanted to know that.

I also wanted to know the impact of housing and what would be the day-to-day operations with specific data, not just from both sides, just theory, but actual practice.

the application of these scenarios.

I also wanted to know about freights and how they use First Avenue, move fluidly through Soto, our industrial zones.

I know we have long blocks in Soto.

We have wide lanes.

Trucks are able to move fairly quickly through Soto as well.

And by the way, I got answers to all these, got those answers, not in these council meetings, but because I sought those answers from different groups to ask them, asking those specific questions.

And I think the timeline has moved fairly quickly.

And I was hoping that this committee would have a little bit more facts and times, but tried to do my homework.

Um, and when I say timeline, I'm not talking about length of time.

I'm talking about the time together and how it was used.

the substance of the times.

And so our industrial lands, our housing, our maker districts, I think are all values that we know and believe that are incredibly important.

Both sides have expressed that a deal was made or a potential deal was made.

We still don't even know what that looks like.

But the one thing that really moved me, and the one thing that really moved me is from my own personal experience of our family that has a farm in in shelton and at any point in time we're always thinking about weather snow humidity precipitation and then traffic i-5 i-90 highway 7 405 520 moving that product all throughout the state and the one thing that hit me is when i was talking to farmers from eastern washington and they mentioned that joy getting through the pass is not hard for us.

It's navigating a Mariners game or it's navigating Seahawks game and that potential impact of moving through Soto and getting to the port.

And that's what hit for me, understanding the potential impact of adding more layers to that, that traffic, that congestion of what that time and that time span.

If we miss a delivery at a retail store, They were closed and we had to drive all the way back to our farm and do it the next day.

And that cost and that potential time and what that looked like.

Are you driving across the pass?

Are you missed your boat and now you have to do more cold storage on the dock?

What the turnaround time is?

All these different things started clicking for me because I was able to get that information and from my own perspective.

So.

Some of the facts that I learned during this process was that the reason why there was so much passion with our port is that because 80% of the transportation that comes to our port is through trucking, 20% is through rail.

In the 1930s, that was reversed.

80% was rail, 20% was trucking.

In Seattle, we are a through port.

70% of the cargo goes through.

the city of Seattle to other places, 30% stays here in LA, it's the reverse 70% stays 30% goes out because of our population and understanding how important that is.

And so I, but before I go on to my next point real quick, and I promise you, I will not be as long as council member Kettle, That's also a joke for you.

I'm just playing.

I wanted to say that at the time I wasn't comfortable.

It wasn't a yes or no.

I was like right in the middle.

But today I'm gonna be voting no and just understanding how important our port is.

And it's no knock on our trades, our building trades and everything that they provide to our city.

But I also know in the comprehensive plan, we're about to up zone the entire city.

And we will have opportunities for this.

And I know that me and my colleagues will look into those to make sure that we are continuing to build housing opportunities all across the city.

But I want to say this.

I do want to say that I didn't appreciate the disrespect that was geared towards Council President Nelson.

today and just like comments or behind the scenes or stuff uh in that nature um just because questioning her ethics her morals her values as a person I see her literally every day on this floor on the second floor I know what type of person she is um and so I just want to say I I know that as elected officials we can take heat and stuff but I just wanted to say personally, I just didn't appreciate those types of comments towards you, Council President, and thank you so much for allowing me to speak today.

Thank you.

Council Member Solomon.

Thank you, Council President.

I wanted to echo the...

COMMENTS THAT JUST MADE REGARDING THE DISPARIGING COMMENTS THAT WERE DIRECTED AT YOU SPECIFICALLY.

I DON'T APPRECIATE MY COLLEAGUES BEING DISPARIGED IN ANY WAY.

So I want to go on the record on saying that.

And while there may be policy disagreements that a person may have, I resent the personal attack on an individual's motivation.

So I just want to state that.

I also want to state that this issue, I've only been on this body for a short amount of time, but I have yet to encounter something that was so divisive, so contentious among so many, that has pitted so many people against each other, union against union, city against port, council member against council member.

And my sense is we are looking at this as an either or.

Either we build housing or we support the port.

I believe we can do both.

I believe it's both and.

We need to rely on our port.

It's a vibrant port.

Our port is competing with Canada, with Tacoma, with Long Beach.

It has to remain viable.

It has to remain accessible.

Yet, I'm still trying to wrap my brain around how doing a makers district, doing housing in a small sliver is going to have an adverse impact on OPERATIONS IN AND OUT OF THE PORT BECAUSE QUITE FRANKLY I THINK THAT THE LIGHT RAIL EXPANSION THAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN IN SOTO IS PROBABLY TO HAVE MORE ADVERSE IMPACT ON GREAT NOBILITY TO AND FROM THE PORT.

SO THAT'S ONE THING I'M CONSIDERING.

SO I'M NOT GOING TO SPEND A LOT OF TIME JUST TALKING ABOUT THIS.

I DO WANT TO ACKNOWLEDGE THAT We need our partnerships.

It really hurts me to see our union brothers and sisters and each other fighting this when we all should be coming together.

And I want us all to come together.

I want us to find solutions that work for both.

When we're talking about amenities, green spaces, the whole bit, I think we can address that, you know, if the housing goes forward, if the approval goes forward, I think we can address that in the design of whatever project is built, wherever it's built.

We can design for green space.

We can design for amenities.

We can attract those amenities to be in those spaces so that those who are living in the area can actually take advantage of those amenities.

So again, I urge us to look at how we can come to a both end as opposed to an either or.

Thank you.

Okay.

Go ahead.

Yes, thank you, Council President.

I just wanted to take the opportunity to second what Council Member Hollingsworth said.

I think that's a very important point to make.

Obviously, this is a charged topic.

There's a lot of factors that go into it, some third parties that are not even in this room, and I think we should keep it to the policy pieces and the fact points that are out there.

And so thank you, Council Member Hollingsworth, for that reminder and that point, seconded by Council Member Solomon.

And I look, by the way, it's part of my outreach.

I thank all those that I outreach to include those that are in the audience, including Mr. Anderson here, that that is the piece that is very important that we have this kind of dialogue and an approach to look at the issues and laying it out, as Council Member Hollingsworth said, in a very long fashion in my case.

Thank you.

I very much appreciate your comments and I do think that the uptick of civility and collaboration is part of the brand of this new council.

So we strive to maintain that.

So thank you very much.

I'm gonna keep this brief.

So what I would say is that If I thought this was going to damage irreparably the port or put it into a position within 100 years where it would not be a strong viable entity, I would not be doing this.

If I thought that it would significantly damage the industrial base in South of City Hall, I wouldn't be doing this.

You may or may not believe that, but I make that point because nobody up here is going to say they don't want housing, they don't want to support small businesses, and they don't love the port and think it's important for the economy of the whole country, frankly, because everything comes through.

the West Coast to get to points further west.

So let me just say this one thing.

So how do we have such diverse opinions?

Because we look at different information, we absorb different, we have different priorities, we prioritize the information if we receive it from one side or the other.

Yeah, it gave me pause to see that letter with all of those representatives and senators signed on to it and, you know, That was, did they have a balanced view of all the issues, et cetera, et cetera.

I'm not gonna go through and go through all of the concerns that the port makes with encounter it with the rebuttal.

I'm only going on the facts that I have in writing.

I understand that even people will question the viability or the quality of the EIS findings in the traffic analysis that there won't be adverse impacts on port operations based on the number of vehicles that are associated with a number of cars and especially not when you compare that to other uses, hotel, potential cruise lines, et cetera.

I went to the, I went to Terminal 5 and no way do I want to do anything to hurt that and was asking, well, how does cargo get there?

And was told that they, well, we heard at the table that they, that many trucks head south coming off of I-90 and bypass First Avenue and on and on and on and on.

So he, So what it comes down to is simply that there are strong emotions on both sides and I'm trying to make decisions based on the facts before me and that's what everybody else does and that is the most difficult thing to do as a public official is try to balance both sides and figure out what's up and make a decision.

And believe me, a lot of times I would love not to have to make a decision.

So what I will last say going forward that everybody knows that for me, this is about small business and affordable housing, workforce housing and public safety.

And I echo your point, Council Member Kettle, It doesn't necessarily have to be there.

But that is the option before us.

And I will say that there, I can acknowledge that there have been conversations to take advantage of opportunities to have a lot more housing elsewhere, you know, straddling the borders of the MEC and other places.

And if there could be a process that brought together all sides and that didn't end up in some of the the splinteredness of before, I'd be all for that.

But this is what we've got before us right now, and so that is why I am going to be obviously voting for it.

I want to say that the port letter did bring up some questions of a legal nature, and we will be doing a legal analysis to answer or to respond or to understand better the merits of those of those points and challenges, and we will also, and so this vote is likely scheduled for March 18th.

However, if that legal analysis takes a bit longer, then we'll go forward.

Today is not the end, it's the beginning of what I would like to be a more fruitful conversation going forward, but I really appreciate everyone sticking through it and hanging out for the vote today and at least getting what has been a very weighty policy issue off our plates for now.

Okay, I'm not seeing any other, and thank you, both sides coming out and putting so much work in representing what you care so much about, so thank you.

All right, will the clerk please call the roll on the recommendation on Council Bill 120933.

Council Member Rivera?

Yes.

Council Member Solomon?

Yes.

Council Member Hollingsworth?

No.

Council Member Kettle?

No.

Chair Nelson?

Aye.

Three in favor, two opposed.

Thank you very much.

The motion carries and the committee recommendation that council pass Council Bill 120933 will be forwarded to the City Council for final consideration and placed on the agenda once it's ready.

This concludes the agenda of the February 27th meeting of the Governance, Accountability, and Economic Development Committee, and our next one is scheduled on Thursday, March 13th at 2 p.m.

If there's no further business, this meeting will adjourn.

Hearing none, it is 3.57 and this meeting is adjourned.