WILL COME TO ORDER. IT'S 9:33
A.M. I'M EDDIE LIN, THE CHAIR
OF THE COMMITTEE. WILL THE
SECRETARY PLEASE CALL THE ROLL.
>> COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS.
COUNCILMEMBER FOSTER.
COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH.
COUNCILMEMBER RINCK. FOUR
MEMBERS PRESENT.
>> GOOD MORNING, YOU ALL, THANK
YOU FOR COMING TO THIS WEDNESDAY
MORNING MEETING. THANK YOU AS
ALWAYS TO OUR STAFF FOR HELPING
US PREPARE FOR THIS MEETING. SO
I JUST WANT TO GIVE A LITTLE BIT
OF HEADS UP. WE'VE GOT KIND OF
A LOT OF INTEREST IN A FEW ITEMS
TODAY. WE HAVE A PRELIMINARY
DISCUSSION AROUND OUR SEPA
PROPOSAL. I JUST WANT TO MAKE IT
CLEAR THERE WILL BE A PUBLIC
HEARING, WE ARE AIMING FOR JULY
1st FOR A PUBLIC HEARING ON
THAT. SO THERE'S PLENTY OF TIME
TO CONTINUE TO ENGAGE WITH US ON
THAT. BUT I APPRECIATE THAT
THERE'S A LOT OF PEOPLE HERE
TODAY. WE ALSO HAVE A PUBLIC
HEARING ON OUR PUBLIC
OPPORTUNITIES HOUSING. THAT WILL
BE AFTER THE PUBLIC COMMENT ON
THE OTHER TWO ITEMS ON OUR
AGENDA. THE THIRD ITEM IS OUR
PROPOSED DATA CENTER MORATORIUM.
WITH THAT, WE WILL NOW OPEN THE
PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD. IT SHOULD
RELATE TO ITEMS ON THE AGENDA.
PLEASE HOLD COMMENTS REGARDING
ITEM ONE UNTIL THE PUBLIC
HEARING, WHICH WILL BE HELD
FOLLOWING THE PUBLIC HYBRID
PERIOD. CLERK, HOW MANY SPEAKERS
ARE SCHEDULED TODAY?
>> WE CURRENTLY HAVE 18 PUBLIC
COMMENT SPEAKERS IN PERSON, AND
21 REMOTE.
>> OKAY. GIVEN THAT THERE ARE
BETWEEN 30 AND 60 SPEAKERS, WE
WILL UNFORTUNATELY HAVE TO LIMIT
TIME TO ONE MINUTE PER SPEAKER.
CLERK, CAN YOU PLEASE READ THE
PUBLIC COMMENT INSTRUCTIONS?
>> THE PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD
WILL BE MODERATED IN THE
FOLLOWING MANNER. THE PUBLIC
COMMENT PERIOD IS UP TO 60
MINUTES. SPEAKERS WILL BE CALLED
FIRST. SPEAKERS WILL HEAR A
CHIME WHEN TEN SECONDS ARE LEFT
OF THEIR TIME. SPEAKERS MICS
WILL BE MUTED IF THEY DO NOT END
THEIR COMMENTS WITHIN THE
ALLOTTED TIME. THE PUBLIC
COMMENT PERIOD IS NOW OPEN, AND
WE'LL BEGIN WITH THE FIRST
SPEAKER ON THE LIST. THAT IS
MAXIMILIAN BENAGE.
>> HI COUNCIL.
>> THERE ARE TWO MICS, AND YOU
DO NEED TO KIND OF SPEAK CLOSELY
IN THE MIC FOR US TO HEAR IT.
>> GOOD MORNING, COUNCIL. I AM
HERE TO ADVOCATE FOR A
MORATORIUM ON A.I. DATA CENTERS.
I'M DOING THIS BECAUSE I FIND
MYSELF IN AN INCREASING
POPULATION OF PEOPLE WHO
UNDERESTIMATE THE SEVERITY OF
THE SITUATION THAT WE'RE IN,
A.I. AND I'M HERE TO MAKE SURE
THAT YOU GUYS ARE NOT SOME OF
THEM. PETER TEAL, FOR SOME OF
YOU WHO DO NOT KNOW, IS AN A.I.
WEAPONS CONTRACTOR WHO DOES A
LOT OF BUSINESS WITH THE UNITED
STATES GOVERNMENT. WHEN ASKED IF
HUMANITY SHOULD ENDURE OR NOT,
HE ESSENTIALLY SAID "I DON'T
KNOW." ANTHROPIC'S CEO SAYS
THEY DON'T KNOW WHAT THEY'RE
BUILDING ANYMORE. I AM VERY
SCARED ABOUT THE FUTURE. AND I
LOVE THIS CITY, AND I JUST WANT
TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE
TREATING THIS LEGISLATION WITH
THE SEVERITY THAT WE SHOULD.
THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR TIME.
>> THANK YOU.
>> NEXT UP, WE HAVE EMILY
JOHNSON, FOLLOWED BY JAKE
DOUGLAS, STEVE, RACHEL
NATHANSON, AND BEN JONES.
>> THANK YOU. FIRST I WANT TO
THANK YOU FOR ACTING QUICKLY
TOWARDS A MORATORIUM. BUT I'M
CONCERNED ABOUT SECTION 1B,
WHICH MAKES A POINT OF SAYING
THAT DATA CENTERS ARE A
CONTRIBUTE TO ECONOMIC GROWTH BY
ENABLING BUSINESSES TO ACCESS
MUCH NEEDED PROCESSING AND
STORAGE CAPACITY. THIS IS A
MISUNDERSTANDING. ONE WHICH TECH
COMPANIES HAVE ENCOURAGED.
STORAGE IS NOT WHAT THESE NEWER
DATA CENTERS ARE FOR. THEY'RE
FOR LARGE LANGUAGE MODELS WHICH
REQUIRE VAST AMOUNTS OF COMPUTE
AND ELECTRIC POWER, BECAUSE
THEIR FUNCTION IS TO PROCESS THE
ENTIRETY OF HUMAN KNOWLEDGE ON
THE INTERNET, AND THEN TO SPIT
OUT ANSWERS LIKELY TO PLEASE US.
FEW IF ANY BENEFITS RELY ON
LARGE LANGUAGE MODELS. INSTEAD,
THEY'RE TRAINED ON MUCH SMALLER
DATA SETS THAT REPRESENT, FOR
EXAMPLE, THE LARGE AMOUNT OF
BREAST CANCER SCANS. IT DOES
SPEAK TO WHY WE NEED TO APPROACH
THE SUPPOSED NECESSITY OF THESE
DATA CENTERS WITH A GIMLET EYE.
THEY'RE GOAL IS TO NOT BUILD
USEABLE TOOLS. THEIR GOAL IS TO
THROW A MASSIVE AMOUNT OF MONEY
AT A COMPUTER.
>> THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU. AND PLEASE, GO
AHEAD IF YOU DON'T -- IF YOU'RE
UNABLE TO PROVIDE YOUR FULL
COMMENTS, PLEASE FEEL FREE TO
EMAIL THEM TO US, THANK YOU.
>> GOOD MORNING, COUNCIL, MY
NAME IS JAKE DOUGLAS. I LIVE IN
WEST SEATTLE, I'M HERE ON
BEHALF OF UNION UNIT 8. OUR
UNION BACKS THE MORATORIUM ON
NEW DATA CENTERS. SEATTLE'S
COST OF LIVING IS ALREADY
CRUSHING UNIT UNION MEMBERS. IN
PORTLAND, HOME ELECTRIC BILLS
HAVE GONE UP 50% IN THE LAST FEW
YEARS, THANKS ALMOST EXCLUSIVELY
TO THE RECKLESS BUILD OUT OF NEW
DATA CENTERS THERE. WE CAN'T
AFFORD THAT HERE. IF WE LET TECH
BILLIONAIRES BRING MASSIVE NEW
DATA CENTERS TO SEATTLE, THEN
HOUSEKEEPERS, COOKS, AND SERVERS
WILL BEAR THE BRUNT OF HIGHER
ENERGY COSTS, DISPLACEMENT, AND
ACCELERATED CLIMATE CHANGE.
THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER LIN.
COUNCIL PRESIDENT HOLLINGSWORTH,
AND MAYOR WILSON FOR YOUR
LEADERSHIP ON THIS ISSUE. THANK
YOU.
>> THANK YOU.
>> NEXT UP WE HAVE STEVE,
FOLLOWED BY RACHEL, BEN, NEIL,
AND JULIANA.
>> IT WOULDN'T BE TOO DIFFICULT
TO LIMIT DATA CENTERS. ALL YOU
HAVE TO DO IS CHARGE FOR
ELECTRICITY CORRECTLY. THE
CITIZENS OF THE CITY OWN THE
UTILITY, YET THEY PAY THE
HIGHEST RATES TO THE UTILITY. I
DON'T KNOW OF ANY OTHER
BUSINESS WHERE THE OWNERS CHARGE
THEMSELVES MORE THAN THEY DO
OTHER PEOPLE. WATER, SAME THING.
IF WE HAD A REASONABLE POLICY
THAT WAY, WE MIGHT BE LESS IN
DANGER OF HAVING A LOT OF THESE
CENTERS AROUND. AND BY THE WAY,
YOU MIGHT AS WELL ALSO HAVE NO
NOISE ORDINANCES THAT REALLY
WORK. IF YOU DID THESE THINGS, I
THINK THAT WE WOULD DROP FROM
THE LIST OF PLACES THEY WANTED
TO BE. AND I THINK THE CITIZENS
OF THE CITY OF SEATTLE WOULD
ACTUALLY GET A BENEFIT. BECAUSE
IF YOU CHARGE THE PEOPLE WHO ARE
USING IT, WHO ARE NOT THEM, MORE
MONEY. YOU CAN CHARGE THEM LESS.
>> THANK YOU.
>> NEXT UP, WE HAVE RACHEL.
>> CITIZENS WERE GIVEN 48 HOURS
TO RESPOND TO CE1215. NO
MEANINGFUL PUBLIC INPUT. THIS IS
ON TOP OF SECRET MEETINGS HELD
BY THE MAYOR, A MEETING THAT MY
COUNCIL REP WAS NOT INVITED TO,
AND DIDN'T EVEN KNOW ABOUT. AT
LAST WEEK'S HEARING, I HEARD
SEVERAL COUNCILMEMBERS SAY WE
MUST DO BETTER. FOR TWO YEARS
WE'VE BEEN BATTLING THE TRUMP
ADMINISTRATION'S POLICIES THAT
HAVE BEEN TAKING AWAY OUR
DEMOCRATIC RIGHTS. QUIETLY
REMOVING TITLE 5 LEGISLATIVE
DECISIONS DOES JUST THAT. TAKES
AWAY ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTIONS.
THIS LOOKS BAD. THERE IS AN
APPEAL CURRENTLY BEING HEARD IN
COURT. YET THIS LEGISLATION
WOULD REMOVE THE ABILITY FOR
SUCH AN APPEAL. WHILE YOU MAY
FEEL SUCH CHECKS ON CITY ACTIONS
ARE NO THE NEEDED, WE CITIZENS
HAVE FEW OPTIONS TO BE HEARD,
AND INVOLVED. PLEASE DO NOT
REMOVE ONE OF THEM. CITIZENS
SHOULD HAVE A PATH TO CHALLENGE
WHETHER THOSE IMPACTS WERE
PROPERLY STUDIED AND ADDRESSED.
THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU. JUST GOING TO NOTE
FOR FOLKS INTERESTED IN DATA
CENTERS THAT AT 2:00 P.M. TODAY,
THERE'S ALSO A RESOLUTION BEING
CONSIDERED IN COUNCILMEMBER
JUAREZ, SHE'S CHAIR OF THAT
COMMITTEE, ON SOME OF THESE
ISSUES AS WELL, INCLUDING THE
RATES. SO I JUST WANTED TO NOTE
THAT FOR THE RECORD. PLEASE
PROCEED.
>> GOOD MORNING, MY NAME IS BEN
JONES.
>> CAN YOU COME A LITTLE CLOSER?
>> CLOSER? HOW IS THAT? GOOD
MORNING, MY NAME IS BEN. GOOD TO
SEE YOU AGAIN. TESTIFYING IN
SUPPORT OF THE MORATORIUM ON
DATA CENTER CONSTRUCTION. AT
THIS POINT, THIS COUNCIL AND THE
MAYOR HAVE RECEIVED OVER 90,000
MESSAGES IN SUPPORT OF A
MORATORIUM, IN THE CONVERSATIONS
OFFER OUR MOBILIZING AROUND
THAT, WE HEAR AGAIN AND AGAIN
FROM PEOPLE THAT THESE DATA
CENTERS FEEL LIKE GIFTS TO THE
RICH AND GIFTS TO THE
BILLIONAIRES, AND PEOPLE FEEL
POWERLESS TO STOP THEM. LAST
YEAR, HALF OF ALL PROPOSED DATA
CENTERS WERE WITHDRAWN. WE'RE
IN THE MIDST OF A NATIONAL
BACKLASH AGAINST THIS
TECHNOLOGY, AGAINST THESE
FACILITIES. I THINK THIS
MORATORIUM IS AN OPPORTUNITY TO
SHOW THE WORLD THAT EVEN HERE IN
THE HOME OF BIG TECH, THAT
PEOPLE REJECT THESE PROJECTS,
THAT THIS COUNCIL REJECTS THESE
PROJECTS. SO I URGE THIS COUNCIL
TO SHOW LEADERSHIP, TO PROTECT
OUR CITY, TO PROTECT OUR WATER,
AND TO KEEP THIS PRESSES GOING,
AND THANK YOU FOR MOVING QUICKLY
ON THIS.
>> THANK YOU.
>> NEXT IS JULIANA.
>> GOOD MORNING, COUNCILMEMBER,
MY NAME IS NEIL, I'M A MEMBER
OF THE GEORGETOWN BUSINESS
ASSOCIATION AND A 16 YEAR
VETERAN OF THE TECH INDUSTRY,
WITH EIGHT YEARS AT GOOGLE, AND
FIVE AND A HALF YEARS AT AMAZON.
SPEAKINGON BEHALF OF A
MORATORIUM ON DATA CENTERS. A
WELL DESIGNED DATA CENTER IS
HIGHLY EFFICIENT. IT'S FAULT
TOLERANT, AND SELF-SUFFICIENT.
TO BE CLEAR, THIS MEANS EVERY
PROPERTY THAT BECOMES A DATA
CENTER, NO LONGER CREATES JOBS,
NO LONGER CREATES JOB, INDUSTRY,
OR LUNCHTIME CROWD OR VISITS TO
LOCAL BUSINESSES. IT JUST COSTS
MONEY. THAT MONEY COMES FROM
PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE. IT COMES
FROM A LOST SALES TAX REVENUE,
BUT TO PUT A FINER POINT ON IT,
IT UNDOES ALL OF THE GOOD WORK
THIS COMMITTEE DID LAST
SEPTEMBER THAT ESTABLISHED A
CLIMATE SECURITY FUNDING
DISASTER PREP. GEORGETOWN NOW
HAS THREE AND A HALF WEEKS OF
FARMERS' MARKETS THAT ARE EBT
ELIGIBLE. LET'S NOT UNDO YOUR
GREAT WORK. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU.
>> GOOD MORNING, COUNCIL. MY
NAME IS JULIANA. I'M A RESIDENT
OF THE CENTRAL DISTRICT. I'M AN
ENVIRONMENTAL ADVOCATE WITH A
INVESTED INTEREST IN HYPER LOCAL
INSTANCES OF ENVIRONMENTAL
RACISM HERE IN THE CITY OF
SEATTLE AND THE SURROUNDING
DISTRICT. I KNOW UNFORTUNATELY,
MS. HOLLINGSWORTH ISN'T HERE IT
TO CONNECT ON THAT, BUT WE'VE
SUPPORTED EACH OTHER. I'M
CONCERNED NEW DATA CENTERS WOULD
EXPOSE OUR BIPOCK NEIGHBORS TO
MORE HARM, INCLUDING AN INCREASE
OF AIR, WATER, NOISE, AND LIGHT
POLLUTION, UNDOING ALL OF THE
CITY'S EFFORTS TOWARDS
ACHIEVING AN ENVIRONMENTALLY
JUST SEATTLE. I URGE THE COUNCIL
TO ADOPT THIS MORATORIUM. THANK
YOU.
>> THANK YOU.
>> NEXT UP WE HAVE SABRINA,
FOLLOWED BY CEDAR, AUDREY,
RENAISSANCE, AND DAVID.
>> MY NAME IS SABRINA. I HAVE A
SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT ISSUE. I SAW
THAT TODAY WE'RE TALKING ABOUT
LAND USE AND ZONING IN A FEW
DIFFERENT AREAS. TALKING ABOUT
LAND USE AND ZONING
APPROPRIATELY, I WANT TO TALK
ABOUT AN ISSUE FROM THE LAST
DECADE, THE CLOSING OF THE
RUSSIAN EMBASSY, AND HERE IN
SEATTLE, IT'S THE ONLY EMBASSY
HERE IN THE WEST COAST AND IT
CREATED A POCKET OF A LOT OF
RUSSIANS THAT ARE USED TO HAVING
THE EMBASSY IN SEATTLE. THE ONLY
OTHER EMBASSY IN THE U.S. IS IN
WASHINGTON, D.C. I WAS HOPING
THE COUNCIL COULD KEEP THAT ON
THE BACK BURNER AND HOPEFULLY
GET THAT EMBASSY REOPENED. THANK
YOU.
>> THANK YOU.
>> NEXT UP WE HAVE CEDAR.
>> SINCE I ONLY HAVE A MINUTE
HERE, I'M GOING TO GET DOWN TO
THE BRASS TAX. I THOUGHT I'D
HAVE THREE. BUT TO START OFF
WITH IMPLEMENTING THE MASS
SURVEILLANCE CENTERS ALSO KNOWN
AS DATA CENTERS WOULD FURTHER
ENCOURAGE THE LACK OF RESOURCES
THAT WE ARE EXPERIENCING IN THIS
COUNTRY. WE ARE PROJECTED TO GO
THROUGH A FOOD SHORTAGE IN THE
FALL, SO THIS WILL ALSO HURT OUR
FOOD AND WATER CRISIS THAT WE
ARE ALREADY GOING THROUGH IN
MANY PLACES IN AMERICA.
SURPRISINGLY, THOUGH, THIS WOULD
FIT QUITE WELL OF THE HISTORY OF
GENOCIDE IN THIS COUNTRY. WE'VE
ALWAYS BEEN A WHITE POWER
STRUCTURE HERE, AND IT LOOKS
LIKE WE'RE GOING TO KEEP GOING
THAT WAY, ESPECIALLY IF THE DATA
CENTERS ARE IMPLEMENTED, BECAUSE
WITH THE LACK OF RESOURCES IS
GOING TO LEAD TO MORE FASCISM,
WHICH IS NEVER A GOOD THING. MY
CERTAIN PARTS OF MY WEALTHY
FAMILY, THOUGH, WOULD ENJOY
THIS, WHICH IS WHY I NO LONGER
TALK TO THEM, AND BECAUSE THEY
WOULD --
>> THANK YOU, CEDAR.
>> THANK YOU.
>> NEXT UP WE HAVE AUDREY,
FOLLOWED BY RENAISSANCE, DAVID,
ALICIA, AND JACQUELINE.
>> GOOD MORNING, COUNCIL. GOOD
MORNING, COUNCIL. MY NAME IS
AUDREY. I'M AN ELECTRICAL
ENGINEER SPECIALIZING IN POWER
AND RENEWABLE ENERGY AND I LIVE
IN DISTRICT TWO. I LEAD OUT IN
CLIMATE, AS AN EXPERT IN THE
FIELD OF ENERGY AND
SUSTAINABILITY, I URGE YOU TO
APPROVE THE MORATORIUM ON DATA
CENTERS. A PHRASE OFTEN UTTERED
WITHIN THE TECH INDUSTRY IS MOVE
FAST AND BREAK THINGS. WE MUST
NOT LET THEM MOVE FAST AND BREAK
OUR CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE. OUR
POWER GRID IS NOT PREPARED TO
HANDLE LARGE LOAD DATA CENTERS.
IT WOULD MEAN HIGHER PRICES FOR
SEATTLEITES. DATA CENTERS IN
SEATTLE WOULD ALSO MEAN OUR
FRESHWATER WOULD BE SPENT ON
COOLING PRIVATELY OWNED SERVERS,
INSTEAD OF NOURISHING OUR
FARMERS AND FISHERIES, WHICH
HAVE BECOME UNATTAINABLE, SINCE
THE STATE HAS BEEN DECLARED A
DROUGHT ZONE FOR 2026, SO A
MORATORIUM WOULD GIVE US ENOUGH
TIME TO ENSURE SAFEGUARDS TO
PROTECT OUR CITY. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU. NEXT UP WE HAVE
DAVID.
>> MY NAME IS RENAISSANCE.
>> I APOLOGIZE.
>> I'M IN FAVOR OF THE
MORATORIUMS AGAINST THE DATA
CENTERS. NOW IT'S NOT THAT DATA
CENTERS DO NOT PROVIDE SOME
BENEFIT TO OUR SOCIETY, BUT THE
COST AND THE NEGATIVE IMPACTS OF
DATA CENTERS, ESPECIALLY RIGHT
NOW, AND ESPECIALLY GIVEN OUR
CIRCUMSTANCES ARE SIMPLY TOO
GREAT TO JUSTIFY THE EXPENSE.
THE LOAN TO AFFORD THIS COST IS
OFTEN THE CASE, WILL COME FROM
THE POOREST, AND THE MOST
MARGINALIZED WITHOUT OUR
CONSENT. THE CITY WILL BE
PERMITTING THE STEALING FROM OUR
POWER SUPPLY AND ABILITY TO
AFFORD THAT POWER. PRICES ARE
ALREADY RISING, AND IN SOME
CASES, SPIKING LIKE WITH GAS.
THE CITY WILL BE PERMITTING
STEALS FROM OUR PRECIOUS WATER
SUPPLY. A DROUGHT HAS ALREADY
BEEN DECLARED, AND THAT IS ONLY
GOING TO GET WORSE WITH CLIMATE
CHANGE. WE MAY BE NOT ABLE TO
STOP THE PROLIFERATIONS OF A.I.
DATA CENTERS, BUT WE CAN AT
LEAST --
>> THANK YOU, RENAISSANCE.
>> THANK YOU. NEXT UP WE HAVE
DAVID, FOLLOWED BY ALICIA,
JACQUELINE, THOMAS, AND
JENNIFER.
>> GOOD MORNING, COUNCIL. I URGE
YOU TO VOTE NO ON COUNSEL BILL
211215, THAT REMOVES THE APPEAL
PROCESS FOR EISs. IT CLAIMS THAT
APPEALS HAVE BEEN FOLLOWED TO
SLOW COUNCIL CONSIDERATION,
SUPPORTING AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
HOWEVER, IF THERE'S NO PROOF OF
THIS, BUT THE CITY IS ALLEGING
THIS AS FACT. APPEALS ARE FILED
BECAUSE PEOPLE CARE ABOUT THE
ENVIRONMENT, NOT TO BLOCK
AFFORDABLE HOUSING. THE DOCUMENT
ALSO CLAIMS THE BILL WILL ALIGN
CITY CODE WITH STATE CODE. THIS
IS ALSO NOT TRUE. THIS BILL, AND
ITS SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS ARE
TYPICAL OF THE FEDERAL
GOVERNMENT, FULL OF LIES AND
DECEPTIONS. I THOUGHT SEATTLE
AND PROGRESSIVES CARED ABOUT THE
ENVIRONMENT, BUT THIS IS AN
ATTEMPT TO EXEMPT CITY RESIDENTS
FROM ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTIONS.
FOR THE RECORD, THE CURRENT
APPEAL AGAINST THE EIS IS DUE TO
LEGAL DELAYS BY CITY ATTORNEYS,
NOT THE APPEAL PROCESS. DESPITE
THE APPEAL, THOUSANDS OF
DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS HAVE
COME IN FROM PHASE ONE OF THE
COMP PLAN. VOTE NO ON COUNSEL
BILL 211-2125. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU.
>> GOOD MORNING, CHAIR, AND
MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE. MY
NAME IS ALICIA, WITH HABITAT FOR
HUMANITY. WE'RE HERE IN STRONG
SUPPORT OF COUNSEL BILL 1215.
ADMINISTRATIVE SEPA APPEALS HAVE
ADDED MONTHS OF DELAY TO THAT
PROCESS. IMPORTANTLY, STATE LAW
DOESN'T REQUIRE THESE APPEALS
AND FULL ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
REMAINS IN TACT UNDER THIS BILL.
SEATTLE IS SIMPLY CHOOSING TO
REMOVE THE REDUNDANT PROCEDURAL
POLICY. THIS BRINGS SEATTLE IN
LINE WITH KING COUNTY, BELLEVUE,
TACOMA, AND EVERETT, ALL OF
WHICH, ALREADY LEGISLATE SEPA
DECISIONS FROM ENVIRONMENTAL
REVIEW. THAT'S NOT A ROLL BACK
OF STANDARDS. THIS BILL WILL
HELP REIGN IN UNNECESSARY
DELAYS, AND EVERY DAY DELAYED IS
ANOTHER DAY A FAMILY GOES
WITHOUT A ROOF OVER THEIR HEAD.
THAT'S WHY WE SUPPORT THIS
BILL.
>> THANK YOU.
>> NEXT UP, WE HAVE JACQUELINE,
FOLLOWED BY THOMAS, JENNIFER,
AND JACKIE.
>> HELLO. I'M JACQUELINE
GORDON, I'M FROM DISTRICT FOUR,
AND I SUPPORT THE DATA CENTER
MORATORIUM. I WORK FOR A TECH
COMPANY THAT SUPPORTS A.I. EVERY
DAY I HEAR A.I. IS THE FUTURE,
SO WHAT IS THAT FUTURE? A FUTURE
WHERE CITIZENS HAVE ASTRONOMICAL
POWER BILLS? A FUTURE WHERE MANY
JOBS HAVE BEEN ELIMINATED, AS
MANY TECH CEOS HAVE OPENLY
GLOATED ABOUT WANTING? BEING
HERE IS NOT HOW I WANT TO SPEND
MY DAYS OFF EVERY YEAR, BUT I'M
COMING HERE FROM NORTHERN
CALIFORNIA. RIGHT NOW IN
NORTHERN CALIFORNIA, AND LAKE
TAHOE, A UTILITY COMPANY IS
PREPARING TO CUT POWER TO
PEOPLE'S HOMES TO DIVERT TO A
DATA CENTER. WE DO NOT HAVE TIME
TO TRUST WHAT TECH COMPANIES SAY
THEY WILL DO, AND HOW
RESPONSIBLE THEY WILL BE. THEY
HAVE CONTINUALLY LIED TO US
EVERY STEP OF THE WAY. A.I. MAY
BE INVESTING IN THE FUTURE, BUT
THAT FUTURE IS A RISING SEA AND
A SINKING SHIP.
>> THANK YOU.
>> HI. MY NAME IS THOMAS MYER. I
LIVE IN DISTRICT 2. I'M AN
ORGANIZER WITH FOOD AND WATER
WATCH. IT'S A JUSTICE GROUP
FIGHTING FOR SAFE FOOD, CLEAN
WATER, AND A LIVABLE CLIMATE.
I'LL JUST SHARE ONE FACT FROM
FOOD AND WATER WATCH'S RECENT
REPORT LAYING OUT WHY A DATA
CENTER MORATORIUM IS URGENTLY
NEEDED IN SEATTLE AND ACROSS THE
COUNTRY. IT'S ESTIMATED THEY
COULD USE AS MUCH AS 727
BILLION-GALLON OF WATER EVERY
YEAR, JUST FOR COOLING. IT'S
SIX TIMES AS MANY HOUSEHOLDS AS
THE ENTIRE STATE OF WASHINGTON.
FOR THAT REASON AND MANY MORE, I
URGE YOU TO SUPPORT A MORATORIUM
ON DATA CENTERS IN SEATTLE.
THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU.
>> GOOD MORNING. I'M AWARE THAT
BILL 121215 IS A RESPONSE TO MY
ENVIRONMENTAL APPEAL. IN THE
COURT OF APPEALS, JUDGE DAVID S.
MAN, ASKED A COUNCIL HOW THEY
WILL KNOW THEY HAVE THE BEST
INFORMATION IN FRONT OF THEM?
CITY COUNCIL COULD NOT ANSWER
THAT. IF WE WANT CLEAN AIR AND
WATER, WE CANNOT LET PEOPLE WHO
DECIDE THESE THINGS DECIDE AS
MUCH. HERE IS A RECORDING.
>> WHY WOULD THE LEGISLATURE
INTEND TO ALLOW THE CITY TO HAVE
THE BEST INFORMATION BEFORE
IT'S DECIDED? ONCE THE CITY
MAKES THAT DECISION, FINE, THE
LEGISLATURE IS TAKEN AWAY --
>> BECAUSE.
>> WHY WOULDN'T THE LEGISLATURE
STILL ALLOW THE CITY TO STILL
HAVE THE BEST INFORMATION IN
FRONT OF IT? JUST SAY SEPA IS
DONE.
>> THEY COULD. IT IS THE
LEGISLATOR'S PREROGATIVE.
>> BUT THEY DIDN'T.
>> THEY PASSED THIS STATUTE --
>> THANK YOU.
>> NEXT UP, WE HAVE JACKIE.
>> THERE'S A 2025 SURVEY THAT
WAS CREATED BY THE SEATTLE METRO
CHAMBER. IN IT, 75% OF THE
PEOPLE THAT LIVE IN THE CITY
THAT RESPONDED TO THE SURVEY
SAID THAT THEY, THE ENVIRONMENT,
AND OUTDOOR ACCESS IS A TOP
REASON FOR LIVING IN SEATTLE,
ALONG WITH NEIGHBORHOODS AND
CULTURE, WHICH INCLUDES TREE
CANOPY, AND AN ADDITIONAL 10%
CHOSE SEATTLE FOR ITS CLIMATE,
JUST LIKE THE OTHER JACKIE THAT
JUST SPOKE. 75% OF OUR RESIDENTS
CLAIM THAT THEY WANT TO BE HERE
BECAUSE OF OUR ENVIRONMENT.
HOWEVER 121215 TAKES AWAY THE
RIGHT FOR PEOPLE TO APPEAL, AND
HAVE THE AND TO APPEAL WHEN
SOMETHING IS GOING WRONG
COUNTERTO THE ENVIRONMENT. IF
THIS IS OUR CITY, 75% OF THE
PEOPLE ARE SAYING THE
ENVIRONMENT MATTERS. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU.
>> NEXT UP, WE HAVE LAUREN,
FOLLOWED BY SUSAN, AND PAUL.
>> HI, MY NAME IS LAUREN. I'M A
RENTER ANDRESIDENT OF DISTRICT 6
IN SEATTLE. A BACKGROUND IN
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT. I CARE
DEEPLY ABOUT THE LONG TERM
RESILIENCY OF OUR COMMUNITY, AND
PUSH THE COUNCIL TO GO FORWARD
ON THE MORATORIUM. THERE'S MAJOR
UNCERTAINTY AROUND THE LONG TERM
PROFITABILITY IN THE A.I. SECTOR
WITH. A.I. FARMS COULD FACE AN
AN $800 BILLION DEFICIT -- THIS
MORATORIUM IS AN OPPORTUNITY FOR
GOVERNMENTS THAT PUTS DURABLE
COMMUNITY NEEDS FIRST, RATHER
THAN THROWING OUR CITY INTO
ANOTHER TECHNOLOGICAL GOLD RUSH.
I URGE THE COUNCIL TO MOVE
FORWARD WITH THE MORATORIUM.
>> THANK YOU.
>> NEXT UP WE HAVE SUSAN,
FOLLOWED BY PAUL.
>> GOOD MORNING. COUNCIL BILL
121196 JUMPS AHEAD OF THE
MAYOR'S OWN COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
PROCESS, UPZONING SEVEN YEARS OF
THE CITY NOW.
>> COULD YOU HOLD ON ONE SECOND?
WE HAVE A PUBLIC HEARING FOR
THAT BILL, SO IT WOULD BE BETTER
IF YOU COULD SPEAK DURING --
IT'S ALL GOOD.
>> IS THIS COUNCIL BILL 121215?
MAY I SPEAK TO THAT, THEN?
>> YES. THAT WOULD BE BETTER,
THEN YOU CAN SIGN UP DURING THE
PUBLIC HEARING.
>> THANKS FOR THE PAUSE BUTTON.
THE PROVISION BILL -- AMENDMENT
TO THE HEARING EXAMER. I'M
CURIOUS TO KNOW THE RATIONALE
BEHIND THIS EXEMPTION,
ESPECIALLY WITH WHEN THE VOICES
THAT CARRY ENVIRONMENTAL WISDOM
AND EXPERTISE HAVE NOT BEEN
WELCOMED TO THE CLOSED DOOR
PLANNING DISCUSSIONS.
ENVIRONMENTAL GROUPS ASKING FOR
A SEAT AT THE TABLE WERE
ACTIVELY DISMISSED. WITH HOUSING
STOCK WELL ABOVE LAST YEAR AND
UNEMPLOYMENT RATES RAISING, THIS
IS AN OPPORTUNE TIME TO STOP AND
FULLY LOOK OVER CLIMATE
IMPLICATIONS. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU.
>> HI. PEOPLE HERE HAVE RAISED
MANY ISSUES WITH DATA CENTERS. I
JUST WANTED TO WARN AGAINST THE
FOOLISH IDEA THAT WE CAN AVOID
ALL OF THAT WITH PROPER
REGULATION. IN MISSISSIPPI,er
OUR DATA CENTERS HAVE BEEN
RUNNING GAS [ INAUDIBLE ]
WITHOUT AUTHORIZATION. THEY
DISCOVERED THAT ANOTHER DATA
CENTER STOLE 13 MILLION GALLONS
OF WATER. MY POINT IS THOSE
PEOPLE HAVE A RECURRING
STRATEGY, BREAK THINGS, BREAK
THE LAW, AND MAYBE ASK FOR
FORGIVENESS LATER. THE CURRENT
ADMINISTRATION HAS ONLY WORSENED
THE SITUATION. THAT'S JUST MY
OWN POINT. DON'T TRY TO
REGULATE AND HOPE IT WILL BE
OKAY. THEY DON'T CARE. THANK
YOU.
>> THANK YOU.
>> THAT IS OUR LAST IN-PERSON
COMMENTER. WE'LL NOW MOVE ONTO
OUR REMOTE COMMENTERS. WE'LL
START WITH EMILY.
>> HI, CAN YOU HEAR ME?
>> YES.
>> HI, MY NAME IS EMILY, I'M
HERE TO OPPOSE BOTH CB121196,
AND CB121219. SEATTLE SHOULD BE
GROUND IN TRANSPARENCY, AND
EQUITY, AND ENGAGEMENT, INSTEAD
OF MAJOR LAND USE REGULATIONS
LIMITING THE ABILITY OF
RESIDENTS TO PARTICIPATE IN
DECISIONS THAT WILL SHAPE OUR
NEIGHBORHOODS FOR GENERATIONS.
121215 WILL REMOVE THE PUBLIC'S
ABILITY TO APPEAL AND
ENVIRONMENTAL REGULAR LACES,
THIS IS A GIVEAWAY TO DEVELOPERS
AND DEEPLY CONCERNING.
SEATTLE'S ENVIRONMENT, OUR
TREES, NEIGHBORHOODS,
WALKABILITY, AND ACCESS TO GREEN
SPACE MAKE THE CITY SPECIAL.
THESE ARE NOT OPTIONAL. THEY'RE
PART OF WHAT EVERYONE LIVES HERE
WANTS TO BENEFIT FROM. DO NOT
ACCEPT THIS PROPOSAL UNTIL
THERE'S TRANSPARENT ENGAGEMENT.
THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU.
>> NEXT UP, WE HAVE ANDREA.
ANDREA, PLEASE PRESS STAR 6.
>> HELLO MY NAME IS ANDREA, AND
I'M HERE TO SUPPORT THE
PROPOSED LEGISLATION, CB121196.
I OWN FOUR PARCELS ON ONE OF THE
BLOCKS THAT IS CONSIDERED FOR
THE FREMONT ZONE. THIS BLOCK IS
LOCATED ON NORTH STONE WAY. I'M
A FIFTH GENERATION OWNER AND
MANAGER OF THESE PROPERTIES. MY
GREAT GRANDPARENTS FIRST BOUGHT
ONE OF THE PARCELS AND MADE IT
THEIR HOME. I'VE WATCHED THE
COMMUNITY EVOLVE OVER FOUR
DECADES. MY CONCERN IS IT WILL
ENABLE THE BUILDING OF FUTURE
HOUSING. IDEALLY, THIS WILL
EMPHASIZE SMALL PUBLIC SPACE.
THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO
PROVIDE MY COMMENTS.
>> THANK YOU.
>> NEXT UP WE HAVE CINDY. HI,
GOOD MORNING, COUNCILMEMBERS.
THIS IS SANDY WITH TREE ACTION
SEATTLE. PLEASE DO NOT ALLOW CB
121215 TO ADVANCE. AS YOU'VE
JUST HEARD. THE ORCA APPEAL WAS
HEARD AT THE WASHINGTON STATE
COURT OF APPEALS. JUDGE DAVID
MAN ASKED SEATTLE CITY'S
ATTORNEY THREE TIMES WHY
WOULDN'T THE CITY COUNCIL WANT
TO HAVE THE MOST ACCURATE
INFORMATION POSSIBLE? HE DID NOT
GET AN ANSWER. BUT WE HAVE THE
ANSWER. IT'S THE RIGHT TO
APPEAL TO THE HEARING EXAMINER.
IT'S AN INDEPENDENT
OPPORTUNITY. WITHOUTTHEY WOULD
BE FORCED TO RECOVER
ENVIRONMENTAL ERRORS. GOOD
DECISIONS RELY ON GOOD
INFORMATION. PLEASE REPORT AND
CHECK NO.
>> NEXT UP WE HAVE JUDY.
>> GOOD MORNING. I'M JUDY. I'VE
BEEN A RESIDENT OF SEATTLE FOR
WELL CLOSE TO SOME PEOPLE'S
LIFETIME. I WOULD LIKE YOU TO
NIX JUST AS THE PREVIOUS SPEAKER
SAID, AND REVIEW, IT'S A CHECK.
IT MAKES SURE OUR PUBLIC
AGENCIES ACTUALLY WORK FOR THE
PEOPLE IN SOME CLAIM. IF OPCD
MISSES CRITICAL POINTS OR FACTS,
THERE'S A REMEDY. I JUST HAVE
TO SAY, THIS REMINDS ME OF THE
FEDERAL GOVERNMENT'S
JUSTIFICATION TO DENY COURT
REVIEW FOR IMMIGRANTS. THE
REASONS ARE THAT IT COSTS MONEY
AND WE HAVE BETTER THINGS TO DO.
WELL THE BETTER THING TO DO IS
TO DO IT RIGHT IN THE FIRST
PLACE, SO YOU DON'T NEED AN
APPEAL. SO PLEASE NIX IT NOW. IT
SHOULDN'T GO ANY FURTHER. THANK
YOU.
>> THANK YOU.
>> NEXT UP WE HAVE SHANE.
>> HI. GOOD MORNING COUNCIL.
I'M HERE TO OPPOSE 121215 AND
ALSO TALK ABOUT 121214 WITH THE
DATA CENTERS. I'M JUST A
SECURITY GUARD AND A MUSICIAN.
I'M 25 YEARS OLD, SO I KNOW
I'M ONE OF, IF NOT THE YOUNGEST
PERSONS IN HERE. WHEN I WAS
YOUNGER, I DIDN'T KNOW WHAT WAS
GOING ON, BUT IN 2010, THE
CITIZENS UNITED CASE HAPPENED,
AND THAT ALLOWED CORPORATE MONEY
TO BE, YOU KNOW, AS POWERFUL, OR
MOSTLY MORE POWERFUL THAN THE
PEOPLE'S VOICES, AND I'M
SEEING THAT AGAIN TODAY WITH
THESE NEW DATA CENTERS COMING
ALL ACROSS THE COUNTRY. AND I
REALLY DON'T THINK THAT WE
SHOULD BE ALLOWING CORPORATIONS
TO OVERRIDE THE PEOPLE'S
DECISIONS. EVERYONE I KNOW IS
AGAINST THIS. AND THANK YOU,
GUYS. EVERY SINGLE PERSON WHO
HAS BEEN IN HERE, YOU'VE BEEN
SPEAKING SO, SO WONDERFULLY. AND
THANK YOU GUYS FOR YOUR TIME.
>> THANK YOU.
>> NEXT UP WE HAVE PATRICK.
>> HI, I'M PAT. I'M A COMPUTER
PROGRAMMER AND HAVE BEEN FOR TWO
DECADES. I'M SUPPORTING THE
DATA CENTER MORATORIUM, THESE
LARGE DATA CENTERS AREN'T LIKE
THE DATA CENTERS WE ALREADY
HAVE. THEY DON'T CREATE JOBS,
AND FOR TECH COMPANIES, THEIR
AIM IS FOR A.I. REPLACING AS
MANY JOBS AS POSSIBLE. WE
ALREADY KNOW FROM OTHERS'
MISFORTUNE, THE RISING ENERGY
COSTS, RUINING OF THE
ENVIRONMENT, AND THE LARGE
PRICES. TECH COMPANIES LIKE TO
BRAG . WERE NO THANKS, WE DO NOT
NEED LARGE DATA CENTERS, ALSO
CONCERNING IS 121215. AS A
NATION WE'VE ALREADY SPENT
DECADES TRYING TO UNDO THE HARM
FROM WELL INTENTIONED ACTIONS
LIKE STRAIGHTENING RIVERS. DATA
CENTERS HAVE PROVEN THEY CANNOT
BE TRUSTED, SO WE NEED AS MANY
CHECKS AS POSSIBLE.
>> THANK YOU, PATRICK. NEXT UP,
WE HAVE IRENE.
>> GOOD MORNING. MY NAME IS
IRENE. I LIVE IN DISTRICT SIX
AND I URGE YOU, DO NOT ADVANCE
CB 121215. THIS ILL CONCEIVED
LEGISLATION, IT READS LIKE AN
ATTACK ON GOOD CITIZENS WHO IN
GOOD FAITH HAVE RELIED ON SEPA
TO INTERVENE WHEN THE CITY
DECISIONS ARE IN CLEAR ERROR,
AND THAT DOES HAPPEN. FOR THE
PAST SEVERAL YEARS, THERE'S
BEEN A CREEPING EROSION OF
CITIZEN ENGAGEMENT WHEN
DECISIONS ARE MADE BOTH LARGE
AND SMALL. SEPA HAS BEEN
JETTISONED AS UNNECESSARY IN
LIGHT OF QUOTE OTHER REGULATIONS
THAT ALLEGEDLY PREVENT HARM, BUT
THE HARM REMAINS. JUST LOOK AT
THE RAPID LOSS OF MATURE TREES
DESPITE THE TREE PROTECTION
ORDINANCE. DESIGN REVIEW HAS
BEEN EVISCERATED. THE CLERK'S
OFFICE LISTS 67 BOARDS AND
COMMISSIONS, AND EVERY ONE OF
THEM HAS MULTIPLE VACANCIES. THE
CURRENT DAM THE TORPEDOES
APPROACH REQUIRES --
>> THANK YOU. NEXT UP WE HAVE
LOGAN SCHMIDT.
>> GOOD MORNING, CHAIR LIN, THIS
IS LOGAN SPEAKING ON BEHALF OF
21195. I BELIEVE IT WILL
MEANINGFULLY IMPROVE SEATTLE'S
ABILITY TO APPROVE ON TIME.
DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS FROM
HEARING EXAMINER APPEALS IS THE
ELIMINATION OF A PROCEDURAL
BOTTLENECK THAT HAS PUT SEATTLE
AT RISK OF MISSING STATE
DEADLINES. SECOND, THE BILL
PRESERVES THE COUNCILMEMBER
DISCRETION BY ALLOWING ANY
MEMBER TO REQUEST DIRECTOR
SUPPORT WHEN THEY BELIEVE IT
WOULD BE USEFUL. WITHOUT MAKING
A DEFAULT REQUIREMENT FOR EVERY
COUNCIL GENERATED ACTION.
FASTER, MORE PROTECTABLE --
THESE PROCESSES BENEFIT
EVERYONE, ESPECIALLY WHEN STATE
LAW IS ALREADY DRIVING THE
TIMELINE. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU.
>> NEXT UP, WE HAVE CARTER.
>> GOOD MORNING, CHAIR LIN, AND
MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE. CARTER
COMMENTING IN SUPPORT OF COUNSEL
BILL 121215. WE APPRECIATE THE
COUNCIL'S EFFORTS TO IMPROVE
THE PREDICTABILITY AND
EFFICIENCY, THIS ESTABLISHES AN
APPROACH ALREADY IN PLACE ACROSS
THE REGION, KING COUNTY, TACOMA,
AND EVERETT ALREADY REPRESENT
SEPA DECISIONS FROM APPEAL. AND
THIS LEGISLATION WOULD BRING
SEATTLE INTO ALIGNMENT WITH THAT
PRACTICE. THIS LEGISLATION ALSO
ADDRESSES A PROCEDURAL GAP THAT
CAN CREATE AVOIDABLE DELAYS.
REDUCING THESE BARRIERS IS
CRITICAL TO HOUSING PRODUCTION.
OUR MEMBERS SEE FIRST HAND HOW
THE PROLONGED REVIEW PROCESSES
ADD COST, AND INTRODUCE
UNCERTAINTY, THAT CAN PREVENT
PROJECTS FROM MOVING FORWARD. BY
CLARIFYING AND STREAMLINING THE
PROCESS, IT STILL SUPPORTS A
MORE EFFICIENT PATHWAY IN
ALLIANCE WITH BROADER GOALS,
BENEFITING BOTH THOSE BUILDING
HOUSING AND FUTURE RESIDENTS OF
OUR CITY.
>> THANK YOU.
>> NEXT UP, WE HAVE BONNEY.
BONNEY, PLEASE PRESS STAR 6.
BONNEY, WE WILL COME BACK TO
YOU. NEXT UP WE HAVE LAILA.
>> CHAIR LIN AND COMMITTEE
MEMBERS, MY NAME IS LAILA, I'M
A LAND USE ATTORNEY COMMENTING
IN SUPPORT OF CB 121215. SEATTLE
IS RISKING COMPLIANCE OF
NON-DEADLINES IN PART BECAUSE OF
SEPA APPEALS ADD MONTHS TO THE
PROCESS. STATE LAW DOES NOT
REQUIRE THESE APPEALS, BUT
INSTEAD MAKES THEM OPTIONAL, AND
KING COUNTY AND BELLEVUE DO NOT
ALLOW THEM. SO ALIGN SEATTLE
WITH THE REGIONAL NORM. TODAY
THESE ARE OPTIONAL, BUT
APPEALING THEY'RE ALLOWED STILL
TAKES TIME AND UPDATES THE
PROCESS BY ELIMINATING THE
DIRECTOR'S REPORT. THIS IS ONLY
PROCEDURE REFORM WITH [
INAUDIBLE ] IN TACT. THIS WILL
HELP KEEP REGULATORY EFFORTS AND
HOUSING ON TRACK, REFLECTIVE OF
THE MAYOR'S AGENDA. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU.
>> NEXT UP WE HAVE JEFF.
>> CAN YOU HEAR ME, OKAY?
>> YES.
>> HI, THIS IS JEFF BRIGS. I
LIVE IN SEATTLE. I'M GOING TO
ADD TO THE SKEPTICISM THAT
PEOPLE HAVE EXPRESSED ON 121215.
I WILL EXPRESS MY DISAPPOINTMENT
WITH HOW THAT'S BEEN EVALUATED
FOR COUNCIL, WHICH HAS THE
ALLEGED APPEALS HAVE BEEN FOUND
IN ORDER TO SUPPORT DEVELOPMENT,
TO BASICALLY TO BE
OBSTRUCTIONIST, AND I'M ASKING
LIKE, WHO THIS IS ALLEGED BY,
AND AGAINST TOWARD WHOM IT'S
ALLEGED. IT SEEMS MORE
EDITORIALIZING THAN THE ACTUAL
ANALYSIS. IT ALSO SAYS DIRECTLY
THAT THIS WOULD ALIGN THE STATE,
OR THE CITY REGULATIONS WITH
STATE REGULATIONS WHILE THE SAME
DOCUMENT ALSO STATES THAT THIS
WOULD APPLY TO ALL TYPE 5, NOT
JUST AFFORDABLE HOUSING. SO IT
SEEMS TO ME, THIS ANALYSIS
PRESENTED TO COUNCIL IS
INACCURATE. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU.
>> NEXT UP, WE HAVE RUBY
HOLLAND.
>> YES. MY NAME IS RUBY HOLLAND.
I STRONGLY OPPOSE CB 121215,
WHICH LIMITS THE RIGHT TO
APPEAL. I STRONGLY OPPOSE THE
COORDINATED EFFORT BY
COUNCILMEMBERS RINCK AND FOSTER
WHO HAVE SEATTLE'S HOMEOWNERS
FROM GETTING DISPLACED BY
STABILIZING OUR PROPERTY TAXES
MERELY SO THEY CAN FORCE THE
ADULT HOMEOWNERS OUT OF [
INAUDIBLE ] THERE IS A SEED OF
CORRUPTION AND BE A LACK OF
TRANSPARENCY TAKING PLACE WITHIN
THE CITY COUNCIL THAT WASN'T
PRESENT PRIOR TO JANUARY. WHAT
CHANGED? WHO IS ERODING THE
PUBLIC TRUST. I PROMISE YOU THAT
A CITY MEETING RUN IN CLOSED
DOORS, AND POLITICAL
ASSASSINATIONS WILL NOT SURVIVE.
THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU.
>> NEXT UP WE HAVE JESSICA
DIXON. JESSICA, IT DOES NOT LOOK
LIKE YOU ARE CALLED IN. WE WILL
COME BACK TO YOU. NEXT UP, WE
HAVE NIVY.
>> HI, EVERYONE, CAN YOU HEAR
ME?
>> YES.
>> OH, AMAZING. MY NAME IS NIVY,
I'M THE FOUNDER OF SEATTLE SOAP
BOX. AND I WANTED TO CALL IN IN
SUPPORT OF A DATA CENTER
MORATORIUM, ALSO IN SUPPORT OF
FREMONT REZONING, WHICH I
DIDN'T KNOW WAS ON THE AGENDA,
OOPS, BUT I LIVE IN FREMONT ON
STOWTON WAY. ALL OF MY COMMENTS
ARE GOING TO BE HOW SEATTLE IS
GOING TO BE A MAJOR CLIMATE HUB
AND IT'S TIME FOR US TO STEP UP
TO WHAT I BELIEVE IS THE BEST
CITY IN THE U.S. IF WE BUILD
DATA CENTERS AND TAKE POWER AWAY
FROM THE PEOPLE, WE ARE ALLOWING
THESE MASSIVE COMPANIES TO BULLY
US AND STEAL OUR RESOURCES AND
CHASE A BUBBLE THAT WE DON'T
EVEN KNOW WILL EXIST. SO I
STRONGLY SUPPORT A DATA CENTER
MORATORIUM, AND I OVERALL
SUPPORT THE PEOPLE BEING ABLE TO
WEIGH IN ON WHAT MATTERS TO US
AS A CITY, INCLUDING HOUSING,
AND TRANSIT, AND GREEN SPACES.
>> THANK YOU.
>> NEXT UP, WE HAVE DAVID.
>> HI, THIS IS DAVID.
DEREGULATION KILLS. IN 2014, THE
OSO LANDSLIDE KILLED OVER 40
RESIDENTS AND PERMANENTLY BURIED
NEW HOMES. THE STATE OF
WASHINGTON HAS PAID EXTENSIVELY
FOR THIS LOSS OF PROPERTY, AND
LOSS OF LIFE. I'M HERE TO ASK
YOU, AND URGE YOU TO CANCEL CB
121215. I'M ONE OF MANY
THOUSANDS OF HOMEOWNERS WHO
SIGNED A WAIVER AT THE CLOSING
AFTER THE PURCHASING OF MY
TOWNHOUSE, THAT BECAUSE IT WAS
BUILT ON THE SALE OF DESIGNATED
LANDSLIDE AREA. AGAIN,
DEREGULATION KILLS. APPEALS DO
NOT DELAY CITY DECISIONS HOW TO
GROW, BUT THEY INFORM US, THEY
INFORM YOU OF CITY DECISIONS.
APPEALS ARE TO PROTECT THE
PUBLIC'S HEALTH, LIFE, AND
SAFETY. YOUR ROLE IS TO PROTECT
THE PUBLIC. NOT TO CATER TO
LOBBYISTS STRIPPING SEATTLE FROM
ITS RIGHTS TO PROTECT
THEMSELVES. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU.
>> JESSICA, IT LOOKS LIKE YOU'RE
BACK HERE. WE WILL GO TO YOU.
JESSICA DIXON, PLEASE PRESS STAR
6.
>> HI, CAN YOU HEAR ME?
>> YES.
>> HI, GOOD MORNING, COUNCIL. MY
NAME IS JESSICA DIXON, AND I'M
ASKING COUNCILMEMBERS TO OPPOSE
COUNCIL BILL 121215,
SPECIFICALLY THE EXCEPTION OF
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENTS
AND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS FROM
APPEALS TO THE SEATTLE HEARING
EXAMINER. THIS WOULD ELIMINATE A
CRITICAL CHECK ON REGULATORS,
ONE THAT EXISTS TO ENSURE
ACCOUNTABILITY UNDER
WASHINGTON'S ENVIRONMENTAL LAWS
BEFORE ANY DAMAGE IS DOWN.
REMOVING THE RIGHT TO APPEAL IS
NOT A PROCEDURAL TECHNICALITY.
IT IS THE REMOVAL OF A
MEANINGFUL AVENUE FOR RESIDENTS
TO HOLD GOVERNMENT. OUR CITY
CABINETS SHOULD GROW OVERTIME.
DEVELOPERS DO NOT WEAR THE
BURDEN OF STEWARDING THE CITY
FROM FUTURE GENERATIONS, WE THE
RESIDENTS DO. PLEASE REMOVE THIS
EXEMPTION.
>> THANK YOU.
>> NEXT UP WE HAVE STEVE.
>> GOOD MORNING, THIS IS STEVE
SPEAKING FOR TREE PACK AND
FRIENDS OF SEATTLE'S FOREST. I
COULD NOT FIND ANY VERSION OF
COUNSEL BILL 121215 ONLINE.
YOU'RE DISCUSSING A BILL THAT
THE PUBLIC IS UNABLE TO SEE THE
SUMMARY AND FISCAL NOTE WITH NO
WORKING LINK TO THIS BILL.
REMOVING DIRECTORS' REPORTS
WOULD DEPRIVE THE COUNCIL AND
PUBLIC OF INFORMATION, EXEMPTING
ENVIRONMENTAL THRESHOLD
DETERMINATIONS IN THE EIS'S,
ASSOCIATED WITH COMP PLAN
AMENDMENTS AND REGULATIONS
SOUNDS LIKE SOMETHING OUT OF
TRUMP'S MAGA HANDBOOK THAT THE
PUBLIC CAN NO LONGER APPEAL
DECISIONS MADE BY THE COUNCIL.
WE OPPOSE THIS LEGISLATION, AND
QUESTION WHY YOU'RE MOVING
FORWARD ON REMOVING PUBLIC
PROTECTION AND SAFEGUARDS AND
THE RIGHT TO APPEAL. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU.
>> NEXT UP WE HAVE DAVID.
>> THANK YOU, DAVID. IT'S
UNSUSTAINABLE TO PUT UP WITH THE
HORN HONKING TRAIN THAT PASSES
THROUGH THE MARINERS BASEBALL
AREA WHEN THEY DON'T EVEN NEED
TO HONK THE HORN. IT'S
SCIENTIFICALLY PROVEN THAT IF
YOU'RE SUBJECTED TO DECIBEL
LEVELS OF 110 TO 150, WHICH THE
TRAIN SPEWS, IT TAKES AWAY YOUR
FOCUS, AND YOU SEE HOW MANY
TIMES YEAR IN AND YEAR OUT IT
GETS WORSE WITH THE MARINERS
CONSTANTLY FLAKING AND PEOPLE
GETTING DRUNK INSIDE THE
STADIUM. THAT TRAIN TRACK RUNS
RIGHT NEXT TO THE STADIUM. YOU
CAN SMELL THE TOXICITY AND THE
SOOT PERMEATING AN AREA, AND
WHEN IT HONKS ITS HORN, WHEN
YOU'RE SITTING IN THAT METAL
FACILITY, IT ECHOS, ESPECIALLY
NEXT TO A BODY OF WATER, AND IT
HAS DESTROYED THE MENTAL HEALTH
OF THE PLAYERS, SOMETIMES IT HAS
A NEGATIVE IMPACT ON THE
VISITING TEAM, BUT ANY ONE TIMES
FOR THE MARINERS, WE NEED A LAW
TO PUT AN END TO THEIR ABUSE.
>> THANK YOU.
>> NEXT UP WE HAVE JUNE.
>> THANK YOU. I JUST WANT TO ASK
A QUICK PROCEDURAL QUESTION
BEFORE I SPEAK. AND THAT IS I
SIGNED UP, I THINK FOR THE
PUBLIC HEARING AS WELL AS THE
PUBLIC COMMENT. IS THERE A
SEPARATE SIGNUP, CAN YOU CLARIFY
THAT?
>> YOU CAN SPEAK TO -- YOU CAN
SIGN UP FOR BOTH, SO THERE
SHOULD BE A SEPARATE SIGNUP FOR
THE PUBLIC HEARING. SO IF YOU
WANT TO DO PUBLIC COMMENT NOW ON
THE SEPA AND THE DATA CENTER,
AND THEN WE'RE GOING TO DO THE
PUBLIC HEARING NEXT.
>> OKAY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. I
URGE THE COUNCIL TO TAKE TWO
ACTIONS FOR ENVIRONMENTAL
JUSTICE. PASS THE MORATORIUM ON
BUILDING DATA CENTERS IN
SEATTLE. THEY ARE UNPROVEN
BENEFITS. DO NOT JUSTIFY THE
HUGE ECONOMIC COST, WHICH WILL
FALL ON THE MOST VULNERABLE
COMMUNITIES. REJECT COUNCIL BILL
121215. THIS BILL WOULD REMOVE
THE ABILITY FOR RESIDENTS IN
SEATTLE TO APPEAL UNDER THE
COUNCIL TO THE SEATTLE HEARING
EXAMINER. THIS WOULD REMOVE AN
IMPORTANT AVENUE TO HOLD THE
COUNCIL RESPONSIBLE TO REMOVE
ENVIRONMENTAL SAFEGUARDS AT A
TIME WHEN INCREASING
ENVIRONMENTAL CRISIS IS
SHORTSIGHTED AND
ANTI-DEMOCRATIC. PEOPLE LIVE
HOUSING, YES. HOUSING THAT IS
LIVABLE. IT IS DEADLY FOR PEOPLE
IN HOUSING, AS WELL AS UNHOUSED
PEOPLE. THANK YOU.
>> CHAIR THAT CONCLUDES OUR
PUBLIC COMMENTERS.
>> OKAY. AS THERE ARE NO
ADDITIONAL REGISTERED SPEAKERS
WE WILL NOW MOVE TO OUR ITEMS OF
BUSINESS. I WILL NOW MOVE TO OUR
FIRST ITEM OF BUSINESS. WILL THE
CLERK PLEASE READ AGENDA ITEM 1?
>> AGENDA ITEM ONE. COUNCIL BILL
121196, AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO
LAND USE ZONING, REZONING
CERTAIN LAND IN THE UNIVERSITY
DISTRICT, THE FREMONT
NEIGHBORHOOD, SUPPORTING
HOUSING, REMOVE CODE TIMBER
AREAS. FOR PUBLIC HEARING,
BRIEFING, DISCUSSION, AND
POSSIBLE VOTE.
>> OKAY. AS PRESIDING OFFICER
I'M NOW OPENING THE PUBLIC
HEARING ON COUNSEL BILL 121196
REGARDING THE HOUSING BILL'S
OPPORTUNITY LEGISLATION. CLERK,
HOW MANY SPEAKERS ARE SIGNED UP
FOR THIS PUBLIC HEARING?
>> CHAIR, WE HAVE ROUGHLY 23
COMMENTERS.
>> OKAY. EACH SPEAKER WILL BE
PROVIDED TWO MINUTES, AND CLERK,
I NOW HAND THIS OVER TO YOU TO
PRESENT THE INSTRUCTIONS.
>> SPEAKERS WILL BE CALLED IN
ORDER THE ORDER OF REGISTRATION.
THE SAME PUBLIC COMMENT RULES
APPLY TO THIS. A 10 SECOND CHIME
WILL BE USED. PUBLIC COUNCIL
BILL RELATING TO 121196 IS ONLY
BEING ACCEPTED AT THIS PUBLIC
HEARING. SPEAKERS ARE BEING
ASKED TO BEGIN THEIR PUBLIC
COMMENTS BY STATING THEIR NAME.
FIRST UP WE HAVE IAN. THAT WILL
BE -- HE WILL BE FOLLOWED BY
MARTA, BOB, OLIVER, AND KYLER.
>> [ INAUDIBLE ] ASKING THE
COUNCIL TO, OR THE COMMITTEE TO
MOVE IT FORWARD TODAY, BECAUSE
WE ARE IN A HOUSING CRISIS, AND
THIS IS AN EXCEPTIONAL PIECE OF
LEGISLATION. THIS IS ANSWERING
THE CALL WHEN WE NEED TO BUILD
HOUSING, WE NEED TO BUILD
HOUSING AND SET THE TABLE WITH
ZONING THAT ALLOWS FOR HOUSING
EVERYWHERE, HOUSING AROUND
TRANSIT, AND HOUSING THAT
ANSWERS THE CALL THAT THE STATE
HAS GIVEN US OF HOW DO WE
INCENTIVIZE HOUSING USING
TIMBER. SO THIS BILL IS AN
AMALGAMATION OF MANY GREAT
IDEAS. UPZONES FOR TARGETED
AREAS, INCLUDING FOR OUR
NONPROFIT PARTNERS IN THE
CENTRAL DISTRICT, FOR AFFORDABLE
HOUSING IN THE RAINIER BEACH
AREA, FOR HOUSING WITH BROOKS
HEADQUARTERS. WHERE IF YOU LOOK
AT THIS AT 36th AND STONE WAY,
THERE IS HOUSING ONE BLOCK TO
THE NORTH. THERE'S HOUSING ONE
BLOCK TO THE EAST, BUT THERE IS
A COUPLE OF VACANT WAREHOUSES
WHERE SURROUNDING THIS AREA IS
HOUSING, AND IT'S IN AN AREA
WHERE THERE'S VIBRANCY,
THERE'S THE BEAUTIFUL WATER
AREA. I WOULD ASK THAT THE
COUNCIL HAS DONE GREAT WORK ON
THIS, THERE'S BEEN GREAT
OUTREACH, THERE'S BEEN, AS
YOU'VE HEARD, THERE'S BEEN A
SEPA OPPORTUNITY. THERE WAS NO
SEPA COMMENTS. THERE WAS NO SEPA
APPEAL. THIS WAS NOT THE CASE OF
COMMENTS THAT HAS NOT ALLOWED
FOR ENGAGEMENT. IT IS A PROCESS
THAT HAS ALLOWED FOR HOUSING TO
MOVE QUICKLY AND ESPECIALLY THE
DEVELOPMENT OF HOUSING IN THE
NEXT COUPLE OF YEARS. SO FOR
THESE REASONS WE WOULD ASK THAT
THE COUNCIL MOVE THIS FORWARD,
SO WE COULD ACTUALLY START TO
SEE CRANES MOVING FORWARD, AND
THE OPPORTUNITY FOR PEOPLE
MOVING INTO HOUSING THROUGHOUT
THE CITY. THANK YOU.
>> NEXT UP WE HAVE MARTA,
FOLLOWED BY BOB, CARTER, AND
PHINNEY.
>> GOOD MORNING, EVERYONE. MY
NAME IS MARTA. AND I LIVE IN
FREMONT. I'M HERE A PART OF THE
FOR SEATTLE PROJECT AND I AM
ALSO HERE ASKING YOU TO SUPPORT
THE HOUSING OPPORTUNITIES
LEGISLATION. AS YOU HEARD
PREVIOUSLY, AND FROM ME
PERSONALLY, I'M PART OF A STONE
WAY CORRIDOR AREA, AND PART OF
THIS PACKAGE ADDRESSES CURRENT
ZONING LIMITATIONS IN THAT
SPACE. IT'S A CORRIDOR THAT I
FREQUENT WITH ALL OF MY FRIENDS.
WE WALK, RUN, GO TO THE
RESTAURANTS AND I WOULD LOVE FOR
MORE RESIDENTS TO LIVE IN THIS
SPACE AND MANY MORE LIKE IT
ACROSS THE CITY. I'M EXCITED
ABOUT THE POSSIBILITIES THIS
LEGISLATION BRINGS TO DOCTOR A
NEW MIX OF HOMES THAT WILL GIVE
FOLKS OF ALL INCOME LEVELS A
CHANCE TO LIVE NEAR THE TRANSIT,
THEIR WORK, PARKS AND MORE. I
BELIEVE THE HOUSING
OPPORTUNITIES, LEGISLATION IS AN
IMPORTANT STEP TO ENSURE WE ACT
WITH URGENCY IN ADDRESSING SUCH
A CRITICAL ISSUE. I HOPE YOU'LL
MOVE THIS FORWARD, THANKS FOR
YOUR COMMITMENT TO THE CITY, AND
ALL OF THE WORK THAT YOU DO.
>> THANK YOU.
>> NEXT UP WILL BE BOB.
>> GOOD MORNING. THANK YOU FOR
GIVING ME THE OPPORTUNITY TO
SPEND A MINUTE OR TWO WITH YOU.
MY NAME IS BOB ELWARD, I LIVE IN
WEST SEATTLE, I HAVE BEEN THE
BENEFICIARY OF DECADES OF
HOUSING POLICIES THAT HAVE
BENEFITED ME GREATLY. TODAY I'M
HERE TO ASK YOU TO PLEASE
SUPPORT THE HOP LEGISLATION
BECAUSE WHAT I DO NOW IS I SIT
DOWN WITH MY DAUGHTER, HER
HUSBAND, AND THEIR FRIENDS, AND
INEVITABLY, WE TALK ABOUT
POLITICS AND IT TURNS TO
HOUSING, AND THE INCREDIBLE
OBSTACLES THAT THEY ARE GOING TO
BE FACING AS THEY RAISE THEIR
FAMILIES AND WANT TO STAY IN
SEATTLE. HOP GIVES US A FIRST,
YOU KNOW, MAYBE SMALL PAPER CUT
AT THE START SOLVING SOME OF THE
ISSUES THAT THIS NEXT GENERATION
OF CITIZENS ARE GOING TO BE
FACING, SO I REALLY URGE YOU TO
PLEASE GET BEHIND THIS, FIND
OTHER HOPS-LIKE AMENDMENTS TO DO
THE POLICY, AND ALSO, THANK YOU
FOR YOUR PUBLIC SERVICE. I
CAN'T IMAGINE GIVING UP THE
TIME, EFFORT, ENERGY, IT TAKES
TO BECOME ELECTED, AND TO SHARE
DAY IN AND DAY OUT. I HOPE YOU
SHARE MY OPINIONS. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU.
>> NEXT UP WE HAVE OLIVER
FOLLOWED BY KYLE, STEVE, AND
LISA.
>> THANK YOU COUNCILMEMBERS.
I'M HERE IN SUPPORT OF THE HOP
LEGISLATION. I LIVE IN MOUNT
BAKER IN DISTRICT 2. I RIDE MY
BIKE TO CITY HALL BECAUSE [
INAUDIBLE ] BUT IF YOU RIDE YOUR
BIKE, YOU GO A LITTLE BIT ON
RAINIER AVENUE, YOU GO THROUGH
JOSE PARK, YOU GO BY 12th AND
JACKSON, YOU GO BY FOURTH AVENUE
OR YOU COME UP FOURTH AVENUE,
AND YOU SEE AGAIN AND AGAIN WHY
WE NEED MORE HOUSING IN THIS
CITY. I HOPE YOU GUYS TRY RIDING
YOUR BIKE. IT'S LIKE A FRONT
AND CENTER VIEW OF WHAT WE NEED
AND THERE ARE LOT OF IMPORTANT
THINGS WE NEED TO DO. WE NEED TO
CONTINUE TO MOVE WITH THE COMP
PLAN. THERE'S A LOT OF
INTENSITY AROUND DATA CENTERS.
ALL OF THESE BIG, HARD ISSUES. I
FEEL LIKE THIS IS AN EASY ONE.
THESE ARE LIKE A FEW TARGETED
UP-ZONES THAT ARE GOING TO GET
US THOUSANDS OF HOMES FOR PEOPLE
OVER THE NEXT FEW YEARS. SO I
HOPE YOU ALL SUPPORT THIS
LEGISLATION. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU.
>> HI, I AM KYLER. I'M A D3
RESIDENT IN CAPITOL HILL. I'M
HERE TO SUPPORT THE HOP
LEGISLATION AS WELL. HOUSING
STARTS AND NEW PERMITTING IS AT
A STAND STILL IN THE CITY. WHICH
IS TERRIBLE NEWS FOR ALL OF US
WHO RENT. PRETTY MUCH MEANS IN
THE NEXT TWO TO THREE YEARS WE
WILL SEE SKYROCKETING RENTS ONCE
AGAIN. THIS IS NOT JUST MY
HYPOTHESIS. THIS IS BOTH WHAT
DEVELOPERS AND LANDLORDS AND THE
CITY ARE PLANNING ON HAPPENING.
WE'RE BAKING THIS INTO OUR
PLANS. SO WE SHOULD BE DOING
EVERYTHING POSSIBLE TO KEEP
PEOPLE FROM GETTING PUSHED
FURTHER TO THE MARGINS IN THE
CITY. I DON'T WANT TO SEE MORE
PEOPLE HAVE TO MOVE OUT OF THE
NEIGHBORHOODS THEY CALL HOME. I
DON'T WANT TO HAVE TO SEE MORE
PEOPLE BECOME HOMELESS. AT THE
SAME TIME, TANGENTALLY, WE'RE
NOT GOING TO GET NEW PERMANENT
SUPPORTIVE HOUSING FOR A HANDFUL
OF YEARS, THANKS TO THE TRUMP
ADMINISTRATION. SO WE WILL NOT
BE PREPARED FOR THE INFLUX OF
ADDITIONAL HOME UNLESSNESS. THIS
IS AN OPPORTUNITY TO BUILD
HOUSING NOW IN PLACES THAT
PEOPLE WANT IT. I PARTICULARLY
WANT TO HIGHLIGHT THAT IT ALSO
MAKES PASSIVE HOUSE HIGHLY
ENERGY EFFICIENT HOUSING,
MODULAR CONSTRUCTION, MASS
TIMBER CONSTRUCTION, WHICH IS
GORGEOUS. I WISH I COULD LIVE IN
ONE. IT MAKES IT MUCH MORE
LIKELY TO GET BUILT DUE TO
DESIGN REVIEW CHANGES. WE SHOULD
ENCOURAGE THAT AS MUCH AS
POSSIBLE, AND THAT'S THE
FUTURE. LET'S BUILD A PUP LINE
OF REALLY, REALLY GREAT, DENSE
HOUSING. THANK YOU SO MUCH.
>> THANK YOU AND JUST FOR THE
RECORD, I'D LIKE TO NOTE THAT
COUNCIL PRESIDENT HOLLINGSWORTH
JOINED US 10 TO 15 MINUTES AGO,
SO THANK YOU FOR JOINING US.
>> NEXT UP.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBERS. MY
NAME IS VENAY AND I LIVE IN
MOUNT BAKER. I'M HERE THIS
MORNING FOR SEATTLE. I'M ASKING
YOU TODAY TO PASS THE HOP
LEGISLATION. MY WIFE AND I BOTH
WORK IN PRIMARY CARE IN THE
SEATTLE AREA. OVER THE PAST TEN
YEARS WE'VE SAID GOODBYE TO
MANY COLLEAGUE OF OURS WHO HAVE
LEFT SEATTLE, BECAUSE THEY CAN
NO LONGER AFFORD TO LIVE HERE.
THE COST OF HOUSING WAS ALWAYS
THEIR NUMBER ONE ISSUE. JUST
LAST WEEK, AN ANNOUNCEMENT
SHE'S MOVING HER FAMILY TO
TEXAS. WE MUST DO MORE TO MAKE
SEATTLE AFFORDABLE AGAIN.
PASSING HOP IS A STEP IN THE
RIGHT DIRECTION. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU.
>> REDDICK SAYS WE'RE NUMBER
FOUR ON THE LIST OF CITIES THAT
PEOPLE ARE LEAVING. THAT ISN'T
THE WHOLE STORY, BECAUSE YES, WE
DO HAVE PEOPLE STILL COMING IN.
BUT WHAT IT DOES SAY IS THE BOOM
IS SLOWING IMMENSELY. AND THAT
FEWER PEOPLE ARE COMING IN THAN
ARE LEAVING, AND WE TALK ABOUT
HOUSING HERE LIKE WE BUILD MORE
AND IT WILL GET CHEAPER. I CAN
TELL YOU THAT PHILOSOPHY HAS NOT
WORKED. I DARE YOU TO LOOK AT
WHAT HAS HAPPENED TO SEATTLE
HOUSING UNDER THAT PHILOSOPHY.
IT HAS CONTINUED TO GO WAY, WAY
UP. SO MY NEXT QUESTION IS,
HOUSING FOR WHO? NOW IF YOU MAKE
$150,000 A YEAR, YOU HAVE
HOUSING. ARE YOU GOING TO BUILD
HOUSING FOR PEOPLE WHO MAKE
$50,000 A YEAR? $45,000 A YEAR?
$60,000 A YEAR? THAT IS THE REAL
QUESTION. THE OTHER THING IS, AS
A SEATTLE SCENE I'M FEELING
LIKE A DOG TREAT. THE BIG DOG
SEEM IT'S TO BE THE DEVELOPERS.
AND AS I LOOK AT YOUR AGENDA,
OBSCENE PROFIT SEEMS TO BE THE
GOAL, BECAUSE THE MARKET PRICE
DOES NOT GO DOWN WHEN YOU SUB SE
DICE THEM. A WHILE BACK, ONE WAS
CROWING ABOUT 400% PROFIT. IS
THAT TOO MUCH? IS IT JUST A NEW
FLOOR? LET US TAKE LOOK AT
WHETHER WE'RE GOING TO ACTUALLY
SEE HOUSING PEOPLE WHO REALLY
NEED IT. WORKING CLASS PEOPLE
HAVE DONE A VERY GOOD JOB TRYING
TO ELIMINATE FROM THE CITY. YOU
DID SUCH A WONDERFUL JOB IN THE
INTERNATIONAL JOB DOING
PREDECESSORS, LET'S TAKE A LOOK
AT PEOPLE LIVING HERE UNITE NOW,
AND NOT FOR THE PEOPLE THATMENT
WANT TO COME. THANK YOU.
>> EXIN UP, WE HAVE LISA,
FOLLOWED BY DAVID, ALEX, SEWSEN,
AND ASHLEY.
>> HI, MY NAME IS LISA. I'M A
RESIDENT FOR DISTRICT 1, AND
I'M HERE WITH FOR SEATTLE
TODAY. I'M HERE TO ASK YOU TO
APPROVE THE HOUSING
OPPORTUNITIES PACKAGE. AS YOU
MAY HAVE NOTICED, I'M A PARENT.
AS WE'VE BEEN BUILDING OUR
COMMUNITY, MORE AND MORE OF THE
PEOPLE THAT WE'RE MEETING ARE
TALKING ABOUT LEAVING SEATTLE,
BECAUSE THEY'RE FINDING IT
HARDER AND HARDER TO FIND PLACES
FOR THEM TO LIVE. THEIR OPTIONS
ARE EITHER LONG COMMUTES, WHICH
MEANS LESS TIME AT HOME, LESS
TIME IN THEIR COMMUNITY, OR
FEELING INSECURE ABOUT THEIR
HOUSING. THIS PACKAGE WILL OFFER
MORE HOUSING OPTIONS SO THAT
PEOPLE STAY AND INVEST IN
SEATTLE, AND MAKE IT THEIR HOME.
THIS WILL ALSO STORE CRITICAL
WORKERS LIKE TEACHERS AND
CARETAKERS AND NURSES. PEOPLE
THAT WE NEED FOR A THRIVING
CITY. THE POLICY WORK IS DONE.
LET'S GET THIS DONE. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU.
>> NEXT UP, WE HAVE DAVE,
FOLLOWED BY ALEX, SUSAN, AND
ASHLEY.
>> GOOD MORNING, AGAIN, COUNCIL.
WE KEEP HEARING THAT WE HAVE TO
UPZONE, SO WE CAN HAVE
AFFORDABLE HOUSING, BUT WE'RE
NOT SEEING THE RESULTS OF THIS,
WE'RE SEEING MARKET RATE
HOUSING. WE'RE SEEING
TOWNHOUSES GO UP ALL OVER THE
CITY THAT COST OVER A MILLION
DOLLARS. BUT THERE SEEMS TO BE
THIS BELIEF IF WE KEEP UPZONING
THINGS WILL GET AFFORDABLE. WELL
THAT'S NOT WHAT HAPPENED IN
VANCOUVER. VANCOUVER UPZONED ALL
OVER THE PLACE, AND NOW THEY'RE
THE THIRD MOST EXPENSIVE CITY IN
THE WORLD. THEY'RE NOT BUILDING
AFFORDABLE HOUSING. YOU HAVE TO
PUT SOMETHING IN THE LEGISLATION
THAT ACTUALLY MANDATES
AFFORDABLE HOUSING. BUT I
HAVEN'T SEEN THAT. IF YOU LOOK
AT ALL THE PERMITS THAT HAVE
BEEN ISSUED SINCE PHASE 1 OF THE
COMP PLAN WAS APPROVED, THEY'RE
OFFERING TOWNHOUSES FOR WELL
OVER $1 MILLION. THE LEGISLATION
DOESN'T DO THAT. ALSO, I LOOKED
AT APARTMENTS.COM THE OTHER DAY,
AND THERE WAS 13,000 APARTMENTS
FOR RENT IN SEATTLE. SO WHAT IS
THIS BIG RUSH? WHY DON'T WE PUS
A LITTLE BIT AND UNDERSTAND THE
EFFECT OF WHAT WE'RE ACTUALLY
DOING. FURTHERMORE, THE COUNCIL
BILL RAISES CONCERNS OF THE
IMPLICATION OF UPZONING THROUGH
THE LAND USE COMMITTEE. IT IS
WIDELY RECOGNIZED THAT SUCH
CHANGES BE INCORPORATED INTO THE
PLAN. AGAIN, IT BEARS
RESEMBLANCE TO THE FEDERAL
GOVERNMENT. COMMUNITY MEETINGS
IN THE IMPACTED AREA SHOULD BE
HELD, NOT COMMUNITY MEETINGS
WITH LIMITED NOTICE. IT IS
IMPERATIVE TO ALLOW THE PLANNED
COMMITTEE TO FULFILL ITS
RESPONSIBILITIES. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU.
>> I THINK IT'S ME. OH, GREAT.
HI, COUNCIL, ALEX, DISTRICT
THREE RESIDENT. TODAY I'M HERE
TO SUPPORT HOP. HOUSING
OPPORTUNITY AMENDMENTS. AND
MAINLY, I WANT TO TAKE MY TIME
JUST TO THANK YOU GUYS FOR THIS
PARTICULAR ISSUE. YOU'VE
ALLOWED ME TO GET INVOLVED IN
CITY POLITICAL LIFE, AND THIS
HAS BEEN AN INCREDIBLE MOMENT
AND EXPERIENCE. I CAN SPEAK FOR
A NUMBER OF PEOPLE THAT ARE HERE
TODAY, WHO HAVE NEVER SPOKEN IN
A COMMITTEE MEETING BEFORE. I
THINK A LOT OF US JUST SEE THIS
AS ONE SMALL STEP IN THE NUMBER
OF THINGS WE NEED TO DO SO HAVE
AS MUCH HOUSING AS POSSIBLE IN
THE CITY. I'M A PROUD, VERY
PROUD SEATTLEITE. A SEATTLE
RESIDENT FOR MOST OF MY LIFE. I
THINK WE'RE THE BEST PLACE IN
THE WORLD, AND CITY HAS CHANGED
A TON. SOMETIMES NOT IN THE
EXACT WAY WE WANT IT, YOU ABOUT
IN A LOT OF WAYS IT REALLY HAS.
I RODE THE LIGHT RAIL ACROSS THE
LAKE THE OTHER DAY, AND I CANNOT
BELIEVE I CAN TAKE THAT TO MY
PARENTS' HOUSE. WE'RE HEADED
IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION ANYWAYS,
BUT I THINK IN HOUSING IN
PARTICULAR, WE'RE SEEING A
CLIFF. IT'S MAKING ME REALLY
CONCERNED, I WANT TO SEE PEOPLE
WHO WANT TO BE HERE TO BE ABLE
TO BE HERE AS LONG AS THEY WANT.
I THINK HOP IS JUST A SMALL
EXAMPLE OF WHAT WE CAN BE DOING,
AND HOPEFULLY NEXT YEAR WE CAN
WORK ON SOMETHING SIMILAR.
SOMETHING THAT IS MEASURABLE AND
GETS YOU RESULTS IN A SHORT
PERIOD OF TIME, WHILE OTHER WORK
IS GOING ON IN THE COMPREHENSIVE
PLAN, ET CETERA. SO THANK YOU
ALL VERY MUCH FOR YOUR SERVICE,
AND I'LL SEE YOU BACK HERE
SOON.
>> NEXT UP, WE HAVE SUSAN,
FOLLOWED BY ASHLEY.
>> AGAIN, REGARDING COUNCIL BILL
121196. THIS JUMPS AHEAD OF THE
MAYOR'S OWN COMPREHENSIVE
PROCESS, UPZONING SEVEN AREAS OF
THE CITY NOW. NO TREE
REQUIREMENTS. IT HARMS ANYONE IN
THE CITY WHOSE ABILITY TO STAY
IN THEIR NEIGHBORHOOD DEPENDS ON
THE CITY THAT LISTENS TO PROFIT
OVER CITIZENS. BEFORE ANY
COMPONENT MOVES TO A FULL
COUNCIL BILL REQUIRE A RACIAL
EQUITY TOOL ANALYSIS AND IMPACT
ASSESSMENT FOR EACH AFFECTED
NEIGHBORHOOD. NO RACIAL ANALYSIS
WAS CONDUCTED, THAT ALONE SHOULD
STOP THIS BILL. HOUSING STOCKS
WAY ABOVE LAST YEAR. I'M SEEING
MORE AND MORE FOR LEASE SIGNS UP
ACROSS THE CITY, WITH HEAVY
LEASE INCENTIVES FOR RENTERS,
WHICH STRONGLY REPRESENTS
DECLINING DEMAND. IT HAS A LOT
MORE TO DO WITH THE GROWING
WEALTH MAP. PLEASE CONSIDER
MECHANISMS THAT BETTER ADDRESS
THE TRUE ECONOMIC ISSUE OF THE
ECONOMIC DISPARITIES. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU.
>> NEXT UP WE HAVE ASHLEY. NEXT
WE HAVE JENNIFER.
>> HELLO, AGAIN. YOU MAY HAVE
GOTTEN NO SEPA COMMENTS POSSIBLY
BECAUSE VERY FEW SEEM TO KNOW
ABOUT THE CB 121196 PUBLIC
ENGAGEMENT WINDOW. I SPEND A LOT
OF TIME PROTECTING THE
ECOSYSTEM, AND I CAN'T ALWAYS
KEEP UP ON THESE BILLS. I DO
BELIEVE THIS BILL NEEDS AN
AFFECTIVE ENGAGEMENT PROCESS,
BEFORE ANY VOTE IS TAKEN,
ESPECIALLY WHILE SOME ARE MOVING
TO ELIMINATE ENVIRONMENTAL
REVIEW AND APPEALS. I CANNOT
WAIT FOR A SEATTLE THAT WALKS
THE EQUITY TALK WITH EQUAL
REPRESENTATION OF THOSE WHO
PROTECT THE ENVIRONMENT THAT
SUSTAINS US, ALSO, CENTRAL
DISTRICT PEOPLE LIKE RUBY AS
WELL AS THOSE WHO PROFIT THE
MOST, LIKE DEVELOPERS WHO HAVE
BEEN GETTING PRIVATE MONTHLY
MEETINGS FOR YEARS. PLEASER
REQUIRE A RACIAL EQUITY TOOL
ANALYSIS AND A SENIOR IMPACT
ASSESSMENT BEFORE ANY COMPONENT
MOVES TO A FULL COUNCIL VOTE.
THE CITY'S OWN FISCAL NOTES, NO
RACIAL ANALYSIS WAS CONDUCTED.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR WORK.
>> THANK YOU.
>> CHAIR, THAT'S OUR LAST
IN-PERSON COMMENTER. WE'LL NOW
MOVE ONTO OUR REMOTE COMMENTERS,
STARTING WITH JUNE.
>> HELLO. I'M JUNE FROM
DISTRICT 2. I'M SPEAKING IN
OPPOSITION TO COUNCIL BILL
121196. YOUR ACTIONS DO NOT
MATCH YOUR RHETORIC. WE KNOW
THIS SUPPLY SIDE ECONOMICS DOES
NOT WORK, POURING MORE RESOURCES
INTO AN INEQUITABLE SYSTEM MAKES
INEQUITY WORSE, NOT BETTER. THE
PEOPLE WHO ALREADY BENEFIT WILL
BENEFIT MORE. THE PEOPLE ALREADY
LEFT OUT, WILL BE LEFT OUT MORE.
POURING RESOURCES INTO A SYSTEM
FASTER, SIMPLY INCREASES
INEQUITY FASTER. I WANT THE CITY
TO CONDUCT AN ANALYSIS ON
HOUSING COSTS AND ON THE IMPACT
ON THE ENVIRONMENT. LOOK AT THE
BUILDING PERMITS THAT SBCI IS
APPROVING, PLACE YOUR ACTIONS ON
THAT,ING RATHER THAN THAT OF
BUILDERS THAT IS CONVEYED
THROUGH SECRET MEETINGS. JUMP
AHEAD OF THE PROCESS, TO GIVE
ZONING ORDINANCES NOW. PROPERTY
TAXES, LIVEABILITY, AND THE
ENVIRONMENT FOR PEOPLE WHO
ALREADY LIVE IN THESE
NEIGHBORHOODS. DO NOT ADVANCE CB
121196 AFTER A SINGLE PUBLIC
HEARING STILL REQUIRES A GENUINE
ENGAGEMENT PROCESS. SEVER THE
MADISON MILLER REZONING. REQUIRE
A RACIAL EQUITY TOOL KIT
ANALYSIS AND ITS SENIOR AND
FIXED INCOME ASSESSMENT FOR EACH
AFFECTED NEIGHBORHOOD, AS OTHER
PEOPLE HAVE ADVOCATED, BEFORE
ANY COMPONENT MOVES TO A FULL
COUNCIL VOTE. THE CITY HAS
ACKNOWLEDGED THAT THIS HAS NOT
BEEN DONE.
>> THANK YOU. NEXT, WE WILL HAVE
BONNEY WILLIAMS. BONNEY, PLEASE
PRESS STAR 6. BONNEY, PLEASE
PRESS STAR 6. OKAY. NEXT, WE
WILL HAVE SCOTT. SCOTT, PLEASE
PRESS STAR 6. OKAY, NEXT IS
SCOTT CLARK. SCOTT CLARK, PLEASE
PRESS STAR 6. I CAN SEE YOU'RE
MUTED.
>> CAN YOU HEAR ME NOW?
>> YES.
>> OKAY. GOOD MORNING. MY NAME
IS SCOTT CLARK. I'M A LICENSED
ARCHITECT IN SEATTLE AND A
FOUNDING PARTNER AT CLARK
BARNES. WE WHOLEHEARTEDLY
SUPPORT THE HOUSING
OPPORTUNITIES BILL 121196, AND
ENCOURAGE THE COUNCIL TO ADOPT
IT AS WRITTEN. THANK YOU VERY
MUCH. BYE BYE.
>> THANK YOU.
>> NEXT UP WE HAVE DAVID.
>> TODAY IS A REMINDER THAT THE
LANDLORDS SABOTAGED THE
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, AND WHAT
YOU'RE VOTING ON TODAY WAS
CREATED BY BRUCE HARRELL, THE
MOST RACIST, UNTRUSTWORTHY MAYOR
OTHER THAN ED MURRAY AND JENNY
DURKAN. I BRING THIS UP, BECAUSE
IT LOOKS LIKE YOU ALL ARE
LITERALLY TAKING INDUSTRIAL
COMMERCIAL ZONED AREAS AND
ACTING LIKE YOU'RE DOING FUTURE
GENERATIONS A FAVOR BY STICKING
THEM IN THE COMMERCIAL
INDUSTRIAL ZONES, AND JUST
CHANGING THE ZONING, ACTING LIKE
IT'S ALL GOOD, BUT YET YOU
DON'T ALLOW THEM TO GO HIGHER
TO GET A BETTER VIEW, YOU'RE
PUTTING THEM AT WHAT? 10FEET
HIGHER? LIKE SIX OR SEVEN
STORIES SO YOU'RE STILL
SURROUNDED BY OTHER COMMERCIAL
BUILDINGS, THAT YOU'RE SUPPOSED
TO GET A JOB AT. WE NEED
WALKABLE NEIGHBORHOODS WHERE THE
SIDE STREETS ARE LITERALLY TORE
UP, WHERE YOU HAVE GREEN
REDEVELOPMENTS THAT YOU CAN WALK
A BLOCK WITHOUT ACTUALLY WALKING
ON THE SIDE OF THE ROAD. BUT THE
THING THAT'S WEIRD ABOUT IT,
AND TELLTALE ABOUT HOW LANDLORDS
ON THE CITY COUNCIL ARE
SELF-DEALING WITH CONFLICTS OF
INTEREST THAT HAVE BACK STABBED
THE WORKING CLASS AND THE
RENTERS, STONE WAY IS REALLY
CLOSE TO THE SEATTLE PUBLIC
UTILITIES TRANSFER STATION,
WHICH IS LIKE A DUMP, AND YOU
ALL ARE SAYING WE'RE DOING YOU
ALL A FAVOR. WE'RE GOING TO
IMPROVE YOUR LIVEABILITY,
BECAUSE WE'RE GOING TO PUT YOU
IN THE INDUSTRIAL ZONE, BUT
WE'RE GOING TO CHANGE THE ZONE
TO RESIDENTIAL. BUT WE DON'T
WANT YOU TO LIVE IN OUR
NEIGHBORHOODS. WE DON'T WANT
YOU TO BUILD BACK BETTER IN OUR
NEIGHBORHOODS, BECAUSE WE'RE
REMORTGAGED. PEOPLE WHO BACK
STAB THE WORKING CLASS THINK
IT'S SUITABLE FOR PEOPLE TO
LIVE IN THE INDUSTRIAL ZONE,
HANGING OVER THE HIGHWAY, RIGHT
OVER THE TRANS ORIENTED TOXIC
ZONES, YOU ALL ARE HYPOCRITES.
>> THANK YOU.
>> BONNEY WILLIAMS, WE'RE GOING
TO COME BACK TO YOU. BONNEY,
PLEASE PRESS STAR 6.
>> HI. SORRY FOR THE -- GOOD
MORNING. I'M BONNEY WILLIAMS.
I'M A D4 RESIDENT. I AM AGAINST
CB 121215, HOUSING OPPORTUNITY
LEGISLATION. IT'S ANOTHER LAYER
OF REZONING. I'M NOT FOLLOWING.
I CANNOT FOLLOW THE PROCESS WHEN
COMP PLAN SELECT COMMITTEE IS
ASSORTED MAPS, REVIEWS IN 2024.
THE PUBLIC IS LOOKING TO SEE
REZONES INTRODUCED THROUGHOUT,
THROUGH THAT COMMITTEE AND HAVE
MUCH GREATER PUBLIC INPUT. THE
PROCESS HAS BEEN CALLED OUT
TODAY IN THE TESTIMONY. AND I
BELIEVE THAT THE COUNCIL SHOULD
PUSH THIS OFF TO PHASE 3. THE
MAYOR HAS INTRODUCED NEW UPZONES
THERE, IT MAKES MORE SENSE TO
PUT IT OFF SO THE PUBLIC CAN
REVIEW THIS LEGISLATION IN
FREMONT, DOWNTOWN, U DISTRICT,
BELLTOWN, RAINIER BEACH, AND
MORE. SOME OF THE TOWERS ARE
DOUBLE THE ORIGINAL HEIGHTS.
I'M AGAINST EXEMPTING NHA. I'M
GOING TO BE AGAINST ADDING
NEIGHBORHOOD RESIDENTIAL ZONES
AND LOW RISE ZONES TO THIS
LEGISLATION. I THINK PEOPLE, IF
THEY KNEW THAT THOSE THINGS WERE
IN THERE, THEY WOULD HAVE
SOMETHING TO SAY ABOUT IT.
TRANSPARENCY IS EXTREMELY
IMPORTANT IN THIS PROCESS. IF WE
GO TOO FAST IT MAKES MISTAKES.
IF YOU DO ROBUST COMMUNITY
ENGAGEMENT, YOU DON'T HAVE TO
WORRY AS MUCH ABOUT APPEALS AND
PROBLEMS LATER. I AGAIN, I SAY
THAT THE PROCESS HAS TO BE
TRANSPARENT, SO AGAIN, PUSH THIS
[ INAUDIBLE ] HISTORY. THANKS.
>> THANK YOU.
>> NEXT UP, WE HAVE RICHARD
ELLISON. RICHARD, PLEASE PRESS
STAR 6.
>> WELL, THANK YOU. MY NAME IS
RICHARD ELLISON. AND I'M A
RETIRED BIOLOGIST. I'VE WRITTEN
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENTS.
I'VE TAUGHT AT THE COMMUNITY
COLLEGES IN THE SEATTLE AREA. CB
121215 PROVIDES NO PUBLIC
NOTICE. IT GIVES AN EXEMPTIONS
ON ENVIRONMENTAL THRESHOLD
DETERMINATIONS AND ANY
COMPREHENSIVE PLANS AMENDMENTS.
THIS BY NOT ALLOWING THE
COMMUNITY TO REVIEW AND FILE
APPEALS ON ENVIRONMENTAL
DECISIONS THAT ARE CITYWIDE,
LEAVES US NOT ONLY POWERLESS,
BUT IT MISSES MANY OPPORTUNITIES
FOR THE COMMUNITY TO OFFER
MITIGATIONS TO HOW TO APPROVE
WHAT IS GOING ON HERE. THIS IS
LIKE THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION
AND HOW THEY OPERATE. WELL,
WE'RE JUST GOING TO DO WHAT WE
WANT. WE DON'T HAVE TO CARE.
WE'LL JUST CHANGE THE LAWS AND
DO WHAT WE WANT TO DO. THIS IS
LIKE IN CHINA, WHERE THEY DON'T
HAVE TO HAVE ENVIRONMENTAL
REVIEWS IF THEY DON'T WANT TO,
THEY JUST GO AHEAD AND BUILD.
THE COMPREHENSIVE VALUE USED TO
CALL FOR 1 IN 4 ENVIRONMENTAL
VALUES WERE STEWARDSHIP.
UNFORTUNATELY, I'M IN STRONG
FAVOR OF PUBLIC HOUSING AND MORE
HOUSING. BUT THE CITY LOOSENED
UP THE ZONING, GAVE IT AWAY A
LONG TIME AGO DOWN IN SOUTH LAKE
UNION AS A GIVEAWAY.
SUBSEQUENTLY, WE LOST ALL THE
LOWER INCOME AREAS FOR HOUSING,
AND IT WAS ALL BUILT UP. NOW THE
REMAINING PLACES THAT ARE --
EXIST ARE VERY COSTLY, I AGREE.
BUILD TALLER. BUILD AROUND
EXISTING LEGISLATION. GIVE US
OPEN SPACE FOR PEOPLE. BUT WHAT
YOU'RE DOING HERE IS CREATING
WILD WEST WITHOUT ANY CONTROLS,
AND SAYING, WELL, WE'RE ALLOWED
TO DO WHAT WE WANT, WE'RE THE
CITY COUNCIL. WE'LL JUST GET
RID OF ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW,
THANK YOU VERY MUCH. AND I FEEL
LIKE THIS IS A DISSERVICE TO THE
COMMUNITY.
>> THANK YOU.
>> CHAIR THAT CONCLUDES SPEAKERS
FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING.
>> THANK YOU, ALL. AS THAT WAS
OUR LAST REGISTERED SPEAKER
PRESENT TO SPEAK AT THE PUBLIC
HEARING, THE PUBLIC BILL ON
COUNSEL BILL 121196 IS NOW
CLOSED. THANK YOU TO OUR
PRESENTER AND STAFF FOR JOINING
US. COULD YOU PLEASE INTRODUCE
YOURSELF FOR THE RECORD?
>> HERE WE GO.
>> THANK YOU. COLLEAGUES. WE'VE
PREVIOUSLY HAD BRIEFINGS ON
THIS. ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS
ON THE HOUSING OPPORTUNITIES
LEGISLATION?
>> COUNCILMEMBER RINCK, PLEASE
GO AHEAD.
>> THANK YOU, CHAIR. JUST
COMMENTSES FOR TODAY. I WANT TO
START BY SAYING THIS HOUSING
OPPORTUNITIES LEGISLATION IS
BOTH NEEDED AND VERY EXCITING.
THIS BILL WILL HELP US BRING
ONLINE, A NUMBER OF PROJECTS
INCLUDING SOME AFFORDABLE
HOUSING PROJECTS WHILE ALSO
SUPPORTING SUSTAINABLE BUILDING
PRACTICES LIKE MASS TIMBER AND
PASSIVE HOUSE CONSTRUCTION. THAT
BEING SAID, I HAVE HIT A COUPLE
OF POINTS OF FRUSTRATION WHEN I
ATTEMPTED TO BRING FORWARD AND
DEVELOP SOME AMENDMENTS FOR THIS
BILL. AMENDMENTS THAT I BELIEVE
LIVE UP TO THE SPIRIT OF THIS
LEGISLATION AND SOME OVERARCHING
GOALS THAT I THINK WE CAN ALL
AGREE UPON. I WAS HOPING TO
BRING FORWARD TWO AMENDMENTS FOR
TODAY, THE FIRST OF WHICH WOULD
EXPAND THE DEFINITION OF
AFFORDABLE HOUSING TO ALIGN WITH
STATE LAW, BUT ALSO TO
INCORPORATE SOCIAL HOUSING AND
ADDITIONAL TIMES OF HOUSING. THE
SECOND AMENDMENT WOULD HAVE
EXPANDED INCENTIVES FOR GREEN
BUILDING PROJECTS.
UNFORTUNATELY, NEITHER OF MY
AMENDMENTS WILL BE VOTED ON
TODAY, DUE TO CONSTRAINTS OUR
CITY FACES UNDER THE
ENVIRONMENTAL ACT, KNOWN AS
SEPA, WHICH WE'VE DISCUSSED
TODAY. I FIND IT A LITTLE
IRONIC, IT'S HOLDING BACK ON US
EXPENDING FROM MORE
ENVIRONMENTAL FRIENDLY TYPES OF
HOUSING. THAT BEING SAID, I'M
STILL VERY EXCITED TO BE
SUPPORTING THIS LEGISLATION
TODAY, AND BE A SPONSOR ON THIS
LEGISLATION. THANK YOU, CHAIR
LIN FOR BRINGING THIS FORWARD.
>> THANK YOU COUNCILMEMBER
RINCK. ANY OTHER COMMENTS?
COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH.
>> THANK YOU, CHAIR. I HAD A
BRIEFING ABOUT IT, AND I KNOW
IT'S BEEN IN COMMITTEE AND
FULLY SUPPORTED. ONE OF THE
QUESTIONS THAT -- AND I DON'T
KNOW IF LIZ, YOU CAN ANSWER
THIS, AND I THINK I HAD ASKED
THE DEPARTMENT. MY ONLY
FRUSTRATION WITH THIS IS JUST
THE OUTREACH. I THINK THAT WE
CAN ALL AGREE THAT THE OUTREACH
NEEDS TO BE BETTER, AND
SOMETIMES IT'S JUST THE
EDUCATION PIECE. AND SO FOR ME,
I KNOW THAT PEOPLE HAVE BROUGHT
UP ABOUT THE ZONING AROUND
MADISON MILLER, SO THAT'S THE
YMCA, MEREDITH MATTHEWS YMCA,
IT'S EBENEZER, AME CHURCH, AND
THE THREE PARCELS THERE, THE
PARKING LOT, AND THEY HAVE OTHER
PIECES. SO I'M NOT GOING TO
SLOW DOWN THE LEGISLATION,
COLLEAGUES, I'M ABSTAINING
TODAY. I DO PLAN ON SUPPORTING
THIS, BUT I DO WANT TO CHECK
WITH THE PASTOR AT THAT CHURCH
AND OTHER -- AND SOME FOLKS AT
THE YMCA TO MAKE SURE THEY'RE
UNDERSTANDING OF THIS. I KNOW
PEOPLE HAD REQUESTED THIS
LEGISLATION TO COME FORWARD WITH
THE DIFFERENT ZONING. HOWEVER,
IT HAS COME TO MY KNOWLEDGE THAT
SOME OF THOSE PEOPLE WERE NOT
AWARE. SO I JUST WANT TO DO MY
DUE DILIGENCE AND DOUBLE CHECK.
I WAS TAKING WHAT THE DEPARTMENT
HAD TOLD ME TO BE THEIR
ASSESSMENT OF OUTREACH. I HAVE A
DIFFERENT DEFINITION. SO A LOT
OF THAT OUTREACH IS ALSO A
LITTLE BIT OF EDUCATION WITH
FOLKS, SO THEY CAN UNDERSTAND
LIKE WHAT'S GOING ON, MAKING IT
PALATABLE STORE PENAL. I
UNDERSTAND WE TALK ABOUT SEPA,
AND THERE WAS NO COMMENT. I
DON'T KNOW ANYONE WHO SOMETIMES
UNDERSTANDS WHAT SEPA IS. THEIR
OUTREACH IS USUALLY TO ME
SENDING AN EMAIL OR TEXT MESSAGE
OR SENDING INFORMATION OUT. SO
JUST FOR THE RECORD, I WILL BE
ABSTAINING. I'M NOT GOING TO
SLOW THIS DOWN. I JUST WANT
PEOPLE TO UNDERSTAND THAT ARE
WITHIN THAT AREA ABOUT SOME OF
THE CHANGES THAT ARE COMING TO
THE NEIGHBORHOOD. SO I REALLY
APPRECIATE YOUR PATIENCE ON
THIS, COLLEAGUES, THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCIL PRESIDENT
HOLLINGSWORTH. COLLEAGUES, ANY
OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS?
OKAY, WELL THANK YOU SO MUCH. I
APPRECIATE COUNCIL CENTRAL
STAFF, I APPRECIATE MY
COLLEAGUES. AND COUNCIL
PRESIDENT HOLLINGSWORTH, I
APPRECIATE YOUR -- OH, VICE
CHAIR STRAUSS, PLEASE.
>> HEY, SORRY, CHAIR LIN, FOR
THE LATE HAND THERE. STATING
I'M GOING TO RESERVE MY
COMMENTS FOR FULL COUNCIL. I'VE
BEEN TRACKING THIS FOR A NUMBER
OF YEARS. IT'S DISAPPOINTING TO
HEAR THAT SOME FOLKS DID NOT
HAVE A -- THE APPROPRIATE
OUTREACH. I'LL BE VOTING YES
TODAY, BUT I'LL BE RESERVING MY
COMMENTS FOR FULL COUNCIL. THANK
YOU, SIR.
>> OKAY. THANK YOU VICE CHAIR
STRAUSS. AGAIN, THANK YOU,
COLLEAGUES, AND YOU KNOW, I DO
THINK WE CAN ALWAYS DO BETTER IN
TERMS OF ENGAGEMENT AND OUTREACH
AND IT'S ALWAYS A BALANCE,
BECAUSE AT THE SAME TIME WE ALSO
HAVE TO MOVE FORWARD. AT SOME
POINT, WE DO HAVE TO MAKE
DECISIONS ON CRITICAL ISSUES FOR
OUR CITY, DESPITE THE FACT THAT
WE MAY, YOU KNOW, EVEN THOUGH WE
KNOW THAT THERE ARE MANY PEOPLE
THAT WANT TO HAVE MORE
ENGAGEMENT. WITH THAT, I WOULD
LIKE TO MOVE WITHOUT OBJECTION,
WOULD LIKE TO MOVE TO SUSPEND
THE RULE SO THAT WE CAN TAKE ON
THIS MATTER TODAY.
>> SECOND.
>> THANK YOU. SO HAVING
SECONDED, AND NOT SEEING ANY
OBJECTION, I MOVE THAT THE
COMMITTEE RECOMMEND PASSAGE OF
121196, IS THERE A SECOND?
>> SECOND.
>> THANK YOU. IT IS MOVED AND
SECONDED TO RECOMMEND PASSAGE OF
COUNCIL BILL 121196. IS THERE
ANY COMMENTS? WILL THE CLERK
PLEASE CALL THE ROLL OR
RECOMMENDATION THAT COUNCIL PASS
THE BILL?
>> VICE CHAIR STRAUSS.
>> AYE.
>> COUNCILMEMBER FOSTER.
>> YES.
>> COUNCIL PRESIDENT
HOLLINGSWORTH.
>> ABSTAIN.
>> COUNCILMEMBER RINCK.
>> YES.
>> CHAIR LIN.
>> YES.
>> THERE ARE FOUR VOTES.
>> IT BE WILL SENT TO THE JUNE
22nd CITY COUNCIL MEETING. WILL
THE CLERK PLEASE READ AGENDA
ITEM NUMBER 2?
>> COUNCIL BILL 21214. AMENDING
SECTION 23.84A.008, APPROVING A
WORK PLAN, DECLARING AN
EMERGENCY, AND ESTABLISHING AN
IMMEDIATE EFFECTIVE DATE, ALL BY
A THREE/FOUR VOTE OF THE CITY
COUNCIL.
>> I'M ERIC McCONAGHY ON THE
COUNCIL CENTRAL STAFF.
>> WE HAD A GENERAL DISCUSSION
ABOUT DATA CENTERS PREVIOUSLY.
WE NOW HAVE THE PROPOSED
MORATORIUM. OBVIOUSLY HEARD A
LOT OF PUBLIC COMMENT. IT'S BEEN
IN THE NEWS QUITE A BIT. THIS IS
FOR A BRIEFING AND DISCUSSION.
IT WILL COME BACK TO OUR NEXT
COMMITTEE MEETING AS WELL. SO NO
VOTE ON THIS TODAY. BUT DO ANY
COMMITTEE MEMBERS HAVE ANY
QUESTIONS? LET'S SEE. OKAY.
HOLD ON ONE SECOND.
COUNCILMEMBER FOSTER.
>> THANK YOU, SO MUCH. I
APPRECIATE THE OPPORTUNITY TO
ENGAGE IN THE CONVERSATION BEING
ABLE TO MOVE FORWARD WITH
LEGISLATION REGARDING DATA
CENTERS. I WONDER IF YOU CAN
SPEAK TO JUST THE CURRENT
CONSIDERATION AROUND ENSURING
THAT WE HAVE THIS APPROPRIATELY
SCOPED IN SIZE. WE HEARD A LOT
TODAY AROUND MAKING SURE THAT WE
HAVE COVERAGE FOR LARGE DATA
CENTERS. SO IF YOU CAN SPEAK TO
THAT, I THINK THAT WOULD BE VERY
HELPFUL.
>> I'LL DO MY BEST IN THE
ABSENCE OF HB HARPER WHO IS ON
POINT. WE SORT OF SWITCH OFF IN
TANDEM ON THIS TOPIC. THIS
AFTERNOON, I'LL BE SPEAKING TO
THE DATA CENTER THAT
COUNCILMEMBER JUAREZ IS THE
SPONSOR OF. THAT BEING SAID, MY
UNDERSTAND IS THERE IS SOME
ONGOING CONCERN ABOUT THE SIZE
OF THE DATA CENTERS, AND WE CAN
BRING SOME INFORMATION ABOUT
THAT TO YOU VERY SOON. SO
HOPEFULLY THAT'S HELPFUL, AND
JUST ACKNOWLEDGING THAT TERMS
LIKE MEGAVOLT, AMPEERS AND
THINGS -- AS YOUR CENTRAL STAFF
SO TO MAKE IT SO THAT A LAY
PERSON HAS A FIGHTING CHANCE TO
UNDERSTAND THE TERMINOLOGY. SO
WE'RE GOING TO DO OUR BEST.
>> THANK YOU, I APPRECIATE THAT.
I KNOW WHEN HB WAS HERE, ONE OF
THE THINGS SHE TALKED ABOUT WAS
HOW CHALLENGING IT IS, GIVEN
THERE'S SUCH A LACK OF CLEAR
DEFINITIONS ON SOME OF THE TERMS
WE'RE USING. I LOOK FORWARD TO
THAT ENGAGEMENT, AND AM HAPPY TO
TAKE THAT CONVERSATION OFFLINE.
THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER
FOSTER. COUNCILMEMBER RINCK.
>> THANK YOU, CHAIR. AND THANK
YOU TO ALL OF THE FOLKS WHO
TURNED OUT TODAY TO PROVIDE
COMMENTS ON THIS TOPIC. WE
DEFINITELY HEAR AND SHARE YOUR
CONCERNS. I'M WONDERING IF WE
CAN JUST DIVE IN, AND CAN YOU
EXPLAIN HOW WE LANDED ON THIS
DEFINITION OF DATA CENTER BEFORE
US?
>> AGAIN, I'LL DO MY BEST
CONSIDERING THAT I WAS SORT OF
PERIPHERAL TO THE CONVERSATION.
SO I ALSO WILL DEFER TO
COUNCILMEMBER LIN, PLEASE STEP
IN BECAUSE OF MY ROLE OF SORT OF
HELPING OUT AND FILLING IN FOR
HB. THERE ARE A WIDE RANGE OF
DATA CENTERS IN SEATTLE AND
ACROSS THE COUNTRY. WE'VE READ
ABOUT THEM IN THE NEWS AT
DIFFERENT SCALES. OTHER PLACES
HAVE FOUND WAYS TO SORT OF
MEASURE AND SCALE THESE. MY
UNDERSTANDING IS THAT THE SIZE
OF THE SCOPE IS THAT IT WOULD
CROSS SORT OF A SIGNIFICANT
THRESHOLD, YOU KNOW, MY WORDS,
NOT A LEGAL TERM, SO THAT IT
WOULD BE MEANINGFUL TO HAVE A
YEAR TO STUDY THE IMPACTS OF
DATA CENTERS, WITHIN THAT TIME,
AND YET NOT SORT OF CAPTURE DATA
CENTERS OR SIMILAR THINGS OF A
SMALLER SIZE THAT DON'T RISE TO
THE OCCASION. HOPEFULLY I'M
SORT OF ACCURATELY REPRESENTING
THAT, BUT I'M HAPPY TO BE A
LITTLE BIT WRONG AND HEAR BETTER
FROM COUNCILMEMBER LIN.
>> THANK YOU SO MUCH. YEAH, WE
WORKED WITH CENTRAL STAFF. WE
WORKED WITH DIFFERENT
STAKEHOLDERS AND YOU KNOW, THIS
HAS BEEN AN ISSUE AROUND THE
COUNTRY, AND WE'VE HAD,
ESPECIALLY WITH THE MEGADATA
CENTERS, YOU KNOW, WITH THE
INCREASED INTEREST AROUND THE
LANGUAGE MODELS AROUND
ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE, AND WE
HAVE HAD DATA CENTERS, AND WE
HAVE DATA CENTERS IN SEATTLE
TODAY. SMALLER DATA CENTERS,
COLLOCATED, OFTENTIMES,
ACCESSORY USE. WHAT WE HAVE NOT
SEEN TO DATE IS THESE, YOU KNOW,
WHAT ARE TYPICALLY DESCRIBED AS
DATA CENTERS, THESE STAND ALONE
FACILITIES THAT ARE REALLY IN
DEMAND. SO WE LARGELY ADOPTED
THE, WHAT WAS ORIGINALLY A 20
MEGAWATT DEFINITION THAT IS
BEING PROPOSED. THAT WAS
PROPOSED THIS PAST LEGISLATION
SESSION AT THE STATE LEVEL. IT
IS BEING PROPOSED AROUND THE
COUNTRY. AND PART OF THE IDEA
WAS TO HAVE A STANDARD
DEFINITION SO THAT WE COULD WORK
CROSS JURISDICTIONS WITH OUR
OTHER CITIES, WITH THE STATE,
BECAUSE IT'S GOING TO BE
DIFFICULT IF WE ALL HAVE
DIFFERENT DEFINITIONS ON WHAT A
DATA CENTER, OR RATHER A
MEGADATA CENTER MIGHT BE. THERE
ARE TECHNICAL ISSUES HERE IN
TERMS OF MEGAWATTS OR MEGAVOLTS,
AND HOW THOSE TRANSLATE TO EACH
OTHER BASED ON SORT OF OUR
RESEARCH, WE ENDED UP LANDING
WITH THE MEGAVOLT DEFINITION.
BUT THAT DOESN'T MEAN IT'S THE
PERMANENT DEFINITION. WE NEEDED
TO COME UP WITH SOMETHING
QUICKLY FOR THE MORATORIUM. BUT
I DO ANTICIPATE THAT WE'LL HAVE
DIFFERENT DEFINITIONS FOR THE
PERMANENT LEGISLATION THAT WILL
DISTINGUISH BETWEEN THESE
MEGADATA CENTERS AND OTHER SORT
OF SMALLER ONES, WHICH, YOU
KNOW, FOR EXAMPLE, THE CITY HAS
ITS OWN TECHNOLOGICAL NEEDS. OUR
911 CENTER HAS TECHNOLOGICAL
NEEDS. YOU KNOW, WE NEED TO
ALLOW FOR THOSE TYPES OF
COLLOCATED ESSENTIAL SERVICES
TYPES OF TECHNOLOGY, AND DATA
CENTERS WHILE ALSO PUTTING
REASONABLE, AT LEAST IN MY
OPINION, REASONABLE REGULATIONS
AROUND THESE MUCH LARGER
MEGADATA CENTERS. SO THAT'S HOW
WE CAME UP WITH THAT DEFINITION
SO FAR. CERTAINLY HAPPY TO GET
INPUT FROM COLLEAGUES, FROM
STAKEHOLDERS AND OTHERS, BUT
THAT'S THE HISTORY OF THAT
DEFINITION.
>> THANK YOU FOR THAT, CHAIR
LIN. THAT'S REALLY HELPFUL TO
UNDERSTAND, AND I KNOW THIS IS
NOW OUR SECOND DISCUSSION IN
COMMITTEE ON THIS TOPIC, AND I
IMAGINE A NUMBER OF THE
QUESTIONS I RAISED DURING OUR
FIRST COMMITTEE MEETING, WE
STILL DON'T HAVE ANSWERS TO.
AND I ACCEPT THAT IN THIS
MOMENT, BECAUSE WE'RE MOVING
QUICKLY, SO I REALLY WANT TO
COMMEND YOU FOR TAKING THIS
APPROACH, OF FIRST INTRODUCING A
MORATORIUM THAT WILL ALLOW US TO
TAKE A PAUSE AND UNDERSTAND HOW
TO LEGISLATE AND REGULATE AROUND
DATA CENTERS. I WANT TO COMMENT
YOU, COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS AS
WELL AS COUNCILMEMBER
HOLLINGSWORTH ON YOUR EFFORT.
EAGER TO LEARN MORE AS WE
CONTINUE THIS ENDEAVOR, AND
THANK YOU AGAIN, FOR YOUR WORK
ON THIS.
>> YEAH, THANK YOU SO MUCH,
COUNCILMEMBER RINCK. SIMILAR TO
YESTERDAY'S DISCUSSION AROUND
INTERIM LEGISLATION, ASSUMING
THIS DOES PASS, IT WILL BE
INTERIM LEGISLATION THAT WILL
NEED TO DEVELOP A WORK PLAN,
WHICH WILL BE ABLE TO HONE IN ON
ALL OF THOSE FINE DETAILS. ANY
OTHER, COUNCIL PRESIDENT
HOLLINGSWORTH?
>> THANK YOU, CHAIR, AND THANK
YOU FOR YOUR LEADERSHIP ON THIS,
AND I KNOW THE LEGISLATION WILL
BE HEARD IN THE PARKS AND CITY
LIGHT COMMITTEE TODAY, WITH
COUNCILMEMBER JUAREZ. EXCUSE ME.
I'M SO VERY GRATEFUL FOR THAT.
AND I KNOW IT'S KIND OF BEEN A
CONCERT OF THINGS HOW THINGS ARE
MOVING, AND THERE HAVE BEEN SOME
PEOPLE THAT HAVE REACHED OUT,
AND I ALSO KNOW THERE ARE SOME
THINGS THAT WE'RE STILL WORKING
OUT WITH THE MORATORIUM, AND AS
YOU MENTIONED, IF IT PASSES,
THIS IS FOR A YEAR TO DO A
RESET. I THINK I SHARE YOUR
UNDERSTANDING, AND YOUR VALUES,
THAT WE'RE NOT TRYING TO HINDER
GROWTH IN OUR CITY, BUT
UNDERSTANDING THAT YOU KNOW, WE
NEED TO DO SOME MORE ASSESSMENT,
AND SOME MORE WORK WITH SOME OF
THE DATA CENTER. AND ALL DATA
CENTERS ARE NOT THE SAME. A LOT
ARE DIFFERENT. AND I WAS JUST
CURIOUS, ERIC, WITH YOUR BEST
KNOWLEDGE FOR THE PUBLIC, COULD
YOU GO INTO A LITTLE BIT OF
DETAIL POTENTIALLY OF SOME
DIFFERENCE OF DATA CENTERS? IS
THAT POSSIBLE?
>> I WILL GO UNTIL -- I'LL GO
RIGHT TO THE EDGE, AND NOT STEP
BEYOND LIKE WHERE I GET --
>> LIKE HOW WE CURRENTLY HAVE
DATA CENTERS, WHAT IS CURRENTLY
IN SEATTLE, AND WHAT ARE THEY
KICKING UP IN THEIR CLOUDS?
>> SO ANY CITY LIKE SEATTLE
WORKS WITH DATA CENTERS, WORKING
WITH THE CLOUD. THE CONNECTIONS
IN AND OUT, THE POWER, THE
PERSONNEL THAT DO THAT. AND
THEY'RE USED FOR LOTS OF
DIFFERENT THINGS, AS ALREADY HAS
BEEN MENTIONED IN THE NEWS AND
IN THE DEVELOPMENTS AROUND THE
COUNTRY, THERE ARE THESE SORT OF
MEGADATA CENTERS THAT ARE REALLY
CONNECTED TO A.I. TECHNOLOGIES,
AND ALL SORTS OF THINGS. AT THE
SAME TIME, DAY IN AND DAY OUT
THERE ARE DATA CENTERS THAT
SERVE MAYBE SORT OF MORE
PROSAIC, ORDINARY THINGS LIKE
RUNNING THE INTERNET AND THINGS
LIKE THAT. THEY RANGE IN SIZE.
THEY CAN BE CONNECTED. THEY
COULD BE, YOU KNOW, ON A FLOOR,
IN A BUILDING DOWNTOWN. THEY
COULD BE ON A LARGE SORT OF
FLOOR PLATE IN A WAREHOUSE
LOOKING BUILDING IN EASTERN
WASHINGTON. SO, YOU KNOW, THEY
RANGE QUITE A BIT. IT'S SORT OF
LIKE IF SOMEONE SAYS HI SMALL
NEIGHBOR, AND THEY'VE GOT A
DOG. WE'RE ALSO GOING TO HAVE
AN IDEA OF WHAT THAT DOG IS.
THERE ARE REALLY DIFFERENT SIZES
AND DIFFERENT NEEDS. DATA
CENTER, JUST BY SAYING SO
DOESN'T REALLY TELL US WHAT IT
IS. I THINK THAT COMES BACK
AROUND TO WHAT YOU AND YOUR
COLLEAGUES ARE SORT OF COPING
WITH, AND ASKING US TO HELP
DEFINE IN TERMS OF, FOR THE
MORATORIUM. WHAT DO WE MEAN BY
DATA CENTER, SO THAT'S A
FUNCTIONAL WORD TO USE.
COUNCILMEMBER LIN JUST
ARTICULATED WHAT WILL THE --
HOPEFULLY I ANSWERED YOUR
QUESTION, AND WAS ABLE TO
UNDERSCORE THAT, YEAH, DATA
CENTERS ARE ACTIVE, AND IN USE
HERE IN SEATTLE. IT'S A
BUSINESS THAT OPERATES IN
SEATTLE. IT'S A SERVICE THAT
THE CITY OF SEATTLE ALSO USES,
AND NOT REVEALING ANY SECRETS
THERE. THAT IS NOW -- I DON'T
THINK THAT REALLY IS THE
QUESTION OR THE PROBLEM THAT THE
COUNCILMEMBER IS ARTICULATING,
PER SE, IT'S ABOUT SCALE, AND
RESOURCES, AND JOBS AND THINGS
LIKE THAT. SO HOPEFULLY, IS THAT
WHAT YOU'RE LOOKING FOR, YEAH?
>> ABSOLUTELY. AND IF I MAY,
CHAIR, ONE MORE, AND THIS IS WHY
I LOVE THE RESOLUTION AND I LOVE
THE THOUGHT PROCESS BEHIND THE
MORATORIUM, BECAUSE WORKING IN
CONCERT TOGETHER, IT ALSO HAS US
REQUESTING TO THE DEPARTMENTS TO
UNDERSTAND ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACTS. IS THERE ANY PUBLIC
BENEFIT FROM THIS? WHAT TYPE OF
-- CAN IT BE SOME HEATING AND
COOLING THAT GOES ON? IS THERE
SOME INFRASTRUCTURE EXPENSE THAT
CAN BE MADE AND UPDATED WITH
SOME OF THE DATA CENTERS
INVESTING BACK INTO THE
COMMUNITY? LIKE THERE'S A LOT
OF THINGS THAT WE NEED TO
EXPLORE, HOLISTICALLY, SO
THAT'S WHY I PRETTY MUCH THE
MORATORIUM THAT YOU'RE
PROVIDING, AND ALSO
COUNCILMEMBER JUAREZ WILL BE
BRINGING TO THE COMMITTEE LATER
ON TODAY. IT'S NOT A KNEE JERK
REACTION. IT'S ALL IN CONCERT
WITH EACH OTHER. AND I JUST
REALLY APPRECIATE THAT. I JUST
WANTED TO SAY ALL OF. THAT THANK
YOU, THANK YOU ERIC AND CHAIR AS
WELL.
>> THANK YOU FOR YOUR
PARTNERSHIP WITH THIS. IF
THERE'S NO FURTHER QUESTIONS OR
COMMENTS, WE ARE GETTING PRETTY
LATE HERE IN THE MORNING, SO WE
CAN COME BACK TO THIS IN OUR
NEXT COMMITTEE MEETING. OKAY.
SEEING NO FURTHER QUESTIONS OR
COMMENTS, I'D LIKE TO MOVE ONTO
OUR THIRD ITEM OF BUSINESS. WILL
THE CLERK PLEASE READ AGENDA
ITEM THREE?
>> AGENDA ITEM THREE, COUNCIL
BILL 121215, AN ORDINANCE
RELATING TO COUNSEL LAND USE
DECISIONS, AMENDING SECTIONS
23.76.050, 23. 23.76.062, AND
25.05.680.
>> THANK YOU, LIZ FOR JOINING
US. CAN YOU PLEASE INTRODUCE
YOURSELF FOR THE RECORD?
>> LISH WHITSON, COUNCIL CENTRAL
STAFF.
>> THANK YOU, LISH, AND THANK
YOU COLLEAGUES AND TO MEMBERS OF
THE PUBLIC WHO COMMENTED TODAY
ON THIS ISSUE. THIS IS JUST AN
INITIAL BRIEFING, AS MENTIONED
EARLIER, WE WILL BE HOLDING A
PUBLIC HEARING ON THIS PROPOSAL.
THIS IS JUST TO GET THOSE
INITIAL THOUGHTS AND QUESTIONS
OUT SO THAT WE CAN HAVE A ROBUST
COMMUNITY DIALOGUE ON THAT.
UNFORTUNATELY, I KNOW THAT
THERE'S A QUESTION WHETHER WE
WILL HAVE A PRESENTATION. WE DO
NOT HAVE A PRESENTATION TODAY.
BUT WE CERTAINLY HAVE VERY
QUALIFIED CENTRAL STAFF HERE TO
ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS OR TO JUST
TALK US THROUGH THE PROPOSAL. SO
WITH THAT, I'LL LET YOU
PROCEED.
>> YEAH. SO COUNCILMEMBER 121215
AMENDS LAND USE CODE IN THE
STATE SEPA REGULATIONS TO REMOVE
TWO IMPEDIMENTS OF LAND USE
CHANGES. FIRST, IT BRINGS
SEATTLE IN LINE WITH OTHER LARGE
JURISDICTIONS IN WASHINGTON
STATE BY REMOVING APPEALS OF
SEPA DETERMINATIONS TO THE
SEATTLE HEARING EXAMINER. IT
WOULD APPLY TO DEVELOPMENT
REGULATIONS AND COMPREHENSIVE
PLAN AMENDMENTS, AND DEVELOPMENT
REGULATIONS UNDER STATE LAW,
MEANING THE CONTROLS PLACED ON
DEVELOPMENT OR LAND USE
ACTIVITIES BY A COUNTY OR CITY,
INCLUDING ZONING ORDINANCES,
ORDINANCES AND SHORELINE MASTER
PROGRAMS. THIS SECTION OF THE
BILL STILL MAINTAINS
OPPORTUNITIES FOR MEMBERS OF THE
PUBLIC TO COMMENT ON SEPA
DETERMINATIONS OFTEN DEPARTMENTS
ISSUING A DETERMINATION OF
NON-SIGNIFICANT OR FINAL
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT
WILL PULL BACK THEIR DECISIONS
BASED ON COMMENTS THEY RECEIVED
DURING THAT EARLY COMMENT
PERIOD. THAT COMMENT PERIOD
STILL WILL REMAIN. MEMBERS OF
THE PUBLIC WILL BE ABLE TO VOICE
ANY CONCERNS WITH ENVIRONMENTAL
REVIEW TO THE CITY COUNCIL. IT
DOES -- AND REMOVING THE HEARING
EXAMINER'S APPEAL PROCESS DOES
NOT REMOVE ANY SEPA APPEALS
PROCESSES. SO HEARING TO THE
COURTS STILL REMAIN TO THE
EXTENT PERMITTED UNDER STATE
LAW. IN ADDITION, IF COUNCIL CAN
ALWAYS ASK FOR ADDITIONAL
INFORMATION IF THEY HEAR
CONCERNS OR COMPLAINTS ABOUT
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW, THAT THEY
DEEM ARE APPROPRIATE. THE SECOND
ACT OF THE BILL IS TO REMOVE A
REQUIREMENT THAT THERE BE A
DIRECTOR'S REPORT FOR TYPE 5
LAND USE ACTION SPONSORED BY USE
OF THE COUNCIL. IT DOES PROVIDE
AN OPPORTUNITY FOR
COUNCILMEMBERS TO REQUEST A
REPORT IF ONE ISN'T PROVIDED.
AND IT BRINGS US BACK IN LINE
WITH THE COUNCIL'S PRACTICE
PRIOR TO AN ADVERSE RULING BY
THE GROWTH MANAGEMENT HEARINGS
BOARD LAST YEAR. JUST AS A
REMAINDER, TYPE 5 LAND USE
DECISIONS ARE DECISIONS THAT ARE
LEGISLATIVE ACTIONS BY THE CITY
COUNCIL LIKE THE TWO OTHER BILLS
YOU'RE SEEING TODAY, AREA-WIDE
REZONES, ZONING AND A FEW OTHER
LEGISLATIVE ACTIONS THAT THE
COUNCIL TAKES. NEITHER OF THESE
SECTIONS OF THE BILL WILL TOUCH
A QUASI JUDICIAL ACTIONS WHICH
STILL GO CAN THROUGH THE SEATTLE
HEARING EXAMINER AND THE HEARING
EXAMINER HOLDS A PUBLIC HEARING
ON THE QUASI JUDICIAL ACTIONS
AND THAT PROCESS WILL STILL
CONTINUE.
>> YEAH. THANK YOU, COLLEAGUES.
ANY QUESTIONS? COUNCILMEMBER
RINCK.
>> THANK YOU, CHAIR. A FEW
QUESTIONS FOR TODAY AS WE'RE
JUST STARTING TO UNPACK THIS
TOPIC. LISH CAN YOU EXPLAIN
BROADLY WHAT SEPA-RELATED RULES
ARE REQUIRED BY THE STATE, AND
WHAT RULES THE CITY HAS
VOLUNTARILY EXPANDED?
>> SO THERE'S A LOT THERE. I'LL
JUST FOCUS ON THE SUBJECT OF
THIS BILL WHICH IS THAT THE
STATE PROVIDES FOR THE CITY TO
USE A HEARING EXAMINER TO
CONSIDER APPEALS OF SEPA, FINAL
SEPA DETERMINATION. SO THE FINAL
DETERMINATION THAT THERE ARE NO
ADVERSE SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS OF A
DECISION OR THE PUBLICATION OF A
FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
STATEMENT. BUT IT DOES NOT
REQUIRE THE CITY TO HAVE THOSE
APPEALS AND MANY OF THE LARGE
JURISDICTIONS AROUND US DO NOT
HAVE HEARING EXAMINER APPEALS.
DOES THAT ANSWER YOUR QUESTION?
>> YEAH, I UNDERSTAND THAT. I'M
TRYING TO HAVE A MORE HOLISTIC
VIEW OF OTHER AMENDMENTS RELATED
TO SEPA, WHERE THERE'S A STATE
REQUIREMENT, AND IF THERE'S
ANYTHING IN ADDITION, EVEN IF
IT'S OUTSIDE OF THE PRACTICAL
MATTER, ANY ADDITION THAT THE
CITY VOLUNTARILY CHOOSES TO
EXPAND ON.
>> SO IT'S DEFINITELY AN AREA
WHERE THE STATE LEGISLATURE HAS
BEEN MOVING QUICKLY TO AMEND
STATE REGULATIONS AND WE
HAVEN'T QUITE KEPT UP WITH IT,
SO THERE -- AND DON'T HAVE ANY
EXAMPLES RIGHT OFF THE TOP OF MY
HEAD, BUT THERE ARE TYPES OF
CITY DECISIONS THAT PREVIOUSLY
WHERE UNDER STATE LAW REQUIRED
BOTH TO GO UNDER SEPA REVIEW.
BUT THE CITY HAS SINCE EXEMPTED
THEM FROM A SEPA REVIEW.
HOWEVER, OUR CITY LAW STILL
REQUIRES SEPA REVIEW. AND SO IN
THE CITY OF SEATTLE, EVEN THOUGH
THERE IS A STATE EXEMPTION, WE
STILL NEED TO REVIEW PROJECTS
UNTIL WE UPDATE THOSE
REGULATIONS.
>> INTERESTING. OKAY. THANK YOU
FOR THAT. CAN YOU ALSO ELABORATE
ON WHAT POINTS IN WHICH REPEAL
OR LEGAL ACTION CAN BE BROUGHT
FOR THESE TYPES OF LAND USE
DECISIONS? MIGHT HAVE COVERED
THAT, BUT IF YOU CAN JUST LAY
THAT OUT AGAIN, THAT WILL BE
HELPFUL.
>> SO IN TERMS OF THE -- WE ARE
RELYING ON THE STATE DEFINITION
OF DEVELOPMENT REGULATION, AND
ALSO IT WOULD APPLY TO A
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. DEVELOPMENT
REGULATIONS ARE CONTROLS PLACED
ON LAND USE BY A COUNTY OR CITY.
THE ONES THE COUNCIL SEES ARE
REZONES, ZONING TEXT AMENDMENTS,
DESIGNATIONS OF MAJOR
INSTITUTIONS, AND MAJOR
INSTITUTION MASTER PLANS. I
THINK I SAID AREA-WIDE REZONES.
PUBLIC FACILITIES THAT RECEIVE
AN EXEMPTION FROM DEVELOPMENT
STANDARDS THAT ARE OTHERWISE
PERMITTED. THOSE ARE THE TYPES
OF THINGS THAT WOULD BE AFFECTED
BY THESE REGULATIONS.
>> I KNOW WE HAD A LITTLE BIT OF
DISCUSSION ABOUT THIS IN COUNCIL
BRIEFING. I BELIEVE
COUNCILMEMBER JUAREZ BROUGHT UP
SOME QUESTIONS ABOUT DELAYS THAT
CAN COME UP, AND WHAT MAKES --
WHAT CAN ADD TIME. HOW MUCH OF A
DELAY ARE WE CURRENTLY FACING ON
AVERAGE, OR HAVE THOSE DELAYS
INCREASED IN RECENT YEARS WITH
MORE APPEALS GOING TO THE
HEARING EXAMINER?
>> YEAH, SO I LOOKED BACK AT THE
LAST TEN YEARS OF APPEALS TO THE
HEARING EXAMINER, THERE ARE
ABOUT 25 APPEALS. MANY OF THEM,
MULTIPLE APELLENTS, SO I THINK
THERE WERE 64 APELLENTS TOTAL
FOR THOSE 25 APPEALS. SO FOR THE
MOST FREQUENT APPEAL ON THE
DECISION IS TO DISMISS THEM, AND
THAT TAKES BETWEEN A MONTH AND
THREE TO FOUR MONTHS TO SORT OF
CONSIDER THAT JUST OUTRIGHT
DISMISSAL THAT THERE IS A
LEGITIMATE APPEAL. THERE ARE A
NUMBER WHERE THE DETERMINATION
IS AFFIRMED. SO THE HEARING
EXAMINER GOES THROUGH A HEARING
PROCESS AND DETERMINES THAT,
YES, THE DECISION WAS MADE
CORRECTLY. ON AVERAGE THAT TAKES
285 DAYS. SO I THINK THAT'S
LIKE SEVEN, EIGHT MONTHS. THERE
HAVE ONLY BEEN TWO WHERE THE
CITY DEPARTMENT'S DECISION WAS
ACTUALLY REMANDED OR REVERSED.
ONE RELATED TO ACCESSORY
DWELLING UNITS, WHERE THE
HEARING EXAMINER DETERMINED THAT
DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE
WAS NOT APPROPRIATE, AND THE
FINAL, THAT THE EIS SHOULD BE
DRAFTED. THAT TOOK SIX MONTHS TO
GET TO THAT DECISION. AND THE
OTHER RELATED TO IMPACT FEES
WHERE SORT OF THAT WAS THE CITY
COUNCIL SPONSORED LEGISLATION.
THAT TOOK, I THINK 15 MONTHS TO
GET TO A DECISION THAT REVERSED
THE ORIGINAL ENVIRONMENTAL
DETERMINATION. SOME OF THE
BIGGEST PROJECTS, THE MHA
LEGISLATION ULTIMATELY MOST OF
THE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW WAS
AFFIRMED BY THE HEARING
EXAMINER, THAT TOOK OVER A YEAR,
THAT HEARING PROCESS, AND THERE
WAS A TRANSPORTATION IMPACT FEE
PROCESS THAT TOOK ABOUT A YEAR.
YEAH.
>> THANK YOU FOR WALKING US
THROUGH AS WE CONSIDER THIS,
WE'D LOVE TO JUST SEE MORE OF
THAT INFORMATION TO JUMP AROUND
TIMELINES ASSOCIATED WITH
APPEALS AND MY FINAL QUESTION
FOR TODAY, CHAIR, IF I MAY, JUST
TO REITERATE THIS POINT AGAIN,
HOW MANY OTHER -- AND WHICH
JURISDICTIONS WOULD, I SHOULD
REPHRASE MY QUESTION. WITH THIS
PROPOSED CHANGE, THIS WOULD
BRING US INTO ALIGNMENT, OR ON
PAR WITH WHICH JURISDICTIONS?
AGAIN, BRING US INTO ALIGNMENT
WHERE WE'RE NOT GOING BEYOND
WHAT STATE LAW IS REQUIRED.
>> OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD, KING
COUNTY, BELLEVUE, EVERETT,
TACOMA.
>> UNDERSTOOD. THANK YOU. THANK
YOU, CHAIR.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER
RINCK, CHAIR FOSTER.
>> THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR
BRINGING THIS FORWARD, AND I
WANTED TO HAVE THIS DISCUSSION.
I WANTED TO ASK YOU, LISH, IF
YOU COULD SPEAK, A LITTLE BIT
MORE TO THE TYPES OF LAND USE
ACTIONS THAT WE'RE THINKING
ABOUT, BECAUSE THERE'S A
SPECIFIC FOCUS HERE ON COUNCIL
GENERATED AND TOP 5. CAN YOU
JUST SORT OF SPEAK TO THAT, SO
THAT WE'RE CLEAR ON THE SCOPE?
>> YEAH, SO THAT IS IN
PARTICULAR FOR THE DIRECTOR'S
REPORTS, AND THE REQUIREMENT FOR
DIRECTOR'S REPORT. THE THREE
TYPE FIVE LEGISLATIVE DECISIONS
THE COUNCIL MOST FREQUENTLY SEES
ARE LAND USE CODE TEXT
REQUIREMENTS, AREA WIDE USE.
AMENDMENTS TO NOT JUST ONE PIECE
OF PROPERTY, WHICH IS A TYPE
FOUR DECISION, BUT AMENDMENTS TO
A BROADER AREA. AND WAIVERS, OR
MODIFICATIONS OF DEVELOPMENT
STANDARDS FOR CITY FACILITIES.
REALISTICALLY, GENERALLY, THE
COUNCIL ITSELF WILL BE PROPOSING
LAND USE CODE TEXT AMENDMENTS. I
HAVEN'T SEEN MANY, OR ANY
REZONES, OR MODIFICATIONS TO
CITY FACILITIES PROPOSED BY THE
COUNCIL, RATHER THAN THE
EXECUTIVE. OTHER TYPES OF TYPE
FIVE DECISIONS THAT ARE
CORRECTIONS OF ERRORS ON THE
ZONING MAP. CONSENT APPROVALS
FOR EXPANSION OF CITY
FACILITIES. MAJOR INSTITUTION
DESTINATIONS, WHERE THE COUNCIL
SAYS YES, THIS HOSPITAL, OR
UNIVERSITY, OR COLLEGES OR MAJOR
INSTITUTION. ADOPTION OF PLANNED
ACTION ORDINANCES WHICH ARE SORT
OF CAMPUS DEVELOPMENT. SO
MULTI-PHASED DEVELOPMENT. DOES
NOT INCLUDE QUASIY JUDICIAL
DECISIONS. SO NO ADOPTIONS OF
MAJOR INSTITUTION MASTER PLANS
OR PUBLIC FACILITIES NEEDING
COUNCIL APPROVAL THAT ARE NOT
CITY OWNED.
>> THANK YOU FOR THAT. I
APPRECIATE THE CLARIFICATION. I
WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT WE HAD
THAT INTO THE RECORD. THANK YOU,
CHAIR.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER
FOSTER. COUNCILMEMBER, VICE
CHAIR STRAUSS.
>> THANK YOU, CHAIR. AND THANK
YOU FOR BRINGING THIS FORWARD TO
COMMITTEE TODAY. I GUESS I WAS
EXPECTING A PRESENTATION OR A
BILL DRAFT. WHILE I REALLY DO
APPRECIATE LISH'S MEMO HERE,
HAVING A PRESENTATION WALKING
THROUGH THE DIFFERENT ASPECTS OF
THIS HELPS ME, IN MY OUTREACH TO
RES DENTS AND TO STAKEHOLDERS.
SO I DO JUST WANT TO CHECK IN ON
PROCESS HERE. IS TODAY'S
MEETING CONSIDER THE ONE OF THE
TWO MEETINGS BEFORE TAKING A
VOTE? ARE WE GOING TO HAVE A
COUPLE MORE MEETINGS BEFORE WE
-- AND RECEIVE THE WRITTEN BILL?
HOW ARE WE MOVING FORWARD ON
THIS?
>> THE NEXT STEP WAS TO HAVE A
PUBLIC HEARING ON JULY 1st. HOLD
ON. I'M GOING TO DEFER TO MY
ESTEEMED COLLEAGUE, THADDEUS.
JUNE3rd, JUNE 17th. OKAY.
JUNE3rd, JUNE 17th, AND THEN A
PUBLIC HEARING ON JULY 1st ARE
THE NEXT STEPS.
>> OKAY, GREAT. AND SOMETHING
THAT I'VE SHARED IN THE PAST,
AND MIGHT BE, I GUESS WE NEED TO
GO A LITTLE FASTER NOW, BECAUSE
WE'VE STARTED DEVELOPING THE
CONCEPT FOR TRIBAL NOTIFICATION
IN THE SAME WAY THAT SEPA
PROVIDES FEDERALLY RECOGNIZED
TRIBES NOTIFICATION OF WORK TO
BE DONE IN THE SOIL, WHICH HAS
BEEN THEIR HOME SINCE TIME OF
MEMORIAL. THAT'S A PROBLEM THAT
WE'VE NEEDED TO FIX FOR QUITE
SOME TIME, AND IF WE'RE GOING
TO BE CHANGING OUR SEPA REVIEW
HERE AT THE CITY, I THINK WE
NEED TO DO THE SAME, BOTH AT THE
SAME TIME. I UNDERSTAND THAT MY
CONCEPT MIGHT BE A LITTLE BIT
FARTHER BEHIND YOURS, BUT IT
SOUNDS LIKE WE NEED TO GET THAT
STARTED NOW, BECAUSE IT'S
IMPORTANT FOR ME THAT WE PROVIDE
THAT TRIBAL NOTIFICATION. BUT
THANK YOU FOR BRINGING FORWARD
THE SUMMARY, AND FISCAL NOTE
TODAY, AND I LOOK FORWARD TO
RECEIVING THE BILL AND THE
POWERPOINT. THANK YOU, SIR.
>> THANK YOU, VICE CHAIR,
STRAUSS. AND YOU MAY RECALL WE
WORKED ON TRIBAL NOTIFICATION AS
PART OF THE SEPA THRESHOLD
EXEMPTION BILL AND I SEE CENTRAL
STAFF LISH RAISED A FINGER.
>> YEAH, SO, TRIBAL NOTIFICATION
IS REQUIRED TO HAPPEN BEFORE THE
SEPA DETERMINATION IS PUBLISHED.
THIS DOES NOT AFFECT THAT. I DO
WANT TO NOTE THAT THE
LEGISLATION HAS BEEN INTRODUCED,
AND IS LINKED TO THE AGENDA.
>> THANK YOU, BUT ABSOLUTELY
HEAR YOU ON A PRESENTATION, AND
WE'LL WORK ON THAT FOR THE NEXT
COMMITTEE MEETING. AND JUST TO
CLARIFY AND TO KIND OF REPEAT,
THIS DOES NOT CHANGE THE
OUTREACH REQUIREMENTS OR ANY
OTHER PROCEDURAL REQUIREMENTS
FOR SEPA. THIS ONLY WOULD AFFECT
THE HEARING EXAMINER APPEAL OF
TYPE FIVE DECISIONS, IS THAT
CORRECT?
>> THE HEARING EXAMINER APPEAL
OF DECISIONS RELATED TO
DEVELOPMENT REGULAR NATIONS AND
THE COMFORTS OF PLAN.
>> WONDERFUL, THANK YOU. VICE
CHAIR STRAUSS, DID YOU HAVE ANY?
IT LOOKS LIKE, OKAY. I HAD A FEW
QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS, AND THANK
YOU FOR THE BRIEFING TODAY, AND
THANK YOU FOR THE FUTURE WORK ON
THIS. JUST TO KIND OF PROVIDE A
BIG PICTURE, SO THAT WE ARE
UNDERSTANDING SORT OF WHAT THE
PROPOSAL IS, AND THE ROLE OF
SEPA, I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY
THAT THIS WOULD NOT CHANGE ANY
OF OUR SUBSTANTIVE REGULATIONS
IN TERMS OF OUR BUILDING CODE
REQUIREMENTS, OUR STORMWATER
REQUIREMENTS. THIS DOES NOT
ACTUALLY CHANGE ANY OF THOSE
REQUIREMENTS, IS THAT CORRECT?
>> CORRECT. AND IT DOESN'T
REQUIRE THE REQUIREMENT TO
ANALYZE THE ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACTS OF THE CITY'S ACTIONS.
>> SO WE STILL HAVE TO DO THE
ANALYSIS, AND TO YOUR EARLIER
POINT, PEOPLE STILL HAVE A RIGHT
TO APPEAL TO THE GROWTH
MANAGEMENT HEARINGS BOARD, OR TO
SUPERIOR COURT, IS THAT CORRECT?
>> CORRECT.
>> AND OFTENTIMES PEOPLE
EXERCISE THAT RIGHT AFTER THE
HEARING EXAMINER APPEAL. WOULD
THAT BE CORRECT?
>> CORRECT.
>> AND JUST SO THAT WE
UNDERSTAND SORT OF HOW THIS
APPLIES TO COUNCIL LEGISLATION,
I JUST WANT TO STEP BACK A
LITTLE BIT AND TALK ABOUT ARE
THERE OTHER TYPES OF COUNCIL
LEGISLATION THAT REQUIRE THIS
LEVEL OF ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW,
AND THEN A PROCESS TO ALLOWING A
HEARING EXAMPLE APPEAL. GY YOU T
O S E E I F THERE'S A
DIFFERENCE. SO FOR EXAMPLE, OUR
CITY'S ANNUAL BUDGET PROCESS.
IS THERE AN ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
PROCESS, OR DO WE GIVE PEOPLE A
RIGHT TO APPEAL THAT TO THE
HEARING EXAMINER BEFORE WE EVER
CONSIDER THE CITY'S BUDGET?
>> NO.
>> AND WOULD YOU AGREE THAT
IT'S IMPORTANT FOR COUNCIL TO
HAVE A ROBUST ENGAGEMENT, AND
INFORMATION AS WE DO OUR CITY
BUDGET?
>> CORRECT. YES.
>> AND SO WE DON'T HAVE THAT
FOR THE CITY'S BUDGET. WHAT
ABOUT IF WE WERE GOING TO CHANGE
LAWS LIKE AROUND PUBLIC CITY,
LIKE OUR CITY'S SOAP AND SODA
LAWS. DO WE GIVE PEOPLE A
HEARING EXAMINER APPEAL BEFORE
WE PASS LEGISLATION LIKE THAT?
>> NO.
>> HOW ABOUT WHEN WE BUY OR SELL
CITY PROPERTY?
>> NO.
>> WHAT ABOUT WHEN WE CHANGE OUR
UTILITY RATES?
>> NO.
>> OKAY. THANK YOU. AND IF WE
DID GIVE THOSE APPEAL RIGHTS AND
THERE WERE MONTHS LONG DELAYS,
WOULD THAT IMPACT THE CITY'S
ABILITY TO PROCEED WITH LIKE OUR
CITY BUDGET?
>> YES.
>> THANK YOU. ONE OTHER
QUESTION, IN TERMS OF WHO CAN
BRING AN APPEAL, CAN YOU JUST
SPEAK TO THE STANDING
REQUIREMENTS OF WHO IS ALLOWED
TO BRING A SEPA APPEAL?
>> SO ANYONE CAN FILE AN APPEAL.
YOU DO NEED TO SHOW SOME SORT OF
CONNECTION TO THE ACTION AND
POSSIBILITY OF HARM FROM THE
ACTION IN ORDER FOR THE APPEAL
TO PROCEED. BUT MANY APPEALS ARE
FILED THAT ARE DISMISSED A
COUPLE OF MONTHS AFTER.
>> SO ANYBODY CAN FILE APPEAL.
ANYBODY AROUND THE WORLD COULD
FILE AN APPEAL, AND A SINGLE
PERSON COULD FILE THAT APPEAL,
IS THAT CORRECT?
>> CORRECT.
>> A SINGLE ENTITY, DO YOU HAVE
TO BE A PERSON, OR COULD YOU BE
SOME SORT OF UNNAMED GROUP TO
FILE AN APPEAL?
>> ANY PERSON OR ORGANIZATION
CAN FILE AN APPEAL.
>> AND EVEN IF YOU DON'T HAVE
STANDING THAT HAS TO BE PROVEN,
OR DISPROVEN, SO IT CAN STILL
RESULT IN A MONTH OR TWO DELAY
TO BE DISMISSED JUST BY FILING
THAT APPEAL, IS THAT CORRECT?
>> YES, THE HEARING EXAMINER
DOES TAKE ANY APPEAL SERIOUSLY
AND REVIEWS TO MAKE SURE THAT
THEY HAVE STANDING.
ANYONE AROUND THE WORLD COULD DO
THAT. THANK YOU. I ALSO JUST
WANT TO CLARIFY, IF SOMEBODY WAS
CONCERNED ABOUT OUR CITY'S
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, PERHAPS THEY
WERE CONCERNED ABOUT SOMETHING
HAPPENING IN THEIR NEIGHBORHOOD,
COULD THEY SORT OF APPEAL ONLY
THEIR SORT OF CONCERN ABOUT
THEIR NEIGHBORHOOD, OR WOULD
THEY APPEAL THE ENTIRE
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, IF IT WAS A
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, AN
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW OF THAT?
>> YOU APPEAL THE ENTIRE
PACKAGE.
>> SO JUST TO KIND OF GIVE IT AN
ANALOGY. IF YOU WERE UPSET ABOUT
THE CITY'S, LIKE WE PASS OUR
CITY'S MULTIBILLION DOLLAR
BUDGET, IF YOU WERE UPSET ABOUT
ONE $5,000 LINE ITEM IN THAT
BUDGET, YOU WOULD HAVE TO APPEAL
THE ENTIRE BUDGET, NOT JUST THAT
LINE ITEM. YOU MIGHT BE
CONCERNED ABOUT ONE THING, YOU
CAN'T JUST APPEAL THAT ONE
THING, YOU HAVE TO APPEAL THAT
WHOLE THING, AND THAT WOULD
RESULT IN POTENTIALLY, MONTHS
LONG, OR LONGER DELAY OF THAT
ENTIRE THING.
>> YES.
>> THANK YOU. THAT'S ALL THE
QUESTIONS I HAVE FOR TODAY.
COLLEAGUES, OBVIOUSLY THIS IS
SOMETHING THAT WE WILL CONTINUE
TO ENGAGE WITH THE PUBLIC ON. I
KNOW THERE'S LOTS OF STRONG
FEELINGS, AND STRONG OPINIONS.
THIS IS IMPORTANT WORK FOR US.
AND I APPRECIATE YOUR, YOUR
WILLINGNESS TO ENGAGE WITH US.
THANK YOU TO LISH FOR JOINING
US. AND ANY OTHER FURTHER
QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS BEFORE WE
END THE MEETING? OKAY. WITH
THAT, WE HAVE REACHED THE END