>>> GOOD AFTERNOON, EVERYONE. THE MARCH 18th -- I'LL START OVER. THE MARCH 18th, 2025 MEETING OF THE SEATTLE CITY COUNCIL WILL COME TO ORDER. IT IS 2:03. I'M SARA NELSON, COUNCIL PRESIDENT. WILL THE CLERK PLEASE CALL THE ROLL. >> COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS. >> PRESENT. >> COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH. >> HERE. >> COUNCILMEMBER KETTLE. >> HERE. >> COUNCILMEMBER MOORE. >> PRESENT. >> COUNCILMEMBER RINCK. >> PRESENT. >> COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA. >> PRESENT. >> COUNCILMEMBER SAKA. >> HERE. >> COUNCILMEMBER SOLOMON. >> HERE. >> COUNCIL PRESIDENT NELSON. >> PRESENT. >> NINE PRESENT. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THERE ARE NO PRESENTATIONS FOR TODAY, SO COLLEAGUES AT THIS TIME WILL OPEN THE HYBRID PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD, LIMITED TO ITEMS ON TODAY'S AGENDA, AND THE COUNCIL WORK PROGRAM. CLERK, HOW MANY SPEAKERS ARE SIGNED UP TODAY? >> WE HAVE SIX REMOTE AND SO FAR 50 IN- PERSON, AND WE STILL HAVE MEMBERS OF PUBLIC SIGNING UP AS WE SPEAK. >> OKAY. SO LET'S GIVE EVERYBODY ONE MINUTE, AND WE'LL START WITH THE TEN IN- PERSON SPEAKERS, GO OVER TO THE FOLKS THAT HAVE SIGNED UP REMOTE AND CONTINUE WITH THE PRESENT. IN-PERSON. >> THE PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD WILL BE MODERATED IN THE FOLLOWING MATTER. SPEAKERS WILL BE CALLED IN THE ORDER THEY ARE REGISTERED. PLEASE BEGIN BY STATING YOUR NAME AND THE ITEM YOU ARE ADDRESSING. SPEAKERS WILL HEAR A CHIME WHEN THERE ARE TEN SECONDS OF THEIR TIME. PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD IS NOW OPEN AND WILL BEGIN WITH THE FIRST SPEAKER ON THE LIST. >> I'M GOING TO BE CALLING NUMBERS. WE'LL START WITH ONE THROUGH TEN, IF YOU COULD PLEASE LINE UP AT THE TWO SPEAKER SETS WE HAVE HERE. >> I'LL REMIND PEOPLE, PLEASE -- JAZZ HANDS AS THEY'RE CALLED AND NOT CLAPPING OR VOCALIZING. GO AHEAD, PLEASE. >> SPEAKERS ONE THROUGH TEN, STARTING WITH MONTY. >> GOOD AFTERNOON. THANK YOU. MY NAME IS MONTY ANDERSON, SEATTLE PUBLIC TRADES. A LONG ROAD TO GET HERE. I KNOW WE'RE ALL HAPPY TO SEE HERE, BUT PROBABLY NOT. IT'S BEEN A LONG TIME GOING ON THIS THING. WE'VE BEEN WORKING REALLY HARD AND FOCUSED ON HOUSING. THIS GENERATION OF WEALTH BUILDING, AND I'M ASKING FOR SOME PRAGMATIC DECISIONS FROM THE CITY HERE TO SUPPORT THESE PEOPLE AND THE COMMUNITY. I ALSO WANT TO BE CLEAR THAT WE'RE NOT INTO THIS IDEA OF A DELAY. I THINK WE HAVE HAD A LOT OF TIME TO THINK OF THIS. SO IN MY CLOSING STATEMENTS, I KNOW WE HAVE A LOT COMING. I WOULD LIKE TO THANK EVERYBODY FOR THEIR TIME AND COMMITMENT, TAKING TIME OFF WORK. I WOULD LIKE TO THANK THE COUNSEL MEMBERS FOR LISTENING TO US, ALL SIDES. I KNOW IT'S A TOUGH DECISION AND I WOULD LIKE TO THANK YOU FOR PUTTING THE SPEAKERS IN ORDER OF IMPORTANCE. THAT MEANS A LOT TO ME. THANK YOU. [ LAUGHTER ] >> SPEAKER NUMBER TWO. >> HI, GOOD AFTERNOON, COUNCIL MEMBERS. I'M ANDREA, AND I'M HERE TO SPEAK IN STRONG SUPPORT. THIS IS A THOUGHTFUL COMMUNITY DRIVEN PLAN THAT WILL CREATE WORKFORCE HOUSING AND GOOD JOBS, AND WILL OFFER ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITIES WITHOUT BURDENING TAXPAYERS. FRANKLY, IF THIS AREA IS NOT DEVELOPED AS THE MAKERS DISTRICT, WE WILL SEE IT TURN INTO ANOTHER OFFICE COMPLEX, ONLY BRINGING MORE CONGESTION, MORE TRAFFIC. INSTEAD, THE MAKERS DISTRICT OFFERS HOMES FOR WORKERS ININ JOBS AND A LONG- TERM COMMITMENT TO BEGIN MAINTENANCE JOBS, CREATING STABLE CAREERS FOR OUR LOCAL WORKFORCE. BEYOND THAT, THIS PROJECT SUPPORTS LIGHT INDUSTRY AND HELPS SMALL BUSINESS OWNERS AND ENTREPRENEURS BUILD GENERATION WEALTH. THIS IS A WIN FOR JOBS, HOUSING AND COMMUNITY AND I URGE YOU TO SUPPORT IT TODAY WITHOUT DELAY. THANK YOU. >> NUMBER THREE, AND IF YOU COULD PLEASE INTRODUCE YOURSELF BEFORE YOUR COMMENTS. THANK YOU. >> GOOD AFTERNOON. BILLY HETHERINGTON. I WANT TO ECHO WHAT MONTY SAID. I WANT TO THANK EVERYBODY FOR TAKING THE TIME TO MEET WITH US, TAKE A TOUR OF THE PROPERTY, LISTEN TO BOTH SIDES. YOU WERE VOTED -- YOU WERE ELECTED FOR A REASON, TO DO THE DUE DILIGENCE YOU HAVE ALL DONE AND THANK YOU FOR THAT. TO THIS PROJECT, YOU KNOW, WE WANT TO GET THE VOTE THROUGH TODAY. NO DELAY. WE'VE GOT A LOT OF BIG COALITION OF FOLKS ON BOTH SIDES TODAY AND THE FACTS ARE THIS, 500 UNITS OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING THAT, YOU KNOW, PLUS WORKFORCE HOUSING, MAKERS DISTRICT, EVERYTHING THAT CAN GO INTO A STADIUM DISTRICT DOWN THERE WOULD MEAN FOR THE SEATTLE RESIDENTS. WE URGE YOU TO TAKE THE VOTE TODAY. THANK YOU. >> GOOD AFTERNOON. FOR THE RECORD, I'M ASHLEY NICOLE HOLLAND FOR HISTORIC DOWNTOWN, ADVOCATING FOR THE PIONEER SQUARE AND CHINA INTERNATIONAL DISTRICT NEIGHBORHOODS. I SUPPORT OF COUNCIL BILL 120933, ALLOWING RESIDENTIAL USES IN THE DISTRICT. WE SUPPORT THE MAKERS NEIGHBORHOOD AS A COMPATIBLE WAY FOR HOUSING TO CO- EXIST ON THE EDGE OF INDUSTRIAL AREAS WITH MIXED USE SPACES BUILT IN TO ACCOMMODATE THE INDUSTRIAL FRAGRANCE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY TO BRING MORE AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND BOOSTING ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND INCREASING PUBLIC SAFETY. THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY TO BRING MORE THAN 900 HOUSING UNITS TO PIONEER SQUARE AND 50% WILL BE REQUIRED TO SERVE PEOPLE BETWEEN 60 AND 90% OF AREA MEDIUM INCOME. MORE RESIDENTS MEANS MORE PEOPLE SPENDING MONEY AND EVEN MORE VISITORS TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD. IT'S GREAT FOR BUSINESSES, FOR INCREASING SAFETY IN THE NEIGHBORHOODS AND IT'S GREAT FOR OVERALL VIBRANCY OF OUR NEIGHBORHOODS, PLEASE SUPPORT THE BILL. THANK YOU. NO DELAY, VOTE TODAY. THANKS. >> NUMBER FIVE? >> HELLO. MY NAME IS LAURA COMATTA, A 20- YEAR RESIDENT OF PIONEER SQUARE AND I WORKED IN A GALLERY FOR 16 YEARS. I WANT TO SAY I'M IN SUPPORT OF THIS MEASURE, AS DIFFICULT TO FIND WORK SPACES TO HAVE A MAKERS DISTRICT WOULD BE VITAL TO THE AREA. I CAN SAY THAT I'VE BEEN INVOLVED WITH THE COMMUNITY MEMBERS OF PIONEER SQUARE RESIDENT BOARD MEMBER, AND IT'S BEEN REALLY IMPORTANT TO INTEGRATE PEOPLE LIKE ME THAT CAN TELL AND TALK TO COMMUNITY MEMBERS TO REMEMBER THE HISTORY OF THE SPACE AND SO BRINGING MORE RESIDENTS IN WILL MAKE IT A SAFER AND MORE VIBRANT NEIGHBORHOOD, BETTER FOR BUSINESSES AND SAFER FOR EVERYBODY VISITING DOWNTOWN. THANK YOU. >> HELLO. JEDD IGER WITH THE LOCAL 46. THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK TODAY. WHEN I WAS HERE A COUPLE WEEKS AGO I MENTIONED MY MOM GRADUATED FROM THE HIGH SCHOOL IN 1964. SHE STILL LIVES HERE IN THE CITY, AND WE'LL BE CELEBRATING HERE 80th BIRTHDAY NEXT JANUARY. WHEN THE VIADUCT CAME DOWN ALL THOSE YEARS DOWN, AS SOMEONE WHO GREW UP ON THE PENINSULA OVER THERE, SHE -- EVERY TIME WOULD TALK, SHE WAS JUST BESIDE HERSELF THAT THIS LANDMARK WOULD COME DOWN. I ASSURED HER THE CITY HAD A PLAN TO MAKE THE WATER FRONT BEAUTIFUL. AND I'LL TELL YOU NOW, OUR CONVERSATION, SHE'S LIKE, OH, HONEY, THEY DID SUCH A GREAT JOB DOWN ON THE WATERFRONT. I THINK WE HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO DO SOMETHING SIMILAR HERE IN THIS MAKERS DISTRICT. TO HAVE A NEIGHBORHOOD IN THE CITY THAT MAKES LIFE- LONG SEATTLE RESIDENTS PROUD TO BE A PART OF THIS CITY AND WHAT THE CITY IS DOING FOR THE RESIDENTS. VOTE YES, NO DELAY. >> NUMBER SEVEN. >> HELLO. MY NAME IS ZACH SNYDER, I'M A RESIDENT IN DISTRICT THREE. HELLO, JOY. I WALKED DOWN HERE TODAY REFLECTING ON THE CITY I LIVE IN. I'VE BEEN HERE SINCE 2016. THOUGH NOT THAT LONG, IT'S LONG ENOUGH TO UNDERSTAND THE CITY'S TRANSITION AND GROWING PAINS. I FEEL LIKE THE CITY IS MORE AND MORE BECOMING A GET IN, GET OUT PLACE. YOU'VE GOT OFFICES AND SPORTS ARENAS. BUT WHAT I THINK MAKES THE CITY GREAT IS WHEN YOU WANT TO HANG OUT AND SPEND MONEY, AND I BELIEVE COMING FROM A FINE ARTS BACKGROUND, THAT HAVING MAKERS DISTRICTS ARE -- IS WHERE PEOPLE WILL FIND THEIR SKILLS AND THINK ABOUT WAYS TO CREATE SMALL BUSINESS. AND HAVING THAT AVAILABLE TO THEM WILL ENSURE THAT SEATTLE HAS MORE OF IT. THANK YOU. >> GOOD AFTERNOON, COUNCIL. MY NAME IS CARL DEYOUNG, AND I'M A PROUD MEMBER OF MY ALMA MATER, THE VIKINGS TAKING THE STATE CHAMPIONSHIP IN BOY'S BASKETBALL. YES. I'M HERE IN STRONG SUPPORT OF THE COUNCIL BILL, SEATTLE IS FACING AN URGENT HOUSING CRISIS, YET WE CONTINUE TO EXCLUDE HOUSING FROM THE KEY DOWNTOWN DISTRICT. THIS PROPOSAL WILL PROVIDE WORKFORCE HOUSING FOR THE VERY PEOPLE WHO KEEP SEATTLE RUNNING. OUR TRADES WORKERS, OUR HOSPITALITY STAFF, OUR ARTISTS, AND SMALL MANUFACTURERS. CRITICS ARGUE THAT THIS WILL DISRUPT SEATTLE'S MARITIME AND FREIGHT ECONOMY. LET ME BE CLEAR, WE CAN SUPPORT OUR WORKING WATERFRONT AND ADDRESSING OUR HOUSING NEEDS. COME ON, SEATTLE, WE CAN WALK AND CHEW GUM AT THE SAME TIME. THE PORT OF SEATTLE IS CRITICAL, BUT THIS DOES NOT THREATEN THEM, IT ALIGNS WITH THE CITY'S LONG- TERM PLANS BY ENSURING THAT HOUSING IS CONCENTRATED WHERE IT MAKES SENSE -- [ MUTED ] >> FOR THE RECORD, I'M CHAD SMITH, THE POLITICAL DIRECTOR FOR IUPTA DC-5. I THINK I'M A THIRD GENERATION SEATTLE-ITE. I DON'T LIVE HERE, BUT I GREW UP IN THE STREETS OF SEATTLE, PLAYED FOOTBALL IN THIS TOWN, WORKED AS AN APPRENTICE IN THIS TOWN. YOU KNOW, THERE'S A SONG CALLED -- BY STARSHIP CALLED "WE BUILT THIS CITY ON ROCK 'N' ROLL. " THIS CITY, WHEN YOU WALK DOWN THE STREET AND YOU SEE THE GLASS, THIS UNION, THESE UNION TRADES BUILT THIS CITY, AND WE WANT TO CONTINUE TO BUILD THIS CITY, AND WE LIKE TO BE HERE AND COME TO FOOTBALL GAMES AND BASEBALL GAMES. PLEASE PASS THIS TODAY. JUST DON'T PUT THIS OFF. THANK YOU. >> AFTER SPEAKER NUMBER TEN, WE'LL MOVE TO SPEAKERS NUMBERS 11 THROUGH 20. SO PLEASE START LINING UP. >> HELLO, CITY COUNCIL. I'M NICOLE GRANT. I USE SHE AND HER PRO-NOUNS. I AM AN ELECTRICIAN, A MEMBER OF LOCAL 46. WE WORKED REALLY HARD TO GET THE FINEST LABOR STANDARDS ANYWHERE TO BUILD MAKER HOUSING IN THE STADIUM DISTRICT, AND ONCE WE GOT THOSE LABOR STANDARDS, THIS PROJECT BECAME OUR OWN, AND THE ENTHUSIASM AND VISION WE HAVE TO BE ABLE TO HAVE A NEIGHBORHOOD THAT'S SO SPECIAL, YOU KNOW, THAT COMES ON THE TAILS OF FIFA, AND THAT IS A PLACE WHERE SO MANY YOUNG PEOPLE WHO HAVE GOTTEN NEW UNION CAREERS, NOT JUST AS APPRENTICES TO BUILDING TRADES BUT AS BAR TENDERS AS SECURITY GUARDS AND JANITORS AT T- MOBILE PARK, AS HOTEL WORKERS. [ MUTED ] >> WE DO HAVE THREE ELECTEDS AND THE TRADITION HERE IS TO OFFER AN OPPORTUNITY FOR FELLOW ELECTEDS TO PROVIDE COMMENT. SINCE YOU ARE HERE AT THE PODIUM, PLEASE GO AHEAD AND MAKE YOUR COMMENT AND THEN I'LL MOVE TO THE NEXT THREE. GO AHEAD, PLEASE. >> THANK YOU. I'M HERE TO DISCUSS A POLICE MATTER THAT HAPPENED TO ME ON DECEMBER 23. SOMEBODY CALLED THE POLICE ON ME, AND WHEN I GOT THE POLICE REPORT, IT'S A BUNCH OF LIES. HOW CAN WE CHARGE TO THE COURT, BECAUSE IF SOMEBODY CALLS ON SOMEBODY ELSE WITH LIES, AND I SPENT 30 DAYS IN JAIL FOR NO REASON. THE CASE WAS DISMISSED. HOW MUCH TIME WILL WE SAVE WITH THE COURT TO NOT LIE TO THE POLICE? THAT'S A SERIOUS CALL. I CAN GET KILLED. POLICE WERE AT MY APARTMENT, AND SO I ASK THE ATTORNEY I SAID HOW CAN I PRESS CHARGES TO THE CALLER? OH, YOU'RE LUCKY YOU DON'T GET CHARGED. I SAID THAT WILL SAVE MONEY FOR THE POLICE DEPARTMENT AND PHONE CALLS TO 911. THE PERSON WHO CALLED NEEDS TO BE CHARGED. THAT'S ALL I WANT TO SAY. THANK YOU. >> COMMISSIONER HASAGAWA, PLEASE. >> THANK YOU, MADAME PRESIDENT. GOOD MORNING, MADAME PRESIDENT AND MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL. I'M TOSHIKO HASAGAWA. I'M HERE WITH OUR COALITION OF OVER 70 ORGANIZATIONS URGING YOU TO DELAY CONSIDERATION OF THIS ITEM UNTIL MORE INFORMATION CAN COME TO LIGHT. ALL OF US DESERVE CLARITY ON OUR OUTSTANDING UNCERTAINTIES. THE COAST GUARD RECORD OF A DECISION WHERE IT WILL GO IS STEJED FOR APRIL 30th. THE CITY RESOLUTION PASSED IN 2023 AND REQUIRED THAT WITHIN TWO YEARS THE CITY WOULD STUDY THE IMPACTS OF NOP- INDUSTRIAL USES OF LAND ON FREIGHT MOBILITY. WHERE IS IT? THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN IS UPON YOU TO CONSIDER HOUSING OPTIONS IN A BROADER CONTEXT. AND IF THE PORT IS DISCUSSING PURCHASING THE HANSON PROPERTIES, BUT WE NEED TO KNOW IF HE'S INTERESTED IN HAVING THAT DISCUSSION. AS PUBLIC OFFICIALS, PLEASE THOUGHTFULLY DELIBERATE THIS AND WE WANT TO BE AT THE TABLE TO DEVELOP A MEANINGFUL STRATEGY. THAT'S THE PATH WE WANT TO BE ON WITH YOU. SO PLEASE WITH YOUR VOTE GIVE US MEANINGFUL TIME. >> GOOD AFTERNOON. I CAN EMPATHIZE WITH ALL OF YOU IN THE POSITION YOU'RE IN, AND OUR ROLES AS PUBLIC LEADERS. WE HAVE REALLY DIFFICULT DECISIONS TO MAKE, ESPECIALLY WHEN WE FEEL LIKE WE'RE BALANCING BETWEEN CORE VALUES. IN THIS CASE, YOU'RE BEING ASKED TO CONSIDER WHETHER YOU SUPPORT THIS POTENTIALLY ADDRESS SOME OF THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING CONCERNS AND OPPOSE IT. WE'RE IN THE MIDST OF A GLOBAL AND NATIONAL TURMOIL. WHAT IF THAT IS A FALSE CHOICE? WHAT IF INSTEAD THERE WAS A THIRD WAY THAT WOULD SUPPORT BOTH SIDES OF THIS AND GET EVERYBODY ON THE SAME SIDE OF THE TABLE? I'M SUGGESTING THERE IS A THIRD WAY HERE, THERE IS ANOTHER OPTION. AND WHAT I'M ASKING YOU FOR IS TO USE THE COLLABORATIVE THAT WAS SIGNED DECEMBER 10th BY THE MAYOR, COUNTY EXECUTIVES AND OTHER PUBLIC AGENCIES, JUST GIVE US A DATE CERTAIN OF A COUPLE OF MONTHS FOR THAT WORK TO HAPPEN. THANK YOU SO MUCH. >> COUNCIL PRESIDENT, MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE, COUNCIL MEMBERS, THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK ONCE AGAIN IN OPPOSITION TO 120933. I'M YOUR OLDEST SERVING PORT OF SEATTLE COMMISSIONER CURRENTLY, AND I HAVE BEEN HERE THROUGH THIS BATTLE MANY TIMES. I HOPE THAT YOU UNDERSTAND WHY HAVING FULL INFORMATION BEFORE MAKING SUCH A DECISION IS CRITICAL. I'M HERE TODAY TO SUPPORT THE EXPERT FROM THE MARITIME INDUSTRY WHO WITH BEST QUALIFIED TO IDENTIFY HOW THIS PROPOSAL PUTS OUR HIGH- WAGE JOBS AT RISK. FLIPPING INDUSTRIAL LANDS INTO RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES CREATE INCOMPATIBLE USES, RESULTING IN MORE DELAY THAT MAKES OUR PORT LESS COMPETITIVE. THE PROPOSAL IS BASED ON SELECTIVE READING OF THE EIS. THIS IS WHAT'S CRITICAL. WHILE THE EIS ALLOWS FOR RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT IN SOTO, IT DOESN'T CLEAR 1st AVENUE FOR THE DEGREE OF DEVELOPMENT NOW UNDER DEBATE. AND IT ASSUMES PROTECTION OF A 200 FOOT BUFFER FOR THIS HEAVY HAUL CORRIDOR AS IS THE CASE THROUGHOUT THE CITY. FURTHER, THE LEGISLATION DOES NOT CONSIDER LITIGATION COST TO THE CITY IDENTIFIED IN THE EIS THAT WOULD BE REQUIRED IF YOU CHOOSE TO VIOLATE THE 200 FOOT BUFFER. I HOPE -- >> TIME IS UP, PLEASE. >> -- ON OUR LANDS AT A MINIMUM I URGE YOU TO COMPLETE THE STUDY BEFORE SETTING -- [ MUTED ] >> WE'LL NOW RESUME IN- PERSON COMMENT. NUMBERS 12 THROUGH 20. THANK YOU. >> HELLO. MY NAME IS EDDIE, I'M A BUSINESS AGENT. I'M HERE TO RISE IN STRONG SUPPORT OF THE OPPORTUNITY FOR AN ALL UNION PLA COVERING AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN THE STADIUM DISTRICT AND IN STRONG OPPOSITION OF A DELAY. THERE ARE MANY PEOPLE WHO TOOK TIME OUT OF THEIR DAYS AND ARE LOSING WAGES TO SUPPORT WHAT THEY BELIEVE IN. THOSE THAT ARE PAID TO BE ON THIS COUNCIL WOULD BE REMISS IF THEY TOOK THESE PEOPLE'S TIME FOR GRANT IT TODAY. ZERO, THE NUMBER OF MARITIME WORKERS, ZERO IMPACT ON MARITIME JOBS IN THAT AREA. NUMBER ONE, CURRENT UPPER ONE OF PRIVATE INVESTORS WILLING TO OFFER AN ALL- UNION PLA FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN SEATTLE. TWO, THE NUMBER OF ARTERIAL ROADS THAT BORDER IN QUESTION, BE IT OVERPASSES, LARGE CROSS WALKS, AS A VIABLE MEANS TO EFFECTIVELY MOVE THOUSANDS OF FANSES IN AND OUT OF SPORTING EVENTS. IS THAT 60 SECONDS? >> SPEAKER 13. [ MUTED ] >> GOOD AFTERNOON, COUNCIL MEMBERS. MY NAME IS SAM HENN, ASSISTANT MANAGER OF LOCAL 66. THANK YOU FOR TAKING THE TIME TO HEAR ME TODAY. I WANTED TO TALK ABOUT THE VALUE OF THIS PROJECT THAT IT BRINGS TO THE COMMUNITY AND THE WORKERS AND THE ARTISTS. THE EIS HAS ALREADY PROVEN THERE WILL BE NO IMPACT ON THE FREIGHT MOBILITY, RIGHT? AND SO THE VALUE THEN REALLY COMES DOWN TO THE COMMUNITY MEMBERS AND IT'S PARAMOUNT WE ADDRESS AFFORDABLE HOUSING. WE HAVE A CRISIS, AND IT'S PARAMOUNT THAT WE ADDRESS THIS, AND A GOOD WAY TO DO THAT IS TO PROMOTE THAT NEIGHBORHOOD HOUSING RIGHT HERE IN THIS DISTRICT. A DELAY TODAY COULD RISK LOSING THIS TREMENDOUS OPPORTUNITY. OUR MEMBERS ARE READY TO GET TO WORK TO SOLVE THIS HOUSING CRISIS WE ALL FACE. NO DELAY AND VOTE TODAY. THANK YOU. >> SPEAKER NUMBER 15. 14, SORRY. 14, THANK YOU. >> MEMBERS, I'M CHIEF OF STAFF OF THE PORT COMMISSION. THE PORT OF SEATTLE, REDUCING INDUSTRIAL LAND FOR HOUSING IS CONTRARY -- GIVE THAN THE PORT IS A GOVERNMENT MADE UP OF COUNTY WIDE ELECTED OFFICIALS. SHOULDN'T THAT ASSERTION BE TAKEN AT FACE VALUE? IS THE PORT NOT A GOVERNING BODY THAT DESERVES THE OPPORTUNITY FOR COLLABORATION? THE PORT AND THE CITY SHOULD BE ABLE TO NEGOTIATE A SHARED FUTURE. LET US SIT DOWN AND DISCUSS THE FUTURE OF MARITIME IN OUR CITY. COUNCIL MEMBERS, IF YOU HAVE A SHADOW OF DOUBT, DELAY THIS LEGISLATION. THE PORT WILL COME TO THE TABLE WILLINGLY TO DEVELOP A PLAN FOR A FUTURE THAT WE CAN ALL SUPPORT. THANK YOU. >> NOW WE'RE AT 15. THANK YOU. >> MY NAME IS TIA. FOR DECADES I LIVED NEXT TO THE STADIUM, THE BALLPARK AND THE PORT NEXT TO THE PROPOSED MAKERS DISTRICT. LAST NIGHT I WROTE A MASS EMAIL THAT TALKED ABOUT MY DISTRICT WAS A QUARTER MILE AWAY FROM A SUPER FUNDS SITE. LUCKILY, THIS ISN'T TRUE. IT'S A MILE AND A QUARTER AWAY OVER IN HARBOR ISLAND. THE FINAL EIS STATEMENT SAYS THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOUSING WOULD RESULT IN MOST LONG- TERM BENEFITS OF LOWER CONCENTRATIONS OF CHEMICALS IN SOILS AND SURFACE WATT WE ARE A CLEAN SIDE AND NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS RELATED TO AIR QUALITY AND GREEN HOUSE GAS EMISSIONS ARE ANTICIPATED. I'VE BEEN COMING HERE SINCE 2013 ON THIS ISSUE. AND I DON'T WANT TO TAKE THIS ONE TO MY GRAVE. CAN WE PLEASE NOT DELAY AND VOTE TODAY. THANK YOU. >> MY NAME IS SANDY SMITH, AND FOR OVER 30 YEARS, I HAVE LIVED WORKED AND OWNED BUSINESSES IN PIONEER SQUARE. AND I AM IN FAVOR OF THE MAKERS DISTRICT. WHEN I WENT THE FIVE- MINUTE WALK DOWN TO WHERE IT IS FROM MY HOME AND LOOKED AROUND, I WENT, OH, MY GOD, THIS IS PERFECT! THIS IS PERFECT! AND I TRIED TO GET -- CALM MYSELF BECAUSE I HEARD THERE WAS OPPOSITION. I WALKED AND LOOKED TO SEE WHERE THAT OPPOSITION COULD BE, WHAT COULD IT POSSIBLY BE IMPEDING, AND I COULDN'T FIND IT. BUT THE REALITY IS, WE WANT IT, WE NEED IT, WE NEED WORKFORCE HOUSING. PIONEER SQUARE IS A DIVERSE NEIGHBORHOOD. WE HAVE PROVEN THAT WE CAN HANDLE A LOT OF DIFFERENCES, AND WE WANT THE CHANCE TO WELCOME THESE PEOPLE FROM THE MAKERS GROUP AND ALSO TO PROVIDE WORKFORCE HOUSING TO CREATE MORE SUSTAINABLE SUPPORT FOR OUR BUSINESSES. AND I TOO VOTE NO DELAY, PLEASE VOTE FOR IT TODAY. THANK YOU. >> I'M GARIEE WITH THE CID COUNCIL IN CHINATOWN. I'M IN SUPPORT OF THE REZONE FOR ALL OF THESE REASONS HERE, AS WELL AS SUPPORTING THE DISTRICT STADIUM, IT WILL SUPPORT THE CAD IN PIONEER SQUARE. SO WE ARE ALL FOR THIS TO INCREASE THE LIVEABILITY AROUND THE CID, PIONEER SQUARE, THE BUSINESSES, WE NEED THIS TO MITIGATE, YOU KNOW, WHAT'S BEEN HAPPENING THE LAST COUPLE OF YEARS DOWN THERE. THE HOMELESSNESS, CONCENTRATIONS OF SHELTERS, AS WELL AS CONCENTRATION OF THE DRUG -- CRAZY DRUG HAPPENINGS DOWN THERE. SO WE NEED THIS TO HELP SUPPORT THE BUSINESSES AND IN THE CID. THANKS. >> HELLO. MY NAME IS JOEL, I'M AN AFFORDABLE HOUSING DEVELOPER AS WELL AS A BUSINESS OWNER IN THE CID. I SUPPORT THE PROPOSAL FOR FOR NEW STADIUM AND MAKERS DISTRICT. WE ARE ALWAYS LOOKING FOR NEW AND CREATIVE WAYS TO BUILD NEW AFFORDABLE HOUSING. THIS HAS THE ADDED BENEFIT AS I THINK EVERYONE KNOWS, AS RELATED MAKERS DISTRICT, AS WELL. MANY OF THOSE BUSINESSES AS ILLUSTRATED ARE OWNED AND OPERATED BY WOMEN, AND WOMEN OF COLOR. I'M A THIRD GENERATION SEATTLEITE. MY GRANDPARENTS HAD A RESTAURANTRESTAURANT WHAT WAS KNOWN AS CHINATOWN. MY MOM HAD AN ART GALLERY AND MY DAD HAD AN ARCHITECTURAL FIRM. SO I KNEW GROWING UP THE BENEFITBENEFIT PEOPLE WALKING AROUND THRIVING IN BUSINESSES. SO PLEASE VOTE TODAY, DON'T DELAY. THANK YOU. >> HI. WE SUPPORT COUNCIL BILL 120933. THE OPPORTUNITY TO CREATE A VIBRANT MAKERS DISTRICT IS A STEP IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION. NOT ONLY TO BOOST ECONOMIC AND PUBLIC BENEFITS IN THE STADIUM DISTRICT BUT TO BRIDGE THAT GAP BETWEEN MY NEAR SQUARE AND THE CID. BUILDINGS CONTINUE TO DETERIORATE, VACANCIES ARE INCREASING AND PUBLIC SAFETY CONCERNS ARE RISING. THE MAKERS DEVELOPMENT PROVIDES WOMEN AND MINORITY ENTREPRENEURS WITH OPPORTUNITY TO GROW AND THRIVE IN THE URBAN FORM. THE BILL SUPPORTS THE ADDITION OF MORE AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNITS IN SEATTLE. 87% OF REGISTERED VOTERS SUPPORT THE PLAN. INVESTING IN THIS INITIATIVE WILL CONTRIBUTE TO MUCH- NEEDED STREET IMPROVEMENT INFRASTRUCTURE, SMALL BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT, PUBLIC CITY ENHANCEMENT, JOB GROWTH AND MOST IMPORTANTLY, INCREASE OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING FOR FAMILIES. THANK YOU. >> AFTER SPEAKER NUMBER 20, WE WILL MOVE INTO REMOTE, THE PUBLIC COMMENT, WHICH THERE ARE FIVE PRESENT. SPEAKER NUMBER 20. >> COUNCIL MEMBERS, THANK YOU. JOSHUA CURTIS, AND I WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS THREE ISSUES. LICK WHICH FACTION, SOUND LEVELS AND PROXIMITY. LIQUEFACTION CAN BE ADDRESSED THROUGH SEISMIC BUILDING CENTERS AS WE DID WITH THE BALLPARK DID OVER 25 YEARS AGO. GEORGETOWN WHERE OPPONENTS WERE IN FAVOR OF RESIDENTIAL ZONING IS ALSO IN THE LIQUEFACTION ZONE. THIS IS A NOISY AREA, A THE EIS RECOMMENDS THAT BUILDING ELEMENTS SUCH AS TRIPLE PANE WINDOWS BE APPLIED. GEORGETOWN HAS AN ALMOST IDENTICAL NOISE RATING. OUR AREA IS LOCATED ACROSS THE BAY FROM THE HARBOR. GEORGETOWN, WHERE OPPONENTS WERE IN FAVOR OF RESIDENTIAL ZONING IS LOCATED NEXT TO THE SUPER FUND SITE. DELAYING THE VOTE WOULD BE A DISTRACTION. PLEASE HONOR THE DEAL STAKE HOLDERS AGREED TO OVER TWO YEARS AGO AND VOTE TODAY TO ADD AFFORDABLE HOUSING, PROMOTE MAKERS BUSINESSES AND IMPROVE PUBLIC SAFETY. THANK YOU. >> PUBLIC COMMENTERS PLEASE PRESS STAR 6. THE FIRST UP IS CURT SWANSON. GO AHEAD, CURT. GO AHEAD, CURT. >> HELLO. I'M SPEAKING IN SUPPORT OF THE COUNCIL BILL 120933. I'M A POLITICAL COORDINATOR FOR THE LOCAL PIPE FITTERS UNION. WE HAVE WORKED ON PIPING IN SEATTLE FOR OVER 130 YEARS. WE HAVE OVER 4,000 MEMBERS IN THE CURRENT REGION. WE RESPECT THE IMPORTANCE OF TRADE AND COMMERCE AND SUPPORT LIGHT INDUSTRIAL, SMALL BUSINESSES AND LOCAL CRAFTS AND ACCORDABLE HOUSING. OUR MEMBERS COULD LOVE -- [ INAUDIBLE ] WE BELIEVE THE FUTURE RESIDENT BUSINESSES AND TRADE OPERATIONS CAN CO- EXIST AND PROSPER. LET'S CREATE ANOTHER UNIQUE REGION WITHIN THE CITY. PLEASE VOTE IN FAVOR OF THE COUNCIL BILL TODAY. DON'T DELAY. THANK YOU. >> NUKE. OUR NEXT SPEAKER IS >> THANK YOU, OUR NEXT SPEAKER IS PETER. >> GOOD AFTERNOON. I SERVE AS THE VICE PRESIDENT OF THE AMERICAN WATERWAYS OPERATORS, WHICH IS THE ADVOCATE, RESOURCE AND VOICE FOR THE TUG BOAT AND BARGE INDUSTRY. I'M ALSO A BOARD MEMBER OF THE WASHINGTON MARITIME FEDERATION. OUR INDUSTRY, WHICH SUPPORTS THOUSANDS OF FAMILY WAGE JOBS IN SEATTLE WASHINGTON, OPPOSE COUNCIL BILL 120933. AS YOU HEARD TIME AND TIME AGAIN, WE HAD A DEAL. ONCE THESE INDUSTRIAL LANDS ARE REPLACED WITH HOMES THEY ARE GONE FOREVER. OUR COALITION HAS THIS MESSAGE, THIS IS NOT JUST ABOUT PROTECTING WHAT WE HAVE, BUT BUILDING A FUTURE WHERE OUR MARITIME INDUSTRY THRIVES AND OUR STATE CONTINUES TO LEAD IN GLOBAL TRADE. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. >> THANK YOU. THE NEXT PUBLIC SPEAKER IS MICAH. PLEASE PRESS STAR 6, MIKE. >> YES, GOOD AFTERNOON, COUNCIL MEMBERS. I'M WITH THE GENERAL CITY COLLECTIVE. I'M IN SUPPORT OF THIS, AND I WANT TO THANK SARA NELSON FOR BRING THING LEGISLATION. WE SHOULD BE THANKING CHRIS HANSON FOR HOCKEY THAT'S HERE IN SEATTLE. NOBODY IS TALKING ABOUT HOCKEY UNTIL CHRIS HANSON WAS TALKING ABOUT GETTING THE SONICS BACK. THAT IDEA GOT HIJACKED. AND CHRIS HANSON IS A GENUINE DUDE. SOMETHING NEEDS TO HAPPEN DIFFERENTLY. I SUPPORT THIS. DON'T GIVE IN TO THE BULLYING ABOUT THE PORT. EVERYTHING WILL BE ALL RIGHT. WE NEED SOMETHING NEW AND FRESH IN SEATTLE AND WE NEED HOUSING. SO I SUPPORT THIS. VOTE IN FAVOR OF THIS. THAT'S ALL I GOT TO SAY. TAKE CARE. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU, MIKE. OUR NEXT SPEAKER IS ANDREA. >> GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS ANDREA SATO, I'M A MEMBER OF THE BALLPARK PSD BOARD OF DIRECTORS AND I WORK ON AFFORDABLE HOUSING ISSUES IN MY DAY JOB. WE JOIN WITH OUR COALITION MEMBERS TO ASK THAT YOU VOTE TODAY IN SUPPORT OF THE STADIUM MAKERS DISTRICT. AN OPPORTUNITY THAT WILL HELP TO TRANSFORM THE LARGE AND ABANDONED AREAS AROUND THE BALLPARK INTO A SAFE AND VIBRANT NEIGHBORHOOD. THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY TO ADDRESS THE HOUSING CRISIS OUR CITY FACES. IN 2023, THE LAST- MINUTE REMOVAL OF HOUSING AS AN ALLOWED USE IN THE STADIUM DISTRICT REVERSED YEARS OF DISCUSSION BY STAKE HOLDERS AND DISREGARDED THE FINDINGS OF THE TRAFFIC STUDY. TODAY, WE ASK YOU TO REMEDY THAT JOEF SIGHT. TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THE OPPORTUNITY TO ADDRESS THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING SHORTAGE IN THE CITY, PROVIDE SMALL MAKERS BUSINESSES THE OPPORTUNITY TO STAY AND FLOURISH IN THE CITY, AND IMPROVE THE PUBLIC SAFETY IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. NO DELAY, VOTE TODAY. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. NEXT SPEAKER IS DAVID HANES. >> THANK YOU. MAYBE COUNCIL SHOULD LOBBY PRESIDENT TRUMP TO BROKE EAR DEAL TO PUT A FEDERAL INJUNCTION ON ALL THE PORT AUTHORITIES, RAISE THE RATES AND SHUT DOWN THE PORT DURING GAME TIME. AND SPOP TOP THEM FROM WATERING DOWN THE INTEGRITY OF CUSTOMS PROTECTIONS THAT ALLOW DRUGS COME IN. WHO TELL OUT OUR SOVEREIGNTY FOR BAD TRADE DEALS THAT THEY WILL SKIM OFF OF AT TAX PAYERS EXPERIENCE. MAYBE COUNCIL NEEDS TO DEMAND THAT THE PORT PUT NOISE ABATEMENT WALLS AROUND THE TERMINAL CLOSEST TO THE STADIUM TO ALLEVIATE SOME OF THE UNNECESSARY NOISE POLLUTIONS THAT GO ON 24/7 AND DEMAND THE INDUSTRIAL TRAIN STOP HONKING THEIR HORNS EVERY NIGHT AND AT GAME TIME. COUNCIL SHOULD TAKE THE FINE PRINT OUT OF THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING AGREEMENT WHERE IF A DEVELOPER BUILDS LOW QUALITY HOUSING -- [ MUTED ] >> NOW TO IN-PERSON SPEAKERS. >> WE WANT TO MOVE INTO THE NEXT TEN SPEAKERS. SPEAKERS 21 THROUGH 30. IF YOU COULD LINE UP AT THE TWO PODIUMS, THAT WOULD BE GREAT AND PLEASE INTRODUCE YOURSELF. >> I'M CHRIS MARCH HERE, THE PUBLIC BOARD THAT OVERSEES PUBLIC OWNERSHIP OF T- MOBILE PARK. AS STEWARDS, WE HAVE SEEN MANY CITIES RELOCATE THEIR STADIUMS INTO VITAL AREAS THAT ARE SAFE AND WELCOMING. HERE IN SEATTLE, WHERE WE FIND OURSELVES FACING AN AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND PUBLIC SAFETY CHALLENGE, WE SHOULD BE TAKING ADVANTAGE OF THE STADIUM DISTRICT TO DO THE SAME AS PLACES LIKE DENVER, SAN DIEGO, AND WASHINGTON, D.C. SINCE 2012, THE PFD HAS WORKED WITH OUR PARTNERS TO BRING THIS VISION TO FRUITION. BETWEEN 2019 AND 2022, WE WORKED IN GOOD FAITH WITH THOSE STAKE HOLDERS THAT INCLUDED HOUSING IN THE STADIUM MAKERS DISTRICT. WE WERE DISAPPOINTED THAT COMPROMISE WAS NOT HONORED IN 2023. WE ASK THAT YOU MAKE GOOD ON THAT COMPROMISE TODAY, WITHOUT DELAY, AND USE THIS OPPORTUNITY TO ADDRESS AN AFFORDABLE HOUSING SHORTAGE, ALLOW SMALL MAKERS BUSINESSES THE OPPORTUNITY TO STAY IN THE CITY AND IMPROVE THE PUBLIC SAFETY IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >> SPEAKER NUMBER 22. NO 22, ON TO 23. THANK YOU. >> HI. MY NAME IS GARY JOHNSON. A RETIRED EMPLOYEE OF THE CITY. I'VE BEEN WORKING ON THIS ISSUE FOR 12 YEARS. THIS PROJECT HAS BEEN STUDIED THOROUGHLY. THIS WILL BRING A LOT OF BENEFIT AND THE STUDIES INDICATE THAT THE PROPOSED HOUSING WILL NOT INTERFERE WITH PORT OPERATIONS AND THE PROPOSED MAKERS STRICT AN INCREDIBLE OPPORTUNITY TO BRING LIGHT INDUSTRY BACK TO AN AREA THAT HAS ZERO INDUSTRY NOW. PLEASE MOVE THIS FORWARD AND DON'T DELAY. THANK YOU. >> HELLO, COUNCIL MEMBERS. I'M RON MANUEL. I RISE IN OPPOSITION TO THIS. I WORKED ON THE DOCKS FOR ALMOST 40 YEARS. I WANT TO THANK THE COUNCIL MEMBERS WHO HAVE BEEN OPEN MINDED TO LISTEN TO THOSE OF US WHO HAVE WORKED THE DOCKS AND SUPPORT THE BUSINESSES OF THIS CITY. THE BUSINESSES LOCATED IN THIS INDUSTRIAL OVERLAY ZONE. SOME OF YOU LISTENED, SOME DID NOT. I WILL APOLOGIZE FOR SOME OF OUR MEMBERS THAT MAYBE CROSSED THE LINE IN PERSONAL ATTACKS. THOSE MEMBERS ARE PASSIONATE ABOUT OUR WAY OF LIFE THE KNOWLEDGE THAT WE HAVE BEEN REASONABLE AND NEGOTIATED IN GOOD FAITH WITH THE CITY TO PROTECT OUR JOBS FROM CONSTANT ATTACKS FROM ALL SORTS OF ENTITIES. WE REACHED THE DEAL TO BE BLIND SIDED BY THIS LAND USE POLICY CHANGE, WHICH JEOPARDIZES OUR JOBS, SO WE MAY HAVE ACTED OUT. I HEARD A COMMENT ABOUT WHO BUILT THIS CITY. BUT IF THEY BUILT IT, A TRUCK BROUGHT IT, A SHIP BROUGHT IT. THANK YOU. >> GOOD AFTERNOON, CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS. I AM A UNION CARPENTER REPRESENTATIVE AND I'M A VERY PROUD CARPENTER. I URGE YOU TODAY TO SUPPORT THE MAKERS HOUSING PROJECT. THIS IS ABOUT WHAT KIND OF CITY SEATTLE WANTS TO BE. DO WE WANT A PLACE WHERE WORKING PEOPLE CAN AFFORD TO LIVE OR JUST A PLACE WHERE THE WEALTHY RESIDE? THIS PROJECT HAS AN INVESTMENT IN A WORKFORCE FOR OUR ECONOMY AND FUTURE. PROVIDES HOUSING FOR WORKERS, CREATES UNION JOBS AND KEEPS INDUSTRIES ALIVE, ENSURING SKILLED TRADES WOMEN AND MEN AREN'T FORCED OUT OF THE CITY THAT THEY HELPED BUILD. WE CAN'T HAVE OUTDATED THINKING HOLD US BACK. SEATTLE NEEDS SMART, FORWARD LOOKING SOLUTIONS. THE MAKERS DISTRICT IS THAT SOLUTION. I URGE YOU TO VOTE YES AND INVEST IN A FUTURE WHERE WORKING PEOPLE WILL HAVE A PLACE TO LIVE IN SEATTLE. THANK YOU. >> NUMBER 26. >> GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS NICK SCHULTZ, A PROUD UBC MEMBER OF LOCAL 206. I SPEAK ON BEHALF OF THE WESTERN COUNCIL SAYING, PROMOTING THIS WILL HELP NOT ONLY JOBSJOBS OUR MEMBERS, BUT ALSO POSSIBLY MEMBERS FROM ALL AROUND, ALL ALONG THE WESTERN SIDE TO MOVE INTO THE CITY OF SEATTLE. A LOT OF OUR MEMBERS CAN NOT AFFORD THIS. THIS WILL ENHANCE THAT TIE. ALSO, SMALL BUSINESSES ALSO ENHANCE OTHER JOBS, NOT JUST FOR THE CARPENTERS BUT OTHER UNION MEMBERS THAT HAVE BEEN ANNOUNCED. SO THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. I ASK FOR YOUR VOTE FOR THIS. >> HELLO. THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR BEING HERE TODAY. MY NAME IS JESSICA, I OWN A COMPANY CALLED MORNING GLORY CHAI. I STARTED IN 1995 IN THE PIPE PLACE MARKET. WE HAVE A SPACE IN GREENWOOD CURRENTLY. WE WERE LOOKING TO RELOCATE INTO THE STADIUM AREA AROUND 6th AND MASSACHUSETTS, BUT BECAUSE IT'S SUCH A DANGEROUS AREA CURRENTLY, WE DIDN'T WANT TO BRING OUR EMPLOYEES DOWN THERE UNLESS WE HAD A PLAN TO TRANSPORT THEM IN AND OUT. I STRONGLY SUPPORT THE STADIUM MAKERS DISTRICT. I WOULD LOVE TO HAVE A SPACE WHERE I COULD PUT MY BUSINESS, MY 30-YEAR- LONG BUSINESS IN A SAFE PLACE THAT SUPPORTS SMALL BUSINESS MANUFACTURING. I'M CONFIDENCE YOU'LL FIND WAYS TO MITIGATE THE CONCERNS OF THE FREIGHT AND THE PORT. I RELY UPON FREIGHT FOR MY INGREDIENTS TO MAKE MY TEA PRODUCTS, SO I DEFINITELY AM IN SUPPORT OF FINDING A BALANCE WHERE THE PORT CAN DO WHAT THEY NEED TO DO AND SMALL BUSINESS IS ABLE TO BENEFIT FROM THAT TO COMBINE EFFORT. SO THANK YOU. PLEASE VOTE IN SUPPORT OF THE STADIUM MAKERS DISTRICT. >> GOOD AFTERNOON. I'M GRACIE SANTOS, THE OWNER OF GRACIE'S PIES. I'M HERE AS A SEATTLE MEMBER TO ASK THE COUNCIL TO VOTE IN SUPPORT OF 120933 TO CREATE A STADIUM MAKERS DISTRICT. MY COMMENTARY KITCHEN IS CURRENTLY LOCATED IN THE CENTRAL DISTRICT. I HAVE STRUGGLED TO FIND A PHYSICAL SPACE SINCE 2020 FOR MY BUSINESS. AND THIS PROJECT COULD HAVE A HUGE ECONOMIC IMPACT INCREASING LOCAL OWNERSHIP, SEATTLE TOURISM, EMPLOYMENT, AND EQUITY FOR BUSINESS OWNERS OF MARGINALIZED COMMUNITIES. THE INDUSTRIAL AND MARITIME STRATEGY LEGISLATION WAS PASSED BY THE CITY OF SEATTLE IN 2023. TO IN PART, CREATE AFFORDABLE OPPORTUNITIES FOR SMALL-SCALE BUSINESSES AND MAKERS. OFFERING HOUSING AND BUSINESS OPPORTUNITIES TO MAKERS IN A TWO- BLOCK AREA WOULD NOT IMPEDE THE MARITIME INDUSTRY. [ MUTED ] -- AND WE CAN, IN FACT -- [ MUTED ] >> NUMBER 29. >> HELLO. MY NAME IS BRENDAN GALLAGHER, A MEMBER OF UFCW 3000. I'M HERE TO SUPPORT THE MAKERS DISTRICT BECAUSE WE NEED HOUSING SO THE PEOPLE THAT KEEP SEATTLE RUN NING TO AFFORD THE PEOPLE THAT LIVE HERE TO KEEP SEATTLE RUNNING. THIS DISTRICT IS THE OPPORTUNITY TO CREATE A VIBRANT NEIGHBORHOOD AND UNDERUTILIZED AREA SUPPORT LOCAL BUSINESSES, CREATE JOBS, AND HELP ADDRESS THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING CRISIS, ENSURING THAT PEOPLE WORKING, WHETHER IT BE A GROCERY STORE, COFFEE SHOP, RESTAURANT OR OTHER RETAIL SPACE, CAN BUILD A LIFE IN THE CITY WE LOVE SO DEEPLY. SEATTLE WANTS TO KEEP ITS WORKERS, WE NEED TO TAKE BOLD ACTION ON HOUSING. PLEASE SUPPORT THE BILL AND MAKE SEATTLE A CITY WHERE EVERYONE CAN THRIVE, NOT JUST THOSE WHO EARN THE MOST. THANK YOU. >> SPEAKER NUMBER 30, THEN 31 THROUGH 40, IF YOU COULD START LINING UP. >> GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS MATT, I'M A PROUD MEMBER OF THE REGIONAL COUNCIL OF CARPENTERS. THIS IS A DIRECT INVESTMENT INTO YOUR CONSICH -- CONSTITUENTS. IT'S GOING TO CREATE HUNDREDS OF CONSTRUCTION JOBS FOR YEARS TO COME AND ENABLE THOSE WORKERS TO BUILD CAREERS, NOT JUST CHASE JOBS AROUND THE REGION. THIS IS A CHANCE TO PUT SEATTLE WORKERS FIRST. PLEASE SUPPORT THIS AGREEMENT THAT SUPPORTS ECONOMICECONOMIC AND HIGHER WAGES. I URGE YOU TO VOTE YES. THANK YOU. >> NUMBER 31. >> HI, MY NAME IS JAMIE HUNT. WE'RE A DISTILLERY IN NORTH SEATTLE. WE HAPPEN TO BE ON A -- IN A SHIPPING YARD. WE HAVE A BEAUTIFUL SYNERGY OF DISTILLERIES, THE FRUIT TOP BREWING WHICH WILL HOPEFULLY COME BACK, AND THERE'S A FISH PROCESSING UNIT IN OUR SPACE. WE ALL WORK REALLY WELL TOGETHER. I'M IN SUPPORT OF THE STADIUM DISTRICT KNOWING HOW HARD IT IS AS A MAKER TO FIND A SPACE. IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT FOR US TO SUPPORT THE COMMUNITY, BE PROUD OF OUR MAKERS, MAKE IT EASIER ON THEM. IT'S ALSO REALLY IMPORTANT AS A RESIDENT, A RECENT RESIDENT OF DOWNTOWN SEATTLE, I MOVED FROM WELLINGFORD TO SEE MORE PEOPLE COMING INTO THE CITY AND FEELING THAT SAFETY THAT IS THERE FOR PEOPLE COMING TO WORK, FOR PEOPLE MOVING INTO THE CITY. WE NEED THAT. WE NEED AFFORDABLE HOUSING HERE AND -- [ MUTED ] >> HELLO, I'M ANDREA PORTER FROM THE SEATTLE GOODS NETWORK. WE THANK PRESIDENT NELSON FOR HER LEADERSHIP ON THE STADIUM MAKERS DISTRICT PROPOSAL. SEATTLE MADE IS A NETWORK OF 700 MANUFACTURING BUSINESSES PRODUCING RIGHT HERE IN SEATTLE. SEATTLE MADE BUSINESSES INCLUDE BIKE BUILDERS, FASHION DESIGNERS, JEWELRY ARTISANS, GLASS BLOWERS AND MANY MORE. THE NUMBER ONE CHALLENGE OUR MEMBERSHIP FACES IS FINDING AFFORDABLE SPACE. THIS MAKERS DISTRICT WOULD SOLVE THIS SIGNIFICANT HURDLE AND CREATE A RETAIL OUTLET FOR MAKERS. A COLLECTIVE SPACE WHERE MAKERS CAN SHARE INFRASTRUCTURE SUCH AS EXPENSIVE MACHINERY. FINALLY, AN IN- SON COMMUNITY WHERE SMALL- SCALE MANUFACTURERS CAN SUPPORT EACH OTHER. WE ASK THE COUNCIL TO VOTE YES. THANK YOU. >> NUMBER 34. >> GOOD AFTERNOON, I'M MATT DAVIES, A PROUD MEMBER OF CARPENTERS 360. I'M HERE IN STRONG SUPPORT OF THE BILL, BECAUSE IT'S A WIN FOR SEATTLE'S FUTURE AND THE WORKING PEOPLE. WE BUILD THIS CITY, ITS HOMES, ITS BUSINESSES, ITS INFRASTRUCTURE. BUT TOO MANY OF US CAN'T AFFORD TO LIVE HERE ANYMORE. IF SEATTLE WANTS STRONG, RELIABLE WORKFORCE, WE NEED HOUSING NEAR OUR JOBSITES, NOT TWO HOURS AWAY. THIS PROJECT CREATES GOOD- PAYING UNION JOBS, PROVIDES AFFORDABLE HOUSING FOR WORKING FAMILIES AND STRENGTHENS SEATTLE'S ECONOMY BY KEEPING SKILLED TRADES PEOPLE CLOSE TO THE INDUSTRIES THAT NEED THEM. SOME SAY HOUSING DOESN'T BELONG IN THE INDUSTRY, BUT INDUSTRY NEEDS WORKERS, WORKERS NEED HOMES, AND SEATTLE NEEDS BOTH TO THRIVE. I URGE YOU TO SUPPORT THE MAKERS DISTRICT AND INVEST IN THE CITY THAT VALUES BOTH JOBS AND HOUSING. THANK YOU. >> GREETINGS, COUNCIL MEMBERS. MY NAME IS DAN, I'M A LONG SHOREMAN. I MOVE CARGO. PLEASE DON'T ASK ME HOW TO BUILD BUILDINGS. I HAVE A LETTER HERE TO CITY COUNCIL OF 72 TRANSPORTATION EXPERTS OPPOSE THING AMENDMENT BEFORE YOU. THERE'S 12 TRANSPORTATION UNIONS ON THIS, PORTS, PORT OPERATORS WAREHOUSES, EXPORTERS. I ASK WHO WOULD YOU CONSULT ON PORT OPERATIONS, DEVELOPERS, STADIUM PEOPLE? BUILDERS? FOR THE FOLKS WHO OPERATE THE PORTS? LET'S TAKE THE POLITICS OUT OF THIS. WE THOUGHT WE HAD A SECURE, LONG- TERM STABILITY ON INDUSTRIAL LANDS IN 2023. WE DID SEE THERE WERE POSSIBLE LARGE PROJECTS AND IMPACTS COMING. THESE MARGINAL HEAVY HAUL CORRIDOR, AMTRAK EXPANSION WAS STUDIED AND A MAJOR STORM WATER PROJECT ALL WORK FOR THE TRADES. THIS IS A STUDY THAT WOULD STUDY THESE ISSUES. PLEASE LISTEN TO -- [ MUTED ] >> WE'LL LET 33 GO AND MOVE ON. THANK YOU. >> HELLO, MY NAME IS ANN, A SMALL BUSINESS OWNER, AND I WORK IN THE CIRCULAR ECONOMY MANUFACTURING. I'M HERE TODAY AS A PROUD MEMBER OF SEATTLE MADE TO SUPPORT THIS BILL. MY BUSINESS IS LOCATED IN THE SOTO AREA. WHEN I FIRST STARTED MANUFACTURING IN 2000 IN THE SOUTH SEATTLE AREA FOR OVER A DECADE IT WAS AN ONGOING STRUGGLE TO FIND SPACES FOR SMALL BUSINESSES AND WORKERS HAD TO COMMUTE LONG DISTANCES AND EXPRESSED A DESIRE TO LIVE AND WORK IN COMMUNITY. SEVERAL COMPANIES THAT MADE IT SUCCESSFUL ARE CASCADE DESIGN. WEATHER EXPAND THE OPPORTUNITIES FOR THE STADIUM ATTENDEES TO SUPPORT SMALL BUSINESS AND MAKE IT A THRIVING AREA. WE KNOW DIVERSE ZONING ALLOWS FOR A THRIVING COMMUNITY. THE STADIUM DISTRICT IS LACKING DIVERSITY AND OPPORTUNITY TO REVITALIZE THE STADIUM DISTRICT WOULD MAKE THE TYPE OF IMPROVEMENTS LIKE LAKE UNION AND THE WATER FRONT DISTRICT. THANK YOU FOR TAKING THE TIME TO BUILD A BETTER SEATTLE. >> 36. >> HELLO. MY NAME IS ALLIE, A PROUD LONG SHORE WOMAN. FIRST, I WANT TO CORRECT THE RECORD. LABOR NEVER ENDORSED THIS PROJECT OR LEGISLATION. THAT WAS FALSE. FURTHER, 120933 WAS RUSHED TO AVOID A FULL EXAMINATION ON THE IMPACT OF FREIGHT MOBILITY. ALL 12 TRANSPORTATION UNIONS OPPOSED HOUSING ON THIS SIDE. FUTURE RESIDENTS WOULD FACE MANY PUBLIC HEALTH AND SAFETY HAZARDS. TAKE YOUR PICK OF BAD OUTCOMES AND THE HIGHEST POLLUTION IN THE CITY. TOPSOIL IN NEED OF REMEDIATION, THE HIGHEST DENSITY OF TRAFFIC INCIDENTS. WHEN BIG TRUCKS GET IN ACCIDENTS, THEY'RE MUCH MORE LIKELY TO BE FATAL. HEALTH OUTCOME REALITIES OF THOSE LIVING IN SOUTH PARK WITH SIMILAR POLLUTION HAVE THE HIGHEST RATES OF CHRONIC ILLNESS, LOWER BIRTH WEIGHTS AND HIGHER INFANT MORTALITY. THANK YOU. >> HI, I'M JAMIE FLEMMING, SPEAKING FOR TEAMSTERS. THERE HAS BEEN A TREMENDOUS AMOUNT OF HAND WAVING ON SOME OF THE DANGERS OF THIS IDEA. THE LONG STORE, I'M SURE, HANDLED THE ISSUE OF THE THRIVING MARITIME INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX THAT WILL BE AFFECTED. I'M HERE TO TALK ABOUT THE FREIGHT CORRIDOR THAT IS RUNNING THROUGH WHERE WE WANT TO PUT HOUSING. I CAN'T FATHOM HOW ANYONE WOULD THINK THIS IS A GOOD IDEA, BECAUSE SOMEBODY IS GOING TO GET HIT BY A TRUCK AND IS GOING TO DIE. AND WE DON'T WANT ANY PART OF THAT. AND SO THERE ARE ALTERNATIVES. I KNOW THERE ARE A LOT OF PEOPLE HERE THAT WANT AFFORDABLE HOUSING. I'M ONE OF THEM. THERE'S A LOT OF PEOPLE THAT WANT THE WORK INVOLVED IN BUILDING. I'M ONE OF THEM. I WANT THEM TO DO IT SOMEWHERE ELSE. PLEASE, THIS IS NOT THE PLACE TO BUILD IT. THANK YOU. >> HI. MY NAME IS WAILEN ROBERT. I'M A RENTER IN DISTRICT THREE. A MERCHANT SEAMAN. SUP HAS BEEN ON THE SEATTLE WATER FRONT SINCE 1885. OUR INDUSTRY HAS BEEN THE MOST CONSISTENT SOURCE OF TAX REVENUE FOR OUR CITY FOR OVER 100 YEARS. TERMINAL 46 IS THE ONLY NATURALLY DEEP WATER BERTH ON THE ENTIRE WEST COAST. WE CAN ALWAYS HAVE THIS INDUSTRY IF WE PROTECT IT. WHAT YOU'RE PROPOSING WILL HAMPER ACCESS TO OUR TERMINALS. I ASK THAT MY MEMBERS HAVE A FUTURE IN THIS CITY AND THAT YOU VOTE AGAINST THIS LEGISLATION. THANK YOU. >> NOW WE GO TO SPEAKER NUMBER 40, AND AFTER THAT, WE'LL GO TO 41 THROUGH 50, IF YOU CAN PLEASE START LINING UP. AND JUST SO AS A REMINDER, SPEAKER NUMBER 38 IS NOT HERE, IF THAT'S CORRECT. THANK YOU. PLEASE, NUMBER 40. >> HELLO, SARAH ESH. THE RESULT OF THE RESOLUTION PASSED IN DECEMBER OF 2023 SPECIFICALLY ASKED THAT THEY WORK COLLABORATIVELY WITH THE PORT, SEATTLE FREIGHT AND OTHERS TO ANALYZE TRANSPORTATION PLANS, ET CETERA. THIS COLLABORATION HAS NEVER HAPPENED AND THUS, THERE'S BEEN NO REPORT OR ANALYSIS THAT CAN SPEAK TO THE IMPACT OF HOUSING IN THIS AREA. PLEASE DO YOUR DUE DILIGENCE. IF HOUSING SUCCEEDS, THIS IS WHAT I SEE, CHRIS HANSON GETS HIS UP- ZONE, OTHER DEVELOPERS SEE THAT THEY CAN DO THE SAME. AFFORDABLE HOUSING GETS SCRAPPED. MORE WEALTHY INDIVIDUALS MOVE IN, DEMAND LESS NOISE AND POLLUTION, AND THEN BEFORE YOU KNOW IT, ALL OF OUR INDUSTRIAL LANDS ARE GONE, SO IS THE PORT OF SEATTLE, AND SO ARE THE THOUSANDS OF JOBS. THE ONLY PERSON WHO WINS IS CHRIS HANSON. THE CITY RELIES ON THAT PORT. PLEASE PROTECT IT. >> SPEAKER NUMBER 41. ROBERT. THANK YOU. >> I'M A LONG- TERM RESIDENT. I'VE WATCHED A LOT OF PEOPLE IN TRAFFIC DOWN ON THE PORT. IF TRUCKS ARE GOING TO BE INVOLVED WITH PEDESTRIANS, YOU'VE LOST YOUR MINDS. THEY CAN BUILD ANY AFFORDABLE HOUSING ANYWHERE, BECAUSE MY NEIGHBORHOOD HAS LOTS OF EMPTY LOTS AND I LIVE IN RAINIER BEACH. SO ACROSS THE STREET, THERE'S AN EMPTY LOT. THERE IT IS. YOU JUST DON'T GET IT. THERE'S A LOT OF JOBS AT STAKE. AND A LOT OF PEOPLE MIGHT DIE OVER THIS MIXING OF TRUCKS AND A LOT OF PEDESTRIANS. THERE'S ALREADY A MIX DOWN THERE. ANYBODY BEEN HIT? THEY WILL IF YOU DO THIS. >> NUMBER 42. >> HI, COUNCIL. MY NAME IS JIM FROM THE MARITIME TRANSPORTATION SECTOR WORKING HERE IN SEATTLE. I STAND BEHIND THE PORT OF SEATTLE TO REINFORCE PRESERVING INDUSTRIAL LANDS. THE CITY PASSED LEGISLATION IN 2023 DECLARING THAT HOUSING IS INCOMPATIBLE USE IN THE SOUTHERN NEIGHBORHOOD AND IN THE MARINE INDUSTRIAL CENTER. WE RELY ON THE PORT TO ACCESS OUR CUSTOMER BASE. THESE LANDS ARE USED FOR WAREHOUSING, FOR REPAIR FACILITIES, FREIGHT MOBILITY CORRIDORS AND OTHER BUSINESS RELATED USES. ONCE THESE LANDS ARE CONVERTED TO RESIDENTIAL HOUSING, IT MAKES IT NO LONGER VIABLE FOR OTHER ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND DISPLACES THE INDUSTRY THAT GENERATES THESE JOBS AND REVENUE THAT THE CITY RELIES ON. THE CURRENT PRESIDENTIAL ADMINISTRATION IS ADDING TARIFFS AND WANTS TO PASS A LEVY ON PORTS OF FOREIGN SHIPS. THIS CANNOT HAPPEN. SO LET'S PRESERVE THESE LANDS. THANK YOU. >> HELLO, CHRIS HARMAN. HOPEFULLY WE CAN KEEP SEATTLE'S PORT WORKING MOVING CONTAINERS. UI SAT DOWN WITH LONGLONG SHORE COMMISSION AND YOU WORKED OUT A DEAL. A LOT OF PEOPLE PUT TIME, EFFORT, AND ENERGY INTO THIS TO CREATE WHAT WOULD BE THE BEST CASE, WIN-WIN SCENARIO. IT CAN'T BE ANY OTHER WAY. IF THIS MANY PEOPLE GOT TOGETHER TO CREATE SOMETHING, IT'S GOT TO BE THE BEST SITUATION. PLEASE VOTE NO TO KEEP THE PORT WORKING. >> JEREMY, LOCAL 19 LONG SHOREMAN. COUNCILMAN MOORE AND NELSON, I LIVE IN YOUR NECK OF THE WOODS. I MET YOU, COUNCILMAN MOORE, IN FRONT OF THE QFC WHEN YOU WERE RUNNING AND I'M VERY PROUD AND THANKFUL TO THE COUNCIL FOR THE WORK YOU'RE DOING. I KNOW THAT 12% OF THE LAND IN SEATTLE IS USED BY THE PORT FOR INDUSTRIAL PURPOSES. WE JUST ASK THAT YOU PLEASE FIND ANOTHER PLACE SO YOU CAN PROTECT MY JOB. THANK YOU. >> SPEAKER NUMBER 45. >> THANK YOU FOR LETTING ME SPEAK FOR YOU GUYS. I'M A MEMBER OF ILWU, HAVE BEEN FOR OVER 25 YEARS. FROM WHAT I SEE, THE REAL PROBLEM IS THE LOCATION. THERE'S OTHER LOCATIONS. THE STUDY HAS BEEN DONE THAT THIS IS NOT VIABLE. THIS IS NOT VIABLE. YOU'RE GOING TO CREATE INSTANCE WHERE IS PEOPLE ARE GOING TO BE ENTER MINGLING WITH A SEMI TRUCK, AND THE SEMI TRUCK IS GOING TO WIN EVERY TIME. IT'S 80,000 POUNDS. IT SQUISHES. WE'VE HAD INSTANCES WHERE PEOPLE WERE RUN OVER DOWN THERE, AND YOU JUST CAN'T HAUL THEM AWAY ON A STRETCHER. IT HAPPENS DIFFERENTLY THAN THAT. SO PLEASE VOTE NO FOR MY JOB, PLEASE. >> GOOD AFTERNOON, COUNCIL MEMBERS AND CHAIR NELSON. I'M JAY JENNINGS, VICE PRESIDENT OF NORTHWEST MARINE TRADE ASSOCIATION, REPRESENTING OVER 600 MEMBERS. FOUNDED IN 1947, WE ARE THE OLDEST AND LARGEST REGIONAL TRADE ASSOCIATION. JUST LAST MOMENT, CONCLUDING OUR 78th SUCCESSFUL SEATTLE BOAT SHOW. THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO EXPRESS OPPOSITION TO COUNCIL BILL 120933. IT MAY SOUND COUNTERINTUITIVE, BUT MUCH OF MARITIME HAPPENS ON LAND. ALONG WITH OUR PARTNERS, OUR MEMBERS CONTINUE TO BE PLAGUED BY DEVELOPMENT, CRIME, AND RESTRICTED ARTERIALS THROUGHOUT THE CITY. WE RELY ON CARGO SHIPPING, SUPPLY CHAIN EFFICIENCY AND FREIGHT MOBILITY, ALL OF WHICH ARE THREATENED BY THIS PROPOSAL. ON BEHALF OF THE NORTHWEST MARINE TRADE ASSOCIATION, I ASK YOU TO DELAY THIS PROPOSAL AND PROTECT THE FUTURE OF MARITIME IN SEATTLE. THANK YOU. >> HELLO. THE ALEAH LITER, I'M IN OPPOSITION TO BILL 120933. I'M A RANK AND FILE UNION MEMBER FOR THE BUSINESS CITY COUNCIL. WE BOTH RUN OFF OF DEMOCRACY. WE LOVE DEMOCRACY, AND WE RESPECT THE SANCTITY OFOF NEGOTIATION. SO I ASK YOU TO PLEASE RESPECT THE EXISTING PLANNING THAT WAS ALREADY NEGOTIATED IN 2023. AND RESOLUTION 3209 THAT SAYS A STUDY MUST BE COMPLETED OF NON- INDUSTRIAL USES OF THIS LAND. I'M NOT AGAINST ARTISTS. I'M AN ARTIST MYSELF. I'M NOT AGAINST THE BUILDING TRADES. I WANT YOU TO HAVE JOBS. I WANT TO HAVE A JOB. I'M NOT AGAINST HOUSING. I WAS HOUSING INSECURE MY WHOLE LIFE UNTIL I GOT A UNION JOB. UNION JOBS HELP WITH POVERTY. AND SO I'M NOT AGAINST THESE ISSUES IN GENERAL, BUT NOT RIGHT HERE, NOT RIGHT NOW, NOT AT THIS PRICE. >> NUMBER 48. >> HELLO. MY NAME IS T.J. , I'M A SECOND GENERATION LONG SHOREMAN AND PROUD UNION MEMBER. I'M OPPOSED TO THE HOUSING OF THE INDUSTRIAL LANDS. THIS IS NOT LABOR VERSUS LABOR, FOR THAT IS A FOOL'S PERSPECTIVE. MANY OF US ARE PROUD UNION WORKERS. BUT THE ARGUMENT MARITIME WILL BE UNAFFECTED BY THIS DECISION IS FALSE AND NEEDS TO BE CAREFULLY THOUGHT OUT. THE I78 MPACT SURVEY HAS THREE TIERS, DO NOTHING, DO LITTLE AND DO MORE. SO YES, MARITIME AND FREIGHT MOBILITY WILL BE UNAFFECTED BUT THAT'S DUE TO THE LACK OF SUPPORT TO OUR TRADE INFRASTRUCTURE. THE SURVEY CAPTURES A WINDOW OF TIME THAT DOES NOT ACCURATELY REPRESENT OUR PORT'S POTENTIAL. WE HAVE 21 CRANES AVAILABLE TO SERVICE VESSELS, AND THE PORT IS BECOMING UNATTRACTIVE DUE TO ENCROACHMENT OF INDUSTRIAL LANDS. THESE BUILDINGS CAN BE BUILT ANYWHERE ON LAND, BUT WE CAN ONLY SERVICE VESSELS ALONG THE WATER. I URGE COUNCIL TO KEEP AND GROW SEATTLE'S WORKING WATER FRONT. THANK YOU. >> GOOD AFTERNOON. HIM NAME IS LINSEY WOLF. I'M A RESIDENT OF DISTRICT ONE. THE ALLIANCE IS RESPONSIBLE FOR -- [ INAUDIBLE ] WE RESPECTFULLY ASK YOU TO VOTE NO ON BILL 120933. NINE YEARS AGO, I HAD A SIMILAR REQUEST TO VOTE AGAINST THE -- AS COUNCIL MEMBER KETTLE ACKNOWLEDGED, THE SITUATION FOR THE PORT AND OUR REGION'S MARITIME HISTORY HAS NOT AND WILL NOT CHANGE. YOU CANNOT BUILD A DEEP WATER PORT. WE HOPE TO SEE THIS COUNCIL DO WHAT IT CAN TO SUPPORT THIS NATIONAL ASSET INTO THE FUTURE. THANK YOU. >> THAT WILL BE FOLLOWED BY SPEAKER NUMBER 50. AND WE'LL MOVE INTO 51 THROUGH 60. IF YOU CAN START LINING UP. AND WE ARE AT A TOTAL OF 75 IN-PERP IN- IN- PERSON SPEAKERS. SO WE HAVE AN ADDITIONAL 25 TO GO. >> YES, THAT'S MY MATH. THANK YOU. >> GOOD AFTERNOON, COUNCIL. THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK TODAY. I CARE DEEPLY ABOUT HOUSING IN THE CITY AS ONE WHO WATCHED HOUSING PRICES GO UP AND UP THROUGHOUT MY ENTIRE LIFE BEFORE I WAS ABLE TO BUY A HOUSE. IT'S PROBABLY ONE OF MY BIGGEST -- OR MY TOP ISSUE LOCALLY AND POLITICALLY. I HOPE THAT THE BUILDING TRADES WILL JOIN ME IN ADVOCATING FOR AGGRESSIVE HOUSING. THERE'S SIMILAR RESIDENT WAS PARKS, SCHOOLS, STORES AND OTHER AMENITIES NECESSARY FOR PEOPLE AND FAMILIES TO THRIVE. AS FOR SOTO, THE LOCAL AND STATE ECONOMY DEPENDS ON THE INTEGRITY OF OUR PORTS AND INDUSTRIAL LAND. COUNTLESS BUSINESSES RELY ON OUR THOUGHTFUL STEWARDSHIP OF THIS RESOURCE. WITH DIRE IMPACTS TO IMPORTERS AND EXPORTERS. I'M SURE IT'S A COINCIDENCE NO SAFETY PLAN WOULD RESIDUE AN OUT OF STATE BILLIONAIRE -- PLEASE VOTE TO PROTECT OUR INDUSTRIAL LANDS, OUR SUPPLY CHAIN, OUR ECONOMY AND GOOD JOBS THAT WILL STAY IN THE CITY. [ MUTED ] >> 51. >> THANK YOU, COUNCIL, I'M ERIC FITCH, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE WASHINGTON PORTS ASSOCIATION, ASKING YOU TO RESPECTFULLY VOTE NO. MY PORT MEMBERS REFLECT THE COMMUNITIES THEY SERVE. SEATTLE IS A MARITIME CITY. COUNCIL MEMBER STRAUSS TALKED ABOUT PRIDE, PRIDE IN OUR CITY AND OUR PORT. HE'S PROUD THAT OUR PORT PUTS GROCERIES ON SHELVES IN ALASKA. I'M PROUD THAT WASHINGTON APPLES ARE WORLD FAMOUS. WASHINGTON WHEAT MAKES NOODLES IN JAPAN. THIS IS NOT A COINCIDENCE, THIS IS BECAUSE OF OUR GROWERS, SHIPPERS IN OUR PORT. SEATTLE IS A PORT CITY. PLEASE CONSIDER THAT WHEN VOTING NO ON THIS MEASURE. PLUK. -- THANK YOU. >> GOOD AMP. MY NAME IS LISA, AND I'M THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE ALLIANCE. I'M HERE TO ASK YOU TO VOTE YES FOR 120933 IN THE CREATION OF THE MAKERS DISTRICT SOUTH OF T- MOBILE PARK. THIS INITIATIVE REPRESENTS A FORWARD THINKING APPROACH TO ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT. WHILE CREATING NEW OPPORTUNITIES FOR SMALL- SCALE MANUFACTURERS AND LOCAL BUSINESSES. THIS IS A CHANCE TO BE INTENTIONAL ABOUT LAND USE, LEVERAGING PUBLIC/PRIVATE PARTNERSHIPS, AND FOSTERING AN INCLUSIVE SUSTAINABLE ECOSYSTEM. THE SPECIFICS OF THIS PROPOSAL ARE WELL THOUGHT OUT AND STUDIED WITH DUE DILIGENCE. TODAY, MORE THAN EVER, IT'S IMPORTANT TO LOOK AT THE FACTS WITHOUT THE FEARMONGERING. I URGE YOU TO PASS BILL 120933 AND HELP SEATTLE'S FUTURE. THANK YOU. >> NUMBER 53. >> COUNCIL PRESIDENT, COUNCIL MEMBERS, THANK YOU. I'M THE TREASURE FOR THE PILOT'S UNION, AND I LIVE IN THE SIXTH DISTRICT. I SPEAK IN OPPOSITION TO 120933. OUR MARITIME INDUSTRIAL LANDS ARE BEDROCK ECONOMIC FOUNDATIONS OF OUR CITY IN SEATTLE. OUR INDUSTRIAL LAND SUPPORTS LONG- TERM GENERATIONAL WEALTH. WE MUST PROTECT THIS AREA. ONCE IT IS DEVELOPED WITH RESIDENTIAL, HOTELS, A MAKERS DISTRICT, IT WILL BE LOST. THIS LAND IS IMPORTANT TO THE TRADE IN AND OUT AND THROUGH OUR STATE, AND IT IS VERY IMPORTANT FOR OUR ECONOMY, OUR STATE ECONOMY AND OUR NATIONAL ECONOMY. I URGE YOU TO OPPOSE 120933. I URGE YOU TO PROTECT THE MARITIME INDUSTRIAL LANDS. THANK YOU. >> HELLO, COUNCIL. I REPRESENT OVER 600 BUSINESSES ACROSS THE STATE. THERE'S TWO CRITICAL PIECES HERE IN MY OPPOSITION TO 120933. THE VIABILITY OF THE SEATTLE GATEWAY AND SAFETY. SEATTLE HAS AN OBLIGATION TO RECOGNIZE IT'S NOT AN ISOLATED CITY BUT HOME TO A UNIQUE PORT, WHAT MOST CITIZENS DON'T UNDERSTAND IS THAT MOST OF THE THINGS, YOUR COMPUTERS, YOUR PHONES, MUCH OF IT IS IMPORTED. SO WE DEPEND ON THE PORT FOR OUR EVERYDAY COST OF LIVING AND SURVIVAL. FREIGHT MOBILITY HERE IN SEATTLE WOULD IMPACT THE COST OF GOODS FOR EVERYTHING. AS WELL AS TENS OF THOUSANDS OF FARMS THAT DEPEND ON THE PORT TO EXPORT FOOD. IT JEOPARDIZES SAFETY, A TRUCK DOES NOT SEE -- [ MUTED ] -- SAFETY OF THE -- [ MUTED ] >> NUMBER 55. >> GOOD AFTERNOON, CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS. I WANT TO MAKE CLEAR THAT I SUPPORT ALL UNIONS. I'M NOT HERE TO TRY TO DIVIDE ANYONE, BUT I'M HERE TO MAKE AN ANALYSIS, AND TO MAKE EVERYONE ON THE CITY COUNCIL TO UNDERSTAND THAT THIS IS NOT THE FIRST TIME THAT OUR CITY COUNCIL IS MAKING THIS DECISION. I WANT TO BRING SOME HISTORICAL CONTEXT. OUR TERMINAL IN OAKLAND, CALIFORNIA, THE FISHER FAMILY, OWNER OF THE GAP AND ALSO THE A's TEAM. SAME SCENARIO TO BUILD IN OAKLAND, CALIFORNIA. THE COMMUNITY WAS MISLED ON THE ISSUE OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING. I SUPPORT AFFORDABLE HOUSING, BUT THE FACT REMAINS THAT WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT WE DON'T TAKE AWAY GOOD PAYING JOBS AS WEWE THE ARGUMENT OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING. [ MUTED ] >> THANK YOU. THANK YOU, SIR. >> NUMBER 55. >> THANK YOU, COUNCIL MEMBERS. MY NAME IS JOHN, AND I'M IN A TRUCKING BUSINESS. I'VE BEEN TRUCKING FOR -- SINCE 2012. WE'RE HERE LOCALLY, IN SEATTLE AND TACOMA. WE TRY TO ADVOCATE FOR MARITIME ZONING. THE SEATTLE WORKING WATER FRONT AND MARITIME ZONES PROVIDE THOUSANDS OF WELL- PAYING JOBS IN TRUCKING, WAREHOUSING, SHIPPING IS, AND MANUFACTURING. HOUSING AND AFFORDABLE DEVELOPMENT IN THESE AREAS WOULD DRIVE UP LAND COSTS AND PUSH OUT BUSINESSES CRITICAL TO THE REGION'S ECONOMY. REDUCING CONGESTION AND PROTECTING FREIGHT MOBILITY -- [ INAUDIBLE ] COMBATTING THIS -- [ MUTED ] >> LOOK, THE PROPONENTS OF THIS MEASURE ADMITTED TODAY THAT IT'S A FIGHT OVER TWO BLOCKS. AND IT'S VERY TRUE, BECAUSE IT'S A VERY PARTICULAR TWO BLOCKS AND A VERY PARTICULAR 200 FOOT BUFFER. DESPITE WHAT MANY OF YOU MAY HAVE BEEN TOLD, THE MARITIME COMMUNITY ARE NOT OWNERS WHO HATE AND OPPOSE AFFORDSABLE HOUSING OR CONSTRUCTION JOBS OR SMALL BUSINESS OR KITTENS OR PUPPIES. WE WOULD NOT BE UNITED TO FIGHT AGAINST THOSE THINGS. THE ONLY REASON THAT THE WHOLE MARITIME COMMUNITY OF THE STATE IS UNITED AGAINST THIS MEASURE IS BECAUSE IT REALLY DOES CONTAIN THE SAME POISON PILL WE HAVE FOUGHT TO OPPOSE AGAIN AND AGAIN AND AGAIN, FROM THE OCCIDENTAL VACATION BACK TO THE 2013 COTTON BOWL. IT'S THE SAME THING. SO PLEASE KEEP THE PORT OPEN. IF IT WASN'T REALLY A THREAT, WE WOULD NOT BE HERE UNITED URGING YOU TO OPPOSE THIS. >> WE SUPPORT THE MAKERS DISTRICT, BECAUSE THE DEVELOPERS HAVE COMMITTED TO USE UNIONS -- [ INAUDIBLE ] THE MAKERS DISTRICT IS DIFFERENT. AS ORGANIZED, THE IMPORTANCY OF THE FAIR WAGES -- [ INAUDIBLE ] BY COMMITTING TO THE UNION LEVEL FOR ONGOING BUILDING SERVICES, THIS PROJECT WILL HAVE A LASTING, POSITIVE IMPACT TO OUR COMMUNITY. THIS IS THE KIND OF COMMUNITY WE NEED. [ INAUDIBLE ] AND THAT CREATES MORE GOOD UNION JOBS FOR THE FUTURE. THANK YOU. >> NUMBER 59. >> GOOD AFTERNOON. A LONG- TIME AUW MEMBER. WE HEARD TODAY SOME PEOPLE DOWN PLAYING THE EFFECTS OF THIS. IT'S A CLASSIC CASE OF A SPECIAL INTEREST GROUP TRYING TO GET THEIR FOOT IN THE DOOR. WE'VE GOT A VIBRANT, VIABLE WORK HERE, 46, 30, 18, 5, THERE'S 2130 SQUARE MILES IN KING COUNTY, CERTAINLY THERE'S SOMEPLACE ELSE THIS COULD BE DONE. THERE'S SAFETY CONCERNS FOR KIDS. WE DON'T WANT THEM PLAYING AROUND TRAINS, TRUCKS, THAT SORT OF THING. WE'VE ALREADY HAD SEVERAL BICYCLE ACCIDENT FATALITIES IN THIS AREA. I URGE YOU TO VOTE AGAINST THIS. THANK YOU. >> WE'RE NOW MOVING TO SPEAKER NUMBER 60 AND THEN SPEAKERS 61 THROUGH 70. IF YOU COULD PLEASE START LINING UP. SPEAKER NUMBER 70. >> GOOD AFTERNOON, COUNCIL. THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY. MY NAME IS CHARLIE, A LIFE LONG SEATTLE RESIDENT. DISTRICT TWO. I'M ALSO A SEATTLE LONG SHOREMAN. MY FAMILY HAS LIVED IN SEATTLE FOR FOUR GENERATIONS. WHY DO WE COME HERE? IT'S A BEAUTIFUL CITY, A WONDERFUL CITY. THERE'S SO MANY GREAT PLACES TO PUT HOUSING. BUT THE HOMESTEAD BROTHERS ARE PROBABLY ROLLING OVER IN THEIR GRAVES RIGHT NOW AT THIS PROPOSAL. THIS IS A HOSTILE ENVIRONMENT FOR RESIDENTIAL LIVING. 9,000 TRUCK TRIPS PER WEEK, NO GREEN SPACES, NO GROCERY STORES, NO SCHOOLS, NO PARKS. I WAS ALSO A CARPENTER FOR A NUMBER OF YEARS. I'LL TELL YOU, WE CAN BUILD HOUSING ANYWHERE. THERE'S SO MANY GREAT PLACES WE COULD PUT HOUSING IN THIS TOWN. AND ISN'T THERE ALREADY A PLAN ALREADY BEING WORKED ON? THIS IS NOT PART OF IT, WHY? YOU MIGHT BE SINCERE IN THINKING THIS WON'T AFFECT THE PORT, BUT YOU HEARD FROM PEOPLE WHO IT AFFECTS, THOUSANDS OF WORKERS -- [ MUTED ] >> SPEAKERS NUMBER 61, 62. 61. >> HELLO, MY NAME IS CHAD, A PROUD DISTRICT SIX NATIVE. I'M THE PORT PRESIDENT OF THE WASHINGTON MARITIME FEDERATION AND EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE COALITION FISHING FLEET. I'M SPEAKING TO YOU AGAIN TO EXPRESS MY OPPOSITION TO COUNCIL BILL 120933. I'M PROUD THAT AFTER MANY YEARS OF WORK WE HAD A DEAL. WE SHOULD NOT BE REVISITING THIS AGREEMENT AND CREATING UNCERTAINTY AND CHALLENGES. TODAY, THOUSANDS OF SEAFOOD AND AGRICULTURE WORK, THEY ARE FACING MULTIPLE CHALLENGES TO OUR LIVELIHOODS. TRUMP'S TRADE WAR IS THREATENING THE FUTURE OF OUR FAMILY FARMERS AND FISHERMEN. CHANGES IN LAND USE -- WE SHOULD NOT BE CREATING ADDITIONAL ROADBLOCKS TO OUR WORK. WE SUPPORT THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING BUT WE NEED IT WHERE IT WORKS. I URGE COUNCIL TO NOT VOTE ON THIS ACTION AND TO DELAY. THANKS. >> 62. >> THANK YOU, COUNCILMAN. MY NAME IS JOE WALLIN, A LONGSHOREMAN. I WOULD LIKE YOU TO VOTE THIS DOWN. A FEW THINGS I WANT TO MENTION. THE TRAFFIC COMING INTO THE PORT AS IT'S NOW CONFIGURED, COMING ON SPOKANE STREET TO GO TO TERMINALS 5 AND 18, I WOULD DESCRIBE IT AS CRAZY. WE BACK SEMIS ALL THE WAY UP TO I-5 AND BEYOND. SO WE ARE MAXED OUT WITH WHAT WE'VE GOT NOW. IN 2014, THE FLYOVER WAS COMPLETED. THE PHASE THREE WAS $34 MILLION. WE PUT ALL THIS MONEY INTO MAKING TERMINAL 46 WORK AND NOW WE'RE GOING TO WALK AWAY FROM IT. YOU PEOPLE KNOW MY SISTER, AND SHE'S LOOKED THIS ORDINANCE OVER. SHE'S LOOKED IT OVER SAY THING IS GOING TO BE A MAKERS DISTRICT. THAT'S HOOPLA. NOTHING AGAINST THE MAKERS. THE OTHER THING IS THE AFFORDABILITY HAS BEEN WATERED DOWN. AND FINALLY, THIS IS A SUBSIDIZED PROJECT. IF YOU GIVE THEM A 12- YEAR TAX BREAK, THAT'S A PUBLIC SUBSIDY. [ MUTED ] >> WE'LL BE SKIPPING 63, 64, AND 65 WHO HAVE ALREADY SPOKEN. WE ARE AT SPEAKER NUMBER 66. >> ALL RIGHT. HELLO, EVERYBODY. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. MY NAME IS AARON McKAY, AND I'VE BEEN A LONGSHOREMAN FOR A LONG TIME. I LIVE IN BEACON HILL IN SEATTLE, ONLY BECAUSE OF MY GOOD UNION JOB THAT I HAVE. I SUPPORT FIVE FAMILY MEMBERS WITH THIS JOB. THIS IS A DIRECT ROUTE TO THE FREEWAY FROM THE PORT. THE MAKERS DISTRICT HAS AN ADVANTAGE OF BEING ABLE TO BE MADE SOMEWHERE ELSE. THE PORT CANNOT. THERE ARE SO MANY OTHER PLACES IN SEATTLE TO BUILD LOW- INCOME HOUSING. WHY DON'T WE CONSIDER SOME OF THOSE OTHER PLACES? MY FAMILY AND HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF OTHER FAMILIES DEPEND ON THIS PORT. PLEASE VOTE THIS DOWN. THANK YOU SO MUCH. >> NUMBER 67. SAYS HELLO, I'M ALLEN SMITH, LONGSHOREMAN. I'M URGING YOU GUYS TO VOTE NO. EVERYBODY FROM LABOR ALL THE WAY ON UP TO THE FEDERAL MARITIME COMMISSION HAS EXPRESSED THEIR CONCERNS ABOUT HOW THIS JOB WOULD BE A BAD IDEA, IT WOULD IMPACT FREIGHT MOBILITY, IMPACT THE REST OF OUR STATE. THOUSANDS AND THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE THROUGHOUT OUR STATE WOULD BE AFFECTED BY THIS PROJECT. LOW INCOME HOUSING, LIKE EVERYBODY HAS SAID, CAN BE BUILT ALL OVER THE PLACE. OTHER MAKERS DISTRICTS, AS WELL. BUT BUILDING IT RIGHT AT THAT SPECIFIC SPOT WOULD SHOCK OFF THE PORT OF SEATTLE. I'M SURE SOME OTHER PEOPLE HAVE SAID IT'S TWO TRAFFIC LIGHTS AWAY FROM THE REST OF THE COUNTRY. BY CHOKING THAT OFF, YOU'RE GOING TO SHOW DOWN THE SUPPLY CHAIN, MAKING THESE PROBLEMS EVEN WORSE. NOT ONLY THAT, BUT THESE MAKERS SPACES THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, PEOPLE MAKING THINGS THAT NEED TO SHIP THEM, IT'S GOING TO BE VERY DIFFICULT WHEN WE CHOKE OFF THOSE ROUTES FOR SHIPPING. HOW IS ANYBODY SUPPOSED TO MAKE SOMETHING AND SHIP IT WHEN THERE WILL BE DELAYS -- [ MUTED PRERN [ MUTED ] >> HELLO, MY NAME IS MICHAEL COLLIDE, A CASUAL AND LONG SHORE UNION. I'M VERY OPPOSED TO BILL 120933. I'VE WORKED AS A COMMERCIAL TRUCK DRIVER AND DRIVEN THROUGH SEATTLE, AND IT'S NOT A NICE PLACE TO DRIVE. THIS WOULD MAKE IT MUCH MORE DIFFICULT, AND THIS IS A VERY IMPORTANT ROUTE TO GET TO THE PORT. ONE OF THE BIGGEST PROBLEMS THAT WE HAVE BRINGING MORE WORK INTO THE PORT IS BEING ABLE TO ACCESS THE PORT RELIABLY AND EFFICIENTLY. THIS WILL BE VERY HARMFUL, AND THE PORT IS A VERY IMPORTANT PART OF THE ECONOMIC GROWTH IN SEATTLE. TO CUT THAT OFF WOULD BE CUTTING OFF REVENUE FOR THE CITY. NOT TO MENTION AFFECTING THOUSANDS OF JOBS THAT WILL PAY A FAMILY WAGE. THIS IS AA -- SORRY. IT'S A GREAT PROFESSION. THERE'S LOTS OF GREAT ASSOCIATED WORK. I WOULD LIKE TO SEE YOU GUYS HELP CONTINUE THAT ON. THANK YOU. >> I GOT HERE LATE. MY NAME IS NYA WU. I USED TO WORK ACROSS THE STREET FROM THE STADIUM AT AN OLD TV STATION. I WANT TO TALK ABOUT THE DISTRICT, THIS LAND NEAR THE LIQUIDATION ZONE AND THIS IS A NEIGHBORHOOD THAT IS FACING DISPLACEMENT AND NAMED ONE OF THE MOST ENDANGERED NEIGHBORHOODS IN THE CITY. HOW DO WE FIGHT GENTRIFICATION? WE NEED MORE AFFORDABLE HOUSING. WE NEED TO BUILD IT EVERYWHERE. WE NEED RESOURCES, BUT WE ALSO NEED THE LARGER AREA TO BE SAFER. WE NEED MORE OPPORTUNITIES FOR THE CREATIVE ECONOMY WHERE PEOPLE IN THE CID HAS ACCESS TO A MAKERS SPACE. THAT WOULD BE AMAZING. CID IS THE POOREST NEIGHBORHOOD IN THE CITY, COMPRISED MOSTLY OF IMMIGRANTS. THIS PROPOSAL CREATES HOUSING JOBS AND OPPORTUNITIES THAT WE ALL DESPERATELY NEED. SO WE NEED TO REIMAGINE WHAT THE ENTIRE CITY NEEDS TO LOOK LIKE FOR HOUSING AND I RESPECTFULLY ASK THAT YOU -- [ MUTED ] >> HELLO, COUNCIL, MY NAME IS CARLIN SMITH, DISTRICT ONE RESIDENT. I'M HERE TO REMIND YOU THAT SEATTLE DOES NOT HAPPEN TO HAVE A DEEP WATER PORT. IT'S A CITY BECAUSE OF ITS DEEP WATER PORT. THE STUDY DID NOT INCLUDE THE WAIVER THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN CHALLENGED HAD WE NOT HAD A DEAL TO PUT THIS TO BED TWO YEARS AGO. FREIGHT AND PEDESTRIANS ARE NOT GOOD NEIGHBORS. HOW MANY MILLIONS ARE YOU SPENDING A MILE SOUTH OF THERE TO SEPARATE TRUCK TRAFFIC, FOOT TRAFFIC AND TRUCKS? IF THIS IS ALLOWED TO MOVE FORWARD, TENANTS WILL BE DEMANDING YOU MAKE THE PORT HAVE QUIET TIME AND CAN'T YOU GET THEM TO DIM THE LIGHTS AT NIGHT. WE SUPPORT AFFORDING A HOUSING, AND NEIGHBORHOODS THAT HAVE THE THINGS FAMILIES NEED. THIS IS NOT THAT. WE NEED MORE AFFORDABLE HOUSING NOT HERE. WE ARE NOW MOVING INTO THE LAST FIVE SPEAKERS, NUMBER 71 THROUGH 75. >> WHEN I FIRST MOVED INTO BELLTOWN IN 2004, I MOVED INTO WORK FOR THE COUNTY. I SUPPORT AND VOTE FOR WAREHOUSING FUNDING BUT PEOPLE WHO NEED LOW INCOME HOUSING SHOULDN'T HAVE TO GET IT IN INDUSTRIAL AREAS, AREAS WITH POLLUTANTS FROM DIESEL TRUCKS AND MACHINERY, TRAFFIC AT ALL HOURS FOR LARGE VEHICLES WITH POOR DISABILITY THAT CAUSE AN OUTSIDE PROPORTION OF PEDESTRIAN DEATHS. AREAS WITHOUT AMENITIES LIKE PHARMACIES, SCHOOLS, CHURCHES, PARKS, NOT AN AREA MEANT FOR PEOPLE TO LIVE. WE DO NEED MORE HOUSING BUT WE NEEDED IN AREAS WITH RESOURCES. WHAT ARE WE TELLING LOW INCOME RESIDENTS WHEN WE PROVIDE THEM HOUSING IN AREAS WITHOUT NECESSITIES OF LIFE? WILL THESE AMENITIES FOLLOW AND THEN THE INDUSTRIAL LAND USE COMPROMISE WAS SIMPLY A LIE? PLEASE SAVE OUR PROSPERITY, OUR PERMANENT JOBS AND MAKE LOW INCOME HOUSING IN AREAS WHERE IT WILL BE APPRECIATED. DON'T CONTRIBUTE TO ENVIRONMENTAL RACISM AND CLASSISM. >> SPEAKER NUMBER 71? ALL RIGHT. WE ARE GOING TO MOVE ON TO NUMBER 73. 74? 75? WHAT NUMBER ARE YOU? >> MY NAME IS MAX AND I AM COMING TO YOU FROM A UNIQUE PERSPECTIVE TODAY. I'M A LIFELONG COMMUNITY MEMBER OF SEATTLE. MY CURRENT ROLL IN THE COMMUNITY IS THAT OF A CLINICAL SUPERVISOR A MENTAL HEALTH PROFESSIONAL WHO WORKS ON THE FRONT LINES . I HAVE DEDICATED MYSELF TO SERVING OUR COMMUNITIES AND MOST VULNERABLE POPULATION. I AM ALSO A LONGSHOREMAN. OF SEATTLE'S INDUSTRIAL BUSINESS CONTINUES TO BE DEVELOPED, IT WILL ONLY FURTHER THE ECONOMIC DIVIDE THAT WE ALL CAN SEE, FURTHER PUSHING AVERAGE CITIZENS OUT OF SEATTLE AND MAKING IT MORE DIFFICULT FOR PEOPLE TO OBTAIN EMPLOYMENT THAT ENABLES THEM TO BE CONTRIBUTING MEMBERS OF OUR SOCIETY. PLEASE PROTECT OUR INDUSTRIAL LANDS AND VOTE NO. >> WE DO NOT HAVE 72, 73? WE WILL MOVE ON TO 75. >> HELLO. I AM A CONSULTANT FOR THE PORT DISTRICT IN THE PUBLIC STADIUM AUTHORITY. I STARTED WORKING ON THIS 6 1/2 YEARS AGO. CHARLIE BROUGHT ME ON AND ASKED ME TO DO 70 DIFFERENT STAKEHOLDER INTERVIEWS TO GET AN IDEA OF WHERE PEOPLE WERE AT A RANDOM ELEMENT OF THE STADIUM. A HANDFUL OF DIFFERENT FOLKS ON THE INDUSTRIAL MARITIME SIDE OF THIS, WE WILL MEET PRIVATELY. DON'T WORRY. WE TELL OUR FOLKS WE ARE GOING TO DELAY, DELAY, DELAY. THIS WAS SIX AND HALF YEARS AGO. THIS HAS BEEN ALIVE FOR 12 YEARS. WE ARE NOT WORRIED ABOUT ANYTHING YOU PROPOSE AROUND THE STADIUM. WE WILL HAVE THE SAME STRATEGY WE HAVE ALWAYS HAD. DELAY, DELAY, DELAY. COMING OUT OF THE STAKEHOLDER PROCESS, AND WHEN AGREED WE WOULD RELY ON THE EIF. EIF SAYS THE TRAFFIC ON ROYAL BROUGHAM WOULD NOT CHANGE IN TERMS OF LEVEL OF SERVICE OR THE ACTUAL TRAFFIC TIME. THERE WAS A 15 DAY APPEAL WINDOW AFTER THE PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE WAS PUBLISHED ON SEPTEMBER 29. EXPIRED OCTOBER 14. HOUSING WAS ON THE TABLE. THERE WAS NO REASON NOT TO APPEAL. >> THAT IS OUR LAST SPEAKER. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH, EVERYBODY, FOR COMING OUT TODAY. I APPRECIATE THE TIME THAT YOU HAVE TAKEN TO BE WITH US TODAY. THE LAST PERSON ON OUR PUBLIC COMMENT LIST HAS SPOKEN SO THE PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD IS NOW CLOSED. I MOVED TO ADOPT -- HOLD ON A SECOND. IF THERE IS NO OBJECTION, THE INTRODUCTION AND REFERRALS CALENDAR WILL BE ADOPTED. HEARING NONE, THE INTRODUCTION AND REFERRALS CALENDAR IS ADOPTED. MOVING ON, I MOVED TO ADOPT THE AGENDA. IS THERE A SECOND? >> SECOND. >> IT HAS BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED TO ADOPT THE AGENDA. I DO WANT TO ADDRESS THE REQUEST TO DELAY THIS VOTE THAT WAS MENTIONED OVER AND OVER AGAIN BY OUR PUBLIC COMMENTERS AND I HAVE TO SAY THAT, WE HAD A LOT OF PEOPLE THAT TOOK TIME OUT OF THEIR DAY TO COME HERE, WORKING PEOPLE THAT TOOK TIME OUT OF THEIR DAY TO COME HERE AND PROVIDE PUBLIC COMMENT. WE ALL HAD A LOT OF PEOPLE ON FEBRUARY 27 AND FEBRUARY 24 AND JANUARY 24 AND IT WOULD BE DISRESPECTFUL, IN MY OPINION, TO REMOVE THIS BILL FROM THE AGENDA TODAY AFTER SO MANY PEOPLE HAVE TAKEN THE TIME TO BE PRESENT AND MAKE COMMENT. REGARDING THE REASON FOR DELAY , UNDER COUNCIL RULES, ALL COUNCILMEMBERS HAVE THE RIGHT TO PROPOSE AN AMENDMENT AHEAD OF A COUNCIL MEETING BY DISTRIBUTING IT WITHIN TWO HOURS IN ADVANCE OF THE MEETING. THE RULES ALSO PROVIDE THAT A LIMITED MECHANISM FOR COUNCILMEMBERS TO PROPOSE NEW PREVIOUSLY UNCIRCULATED AMENDMENTS DURING THE MEETING ITSELF. THAT IS NOT HAPPENING HERE. MORE NOTICED -- NOTICE IN ADVANCE OF INCOMING AMENDMENTS IS APPRECIATED BUT IT IS INCUMBENT UPON COUNCILMEMBERS AND STAFF TO RESERVE THE TIME TO ABSORB AND ANALYZE POSSIBLE LATEBREAKING AMENDMENTS AS WE DON'T DELAY LEGISLATION AND COUNCIL THAT HAS BEEN VETTED THROUGH THE COMMITTEE PROCESS SOLELY ON THE LATEBREAKING AMENDMENTS. THAT IS NOT OUR PRACTICE. THIS HAS BEEN VETTED. WE HAVE HAD THREE COMMITTEE MEETINGS ON THE LEGISLATION. MANY OF MY COLLEAGUES WHO ARE NOT EVEN ON THE COMMITTEE EXERCISED THE OPPORTUNITY TO ATTEND AND BE PART OF THAT DISCUSSION. THE BILL CAME OUT OF COMMITTEE ON 2 TO 3 VOTE WEEKS AGO. SO, THERE LE TIME FOR DISCUSSION AND EVERY ONE OF THE AMENDMENTS CIRCULATED TODAY TO COME BEFORE US AND THESE ARE TECHNICAL AMENDMENTS. NONE OF THEM MAKE SUBSTANTIVE CHANGES IN A WAY THAT HAS NOT ALREADY BEEN ADDRESSED. WE HAVE DELAYED THIS PROPOSAL LONG ENOUGH AND IF MY COLLEAGUES DON'T LIKE THE AMENDMENTS OR ARE NOT ABLE TO UNDERSTAND THE IMPLICATIONS OF THEM, THEY ARE FREE TO VOTE NO AND THEY ARE ALSO FREE TO VOTE NO ON THIS BILL ALTOGETHER. SO, I AM MAKING A STRONG ARGUMENT FOR GOING AHEAD WITH THE AGENDA AS IT IS SO THAT FOLKS WHO HAVE COME TO SPEAK THEIR OPINION ON BOTH SIDES OF THE OPINION WILL NOT HAVE WASTED THEIR TIME AGAIN. ARE THERE ANY COMMENTS? GO AHEAD, COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA. >> THANK YOU, COUNCIL PRESIDENT. FIRST, I WANT TO THANK EVERYONE WHO CAME DOWN HERE FOR PUBLIC COMMENT. I UNDERSTAND THAT WHEN CONSTITUENTS COME DOWN FOR PUBLIC COMMENT, IT IS NOT EASY. PEOPLE TAKE TIME OUT OF THEIR MAYBE JOBS AND FAMILIES THAT THEY COULD BE WITH TO COME DOWN HERE AND JUST KNOW THAT I FOR ONE REALLY APPRECIATE IT AND UNDERSTAND HOW DIFFICULT IT IS. THIS JUST GOES TO SHOW YOU WHAT A DIFFICULT ISSUE THIS IS. HOWEVER, DELAYING THE VOTE WILL NOT CHANGE THAT THIS IS A DIFFICULT ISSUE. WE HAVE HAD MULTIPLE MEETINGS AND PRESENTATIONS INCLUDING ROBUST PUBLIC COMMENT LIKE WE HEARD TODAY. WE HAVE HAD PUBLIC COMMENT AT OTHER MEETINGS ON THIS ISSUE. WE ALSO HAD A PUBLIC HEARING AND WE HAVE HAD A LEGAL CONSULT FROM OUR ATTORNEYS. WE HAVE ALL THE INFORMATION THAT WE NEED TO TAKE THIS VOTE TODAY. THIS COUNCIL SHOULD NOT SET PRECEDENT BY DELAYING THIS VOTE AFTER THE DILIGENT REVIEW WE HAVE HAD ON THIS ISSUE. AS TO THE MORE RECENT AMENDMENTS THAT WE BROUGHT, THIS IS NOT THE FIRST, NOR WILL IT BE THE LAST TIME THAT THIS BODY WILL CONSIDER AMENDMENTS THAT ARE EITHER BROUGHT JUST DAYS BEFORE OR EVEN UPON AMENDING. I DO NOT CONSIDER THE AMENDMENTS BROUGHT TODAY TO BE OF A NATURE THAT WOULD HAVE US BREAK FROM OUR RECENT POLICY CONSIDERING AMENDMENTS . AT THE END OF BUDGET DELIBERATIONS FOR A VOTE ON NOVEMBER 15, WE HAD MULTIPLE LAST-MINUTE AMENDMENTS. WE HEARD THREE THE SAME DAY, WALK ON AMENDMENTS, AND FIVE AMENDMENTS CAME ON JUST THE DAY BEFORE. MOST OF THESE WERE AS A SUBSTANTIVE NATURE AS THE ONES BROUGHT TODAY AS THEY INVOLVE FINANCIAL REASONS FOR THE BUDGET. DURING THE RENEWAL OF THE TRANSPORTATION LEVY AS WELL, WE HAVE SEVEN LATEBREAKING AMENDMENTS WITH SUBSTANTIAL FINANCIAL CHANGES. THOSE AMENDMENTS WERE CIRCULATED MIDDAY FRIDAY BEFORE A TUESDAY VOTE. I BRING THESE UP AS EXAMPLES OF AMENDMENTS THAT WE HAD TO REVIEW IN SHORT ORDER AND AT LEAST ONE PUBLIC COMMENT OR SAID TODAY, OUR JOB IS TO ENSURE WE REVIEW AND MAKE DECISIONS IN A TIMELY FASHION ON BEHALF OF OUR CITY RESIDENTS AND I TAKE THAT COMMITMENT REALLY SERIOUSLY AND THAT WORK VERY SERIOUSLY. AGAIN, I FEEL WE HAVE HAD AMPLE TIME TO REVIEW. THIS IS A DIFFICULT ISSUE BUT WE HAVE TAKEN A LOT OF YOUR TIME, NOT JUST TODAY, BUT OTHER TIMES. I KNOW MANY OF YOU HAVE COME HERE ON OTHER OCCASIONS TO GIVE PUBLIC COMMENT AS WELL. I DON'T THINK WE SHOULD SET PRECEDENT TODAY BY DELAYING THIS VOTE. THANK YOU, COUNCIL PRESIDENT AND AGAIN, THANK YOU ALL FOR BEING HERE. >> SEEING NO FURTHER COMMENTS, THE AGENDA IS ADOPTED. MOVING NOW -- OKAY. GO AHEAD AND PLEASE CALL THE VOTE ON THE ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA. >> COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS'S >> YES. >> COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH? >> YES. >> COUNCILMEMBER KETTLE? COUNCILMEMBER KETTLE? >> WE DON'T USUALLY BUT OUR CLERK SAID TO DO SO. >> THIS IS A VOTE ON THE AGENDA. COUNCILMEMBER KETTLE JUST VOTED YES, CORRECT? >> THANK YOU. >> COUNCILMEMBER MOORE? >> AYE. >> COUNCILMEMBER RINCK? >> AYE. >> COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA? >> AYE. >> COUNCILMEMBER SAKA? >> AYE. >> MARK SOLOMON ONE? >> AYE. >> NINE IN FAVOR, NONE OPPOSED. >> WE WILL NOW CONSIDER THE PROPOSED CONSENT CALENDAR. ITEMS ON THE PROPOSED CONSENT CALENDAR ARE THE MINUTES OF MARCH 11, 2025, COUNCIL 120951 WHICH IS THE PAYMENT OF THE BILL AND THREE APPOINTMENTS FROM THE LIBRARIES, EDUCATION AND NEIGHBORHOODS COMMITTEE. ARE THERE ANY ITEMS THAT COUNCILMEMBERS WOULD LIKE REMOVED FROM TODAY'S CONSENT CALENDAR? ALL RIGHT . HEARING NONE, I MOVED TO ADOPT THE CONSENT CALENDAR. IS THERE A SECOND? >> SECOND. >> IT HAS BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED TO ADOPT THE CONSENT CALENDAR. WILL THE CLERK PLEASE CALL THE ROLLBACK TO ADOPT THE CONSENT CALENDAR? >> TREND 21? >> YES. >> COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH? >> AYE. >> COUNCILMEMBER KETTLE? >> AYE. >> COUNCILMEMBER MOORE? >> AYE. >> COUNCILMEMBER RINCK? >> AYE. >> COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA? >> AYE. >> COUNCILMEMBER SAKA? >> AYE. >> COUNCILMEMBER SOLOMON? >> AYE. >> COUNCIL PRESIDENT NELSON? >> AYE. >> THANK YOU. THE CONSENT CALENDAR ITEMS ARE ADOPTED. WILL THE CLERK PLEASE AFFIX MY CALENDAR TO THE LEGISLATION AND MINUTES ON THE CONSENT CALENDAR ON MY BEHALF? WILL THE CLERK PLEASE READ ITEM ONE INTO THE RECORD? >> THE GOVERNANCE ACCOUNTABILITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE, CB 120933, AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO LAND AND ZONING, AMENDING SECTIONS 23.7 4.002 AND 23.7 4.008 OF THE SEATTLE MUNICIPAL CODE TO ALLOW RESIDENTIAL USES IN THE STADIUM TRANSITION AREA OVERLAY DISTRICT. THE COMMITTEE RECOMMENDS THAT THE COUNCIL PASS THE BILL. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. COUNCILMEMBER DAN STRAUSS ? >> THANK YOU. AS I SHARED WITH THE PUBLIC AND MY COLLEAGUES TODAY, I DO NEED MORE TIME. I NEED MORE TIME BECAUSE OF THE PROCESS THAT HAS BEEN UNDERWAY AND THAT DECISION POINT THAT IS AHEAD OF US JUST THIS YEAR. I WILL SPEAK TO THE PROCESS A LITTLE BIT LATER BUT I WILL SAY THAT THIS HAS NOT BEEN A PROCESS THAT HAS ENCOURAGED COLLABORATION OR CONSENSUS BUILDING WHICH IS A PROCESS THAT, IN MY OPINION, HAS CREATED MORE DIVISION THAN IT HAS NEEDED TO. THE UPCOMING DIVISION POINTS THAT WE HAVE THAT IMPACT THIS ARE THE COAST GUARD RECORD DECISIONS IN LATE APRIL, THE TRANSPORTATION STUDY THAT WAS REQUESTED TO BE ACCOMPANIED THROUGH THE 2023 INDUSTRIAL MARITIME CHANGES. THAT HAS NOT COME TO FRUITION. WE HAVE, AS WE JUST PASSED THIS LAST WEEK, FROM THE TRANSPORTATION -- REGARDING THE TRANSPORTATION LEVY PROVISO AND THE TRANSPORTATION PLAN FOR THIS YEAR, SGOT IS PLANNING TO CREATE THE CORD OR IMPROVEMENTS BETWEEN THE PORT AND I-95. WE WILL HAVE A COUPLE OF DIFFERENT OPPORTUNITIES. WE WILL HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY ONCE THOSE PROJECTS ARE IDENTIFIED, THE PLANS OF 60%, 90% AND DELIVERED. WHAT WE DON'T HAVE TODAY IS THE ABILITY TO CONNECT THOSE TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS WITH WHAT WE ARE CONSIDERING TODAY BECAUSE THE PROCESS HAS NOT ALLOWED. WE HAVE COUNCILMEMBERS INTERESTED IN CREATING MORE MEDIATION BETWEEN DEPARTMENTS. WE HEARD TODAY FROM THE PORT THAT THERE IS AN INTEREST IN MAKING A PURCHASE. JUST TODAY, WHILE WE HAVE SAT HERE, WE HAVE RECEIVED BOTH NEW, LEGAL ARGUMENTS. WE HAVE RECEIVED A LEGAL AWARENESS FROM OUR COUNCIL ATTORNEY AND AN EMAIL HAS BEEN DISTRIBUTED SAYING -- I'M NOT GOING TO BREECH ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGE BUT PROVIDING MORE INFORMATION FROM THE CITY ATTORNEY. I CAN'T EXPLAIN ANY MORE CLEARLY THAT IF WE ARE HAVING POLICY DISCUSSIONS BY EMAIL WHILE PUBLIC COMMENT IS GOING ON, IT CLEARLY STATES THAT WE NEED MORE TIME. COUNCIL PRESIDENT, I WILL MAKE A MOTION HERE FOR -- I WILL MOVE TO POSTPONE COUNCIL BILL 120933 UNTIL OUR JULY 15, 2025 MEETING SO THAT WE CAN UNDERSTAND WHAT THE COAST GUARD RECORD OF DECISION IS AND SO THAT WE CAN MOVE FORWARD WITH THE SDOT IMPROVEMENTS. >> I HEAR THE MOTION AND I WOULD LIKE TO PROVIDE MY OPPOSITION TO POSTPONE -- THERE HAS BEEN A SECOND. HERE'S THE DEAL. IS ONE OF OUR LAST PUBLIC COMMENT SPEAKERS, THERE WILL ALWAYS BE DELAY, DELAY, DELAY. THE LAST TIME, RIGHT BEFORE WE WERE SET TO VOTE, THERE WAS A THREAT THAT IF WE VOTED IN COMMITTEE, WHICH IS EVEN THE SUBJECT TO A VIOLATION OF THE SPEAKER BOARD , THAT WE GOT SLAMMED WITH A LETTER THREATENING LAWSUITS. WE WENT THROUGH THE PROCESS OF MAKING SURE THAT WE WERE COMFORTABLE GOING FORWARD WITH THE LEGISLATION. WE TOOK A VOTE AND IT HAS BEEN A WEEK AND A HALF OR SO SINCE THEN. THERE HAS BEEN AMPLE TIME TO BRING UP THIS WORK THAT SDOT IS WORKING -- DOING. IF IT IS THAT IMPORTANT, IT COULD HAVE BEEN BROUGHT UP A BIT SOONER. WE KNOW THAT THE FACTS AS LAID OUT IN THE EIF IS ASSOCIATED WITH THE RESIDENTIAL UNITS THAT ARE PROPOSED UNDER THIS LEGISLATION WILL NOT IMPACT, OR WILL NOT HAVE ADVERSE IMPACT ON PORT OPERATIONS OR FREIGHT MOBILITY. THAT HAS BEEN STATED MANY, MANY TIMES. THERE CAN BE DISAGREEMENT ABOUT THAT BUT I'M WORKING WITH THE FACTS THAT I HAVE. REGARDING THE COAST GUARD LETTER OF DETERMINATION, I UNDERSTAND THAT THAT WILL REVEAL WHAT THE COAST GUARD PLANS ON DOING, WHETHER THEY WANT TO MOVE THEIR OPERATIONS OR GO DOWN TO THE TERMINAL NEXT-DOOR. FRANKLY, IN THIS DAY AND AGE OF PRESIDENT TRUMP, I AM A LITTLE BIT CONCERNED ABOUT HOLDING ANYTHING OFF UNTIL WE GET A LETTER FROM A FEDERAL AGENCY BUT THE POINT IS, WHATEVER THE COAST GUARD DOES WITH THEIR OPERATION, THE IMPACTS OF THE HOUSING ARE FAIRLY IRRELEVANT ON WHAT IS GOING ON ON FIRST AVENUE. I COULD GO ON AND ON AND ON AND TAKE UP ALL THE REASONS WHY THE REASON FOR DELAY DOES NOT RISE TO THE LEVEL OF CONSEQUENCE TO MERIT ASKING THESE PEOPLE TO GO HOME, THANK THEM AGAIN FOR COMING AND MAKING PUBLIC COMMENT AND, SORRY, YOU WILL HAVE TO COME BACK AGAIN ON SUNDAY WHEN WE HAVE TIME. WE HAVE NINE COUNCILMEMBERS HERE. IT IS HARD TO GET EVERYBODY TOGETHER WITHOUT SOMEBODY BEING ON VACATION. WE ARE GOING TO BE HEADING INTO SUMMER AND THEN OUR COUNCIL RECESS IN AUGUST TWO WEEKS AND THEN VERY QUICKLY AFTER THAT, WE'VE GOT BUDGET ON TOP OF THE LEVEE THAT NEEDS TO BE REVIEWED AND ONGOING WORK. I URGE MY COLLEAGUES TO VOTE AGAINST THE MOTION TO POSTPONE THIS PIECE OF LEGISLATION AND GO FORWARD DOING THE WORK OF THE PEOPLE OF SEATTLE AND MAKE A DECISION AND THEN MOVE FORWARD WITH EVERYTHING ELSE ON OUR CANCEL DOCKET -- COUNCIL DOCKET. >> COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA? >> I'M SORRY. COUNCILMEMBER KETTLE? >> THANK YOU, COUNCIL PRESIDENT . I WOULD LIKE TO TAKE THE OPPORTUNITY TO THANK EVERYONE WHO CAME OUT, WHETHER YOU ARE FOR OR AGAINST THIS BILL. I HAVE SAID BEFORE THAT THE S -- F STOOD FOR FLAWED BUT I WOULD SAY TODAY THAT IT IS ALSO FOR A FAILING GRADE WITH RESPECT TO THIS SPECIFIC PIECE OF LEGISLATION. I WOULD SAY IT DOESN'T ACCOUNT FOR THE 200 FOOT CHANGE WHICH IS A MATERIAL CHANNEL -- CHANGE. AS MENTIONED BY COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS, IT DOES NOT ACCOUNT FOR THE COAST GUARD DECISION ON PIER 46. THIS IS MAJOR. I SUSPECT IT WILL NOT BE ON TIME BECAUSE OF THE CHAOS THAT IS HAPPENING IN WASHINGTON, D.C.. IT IS INTERESTING THAT NO ONE TALKS ABOUT THE AMTRAK DECISION RELATED TO SOUTH COLGATE STREET. ZERO MENTION OF THAT. THAT IS GOING TO BE HUGE WHEREVER IT GOES. IT WILL HAVE MAJOR IMPACTS ON OUR MAJOR TRUCK ROUTES. IT WILL HAVE MAJOR IMPACTS ON OUR HEAVY HAUL NETWORK. IT IS JUST SOUTH OF THE PROPOSED UP SOME, REZONE. THIS NEEDS TO BE ACCOUNTED FOR BUT IT IS NOT ACCOUNTED FOR IN THE DOCUMENTS THAT WE HAVE HAD. I MENTIONED BEFORE THE WET WEATHER TREATMENT FACILITY. THAT WILL TAKE OUT FOUR TO EIGHT ACRES . THAT IS THE KING COUNTY WASTEWATER DIVISION PROJECT AND BASED ON MY VISIT TO THE GEORGETOWN WET WATER TREATMENT FACILITY, I SUSPECT IT WILL BE CLOSER TO EIGHT, NOT FOUR. UP TO EIGHT ACRES TAKEN OUT IN TRAN23. THAT IS HUGE. WHAT IS THE IMPACT ON THE TRUCK ROUTE, THE HEAVY HAUL NETWORK? THE MAJOR TRUCK ROUTES? THIS IS SERIOUS. THIS IS MAJOR. NO MENTION OF IT IN THE EIF. NO MENTION OF IT IN THE DISCUSSIONS WE HAVE HAD IN EXECUTIVE SESSION OR HERE IN THE COMMITTEE. NOTHING. THEN, ON TOP OF THAT, AS MENTIONED EARLIER, WE HAD RESOLUTION 32097 ONLY SIGNED IN DECEMBER 2023. IT IS BARELY A YEAR OLD AND IT TALKED ABOUT DOING REPORT ON NONINDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT, SITE IMPACT ANALYSIS. WE HAVE NOT DONE ANYTHING ON THAT. AS MENTIONED, WE ARE INVESTING IN OUR FREIGHT PROGRAM, THE TRANSPORTATION LEVEE THAT HAS WORKED SO WELL. THIS IS HUGE. THIS IS HUGE. FOR THESE REASONS, AND I AM ALSO THINKING OF FORMER COUNCILMEMBER PRESIDENT TALKING ABOUT THIS REALLY IS, THIS IS ABOUT OUR MARITIME CULTURAL HERITAGE THAT WE HAVE IN THE CITY END WE CAN BUILD -- AS SHE SAID 10 YEARS AGO, WE CAN BUILD ONE ARENA, FIVE ARENAS BUT WE CANNOT BUILD A DEEP WATER PORT. THIS IS SERIOUS. THIS IS MAJOR. AGAIN, COAST GUARD, AMTRAK, THE SOTO WET WEATHER AND THE FREIGHT PROGRAM WITH THE TRANSPORTATION LEVY . FOR THESE REASONS, I SUPPORT THE MOTION TO DELAY THIS LEGISLATION. THANK YOU, COUNCIL PRESIDENT. >> COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA? COUNCILMEMBER RINCK? WHO HAD THE HAND UP AFTER COUNCILMEMBER KETTLE? >> I DID BUT I LOWERED IT. >> GO AHEAD. >> ALL RIGHT. >> GO AHEAD, COUNCILMEMBER RINCK. >> SOMEONE ASKED ME TODAY IF IT WAS UNFAIR TO DELAY THE VOTE GIVEN HOW MANY PEOPLE TURNED OUT TODAY. IT IS. YES, IT IS UNFAIR AND IT IS UNFAIR TO HAVE NINE AMENDMENTS COME BEFORE US JUST LAST NIGHT. THAT ONLY BECAME PUBLIC LAST NIGHT, LIMITING OUR ABILITY TO MEANINGFULLY ENGAGE WITH OUR PARTNERS ON THIS. MY OFFICE WANTS TO GOVERN WITH THE PEOPLE AND ALONGSIDE THE PEOPLE AND I UNDERSTAND THAT COUNCIL RULES PERMITS THIS BUT JUST BECAUSE YOU CAN , DOESN'T MEAN YOU SHOULD , ESPECIALLY GIVEN THE LONG CONTENTIOUS HISTORY OF THIS PROJECT. WE ARE TALKING ABOUT 10 YEARS OF HISTORY HERE AND I KNOW MANY PEOPLE IN THIS ROOM HAVE WORKED ON THIS ISSUE AND I WANT TO HONOR THAT BECAUSE I KNOW IT HAS NOT BEEN EASY. I CERTAINLY FEEL THAT IN THIS MOMENT. WHEN I LOOK IN THIS ROOM, I SEE A LOT OF FRIENDS. I SEE A LOT OF PEOPLE WHO HAVE SHARED GOALIT DOES HURT ME TO SEE WORKING FOLKS FIGHTING OVER THIS. IT HAS BEEN BAD FOR US . I SEE PEOPLE WHO ARE LINED ON THEIR SHARED GOALS FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING. I SHARE IN THAT. I SEE FOLKS WHO WANT TO SUPPORT GOOD UNION JOBS BOTH IN AFFORDABLE HOUSING DEVELOPMENT AND PROTECTING THE JOBS WE HAVE AT THE PORT, SUPPORTING MAKERS , MAKING SURE WE HAVE SAFE STREETS AND I BELIEVE THAT THERE IS A PATH TO COMPROMISE AND I MEAN THAT GENUINELY AND RESCHEDULING THIS VOTE ALLOWS FOR TIME TO CONTEMPLATE THESE AMENDMENTS WITH STAKEHOLDERS AND OUR LABOR PARTNERS ON ALL SIDES OF THIS ISSUE. AGAIN, WE ARE TALKING ABOUT NINE AMENDMENTS DROP YESTERDAY, LEAVING MY OFFICE LIMITED TO NO TIME TO CONSULT WITH LABOR COURT AND ALL KEY PARTNERS TO REALLY TALK TO THE MERITS OF THESE AMENDMENTS. I WANT TO BE CLEAR THAT I APPRECIATE THE WORK OF MY COLLEAGUES AND WHAT THEY HAVE DONE TO WORK ON THESE AMENDMENTS AND THEY REPRESENT, IN MY MIND, A GREAT MOVE IN ADVANCING THIS PRODUCT IN A WAY THAT WOULD BUILD CONSENSUS RATHER THAN SO DIVISION. IF WE AS A BODY HAVE BEEN GIVEN NECESSARY TIME TO ANALYZE AND ENGAGE WITH STAKEHOLDERS, THE PROCESS WE PRESENTED WITH DID NOT ALLOW THAT TO HAPPEN AND IN MY MIND, I VIEW RESCHEDULING AS A COURSE CORRECTION THAT WILL ALLOW US TIME TO TRULY RESOLVE THIS IN A WAY THAT WORKS FOR EVERYBODY IN THIS ROOM. ADDITIONAL TIME WOULD ALLOW FOR US TO DO OUR DUE DILIGENCE IN SPEAKING WITH OUR PARTNERS TO COME TO AN INFORMED DECISION AND GET THESE AMENDMENTS A THOUGHTFUL PROVISION THEY DESERVE. RESCHEDULING ALLOWS TIME FOR THE POSSIBILITY OF A REAL COMPROMISE ON ALL SIDES. THE MISSTEPS OF THIS LEGISLATIVE PROCESS HAS SEWED DIVISION. THIS BILL WAS INTRODUCED TWO MONTHS AGO ON AN ISSUE THAT HAS ALREADY BEEN A CONTENTIOUS DEBATE FOR A DECADE AND WE SIMPLY NEED MORE TIME. FOR MY PART, MY OFFICE HAS BEEN HOPEFUL TO CONVENE OUR LABOR PARTNERS TO WORK ON A COMPROMISE SOLUTION. THANK YOU, COUNCIL PRESIDENT. >> ARE THERE ANY FURTHER COMMENTS? GO AHEAD COUNCILMEMBER MOORE. >> THANK YOU. WHILE THERE MAY BE VALID REASONS TO CONTINUE THIS SUBSTANTIVELY, I DON'T BELIEVE THE REASONS BECAUSE WE HAVE RECEIVED NINE AMENDMENTS IS ONE OF THEM . THIS IS A PROCESS THAT WORKS QUICKLY. WE ARE REQUIRED TO ALWAYS WORK QUICKLY, TO THINK ABOUT THINGS QUICKLY, TO DO OUR DUE DILIGENCE. WE HAVE ALL BEEN DOING OUR DUE DILIGENCE FROM THE BEGINNING. I WOULD HAVE LIKED TO HAVE GOTTEN THE AMENDMENTS SOONER AS WELL AND I HAVE BEEN TALKING ABOUT MY AMENDMENT FOR A WHILE. IT HAS BEEN TRICKY BECAUSE WE HAVE BEEN TRYING TO FIGURE OUT HOW WE MINIMIZE ADDITIONAL ENCROACHMENT, WHICH I THINK IS A VERY REAL CONCERN. THAT WAS WHY I BROUGHT AMENDMENTS. THAT IS WHY MY COLLEAGUE HAS BROUGHT AMENDMENTS AS WELL. I WANT TO POINT OUT THAT I STAYED UP UNTIL 1:00 LAST NIGHT REVIEWING ALL OF THESE AMENDMENTS SO THAT I COULD BE PREPARED. TODAY, I AMENDED MY AMENDMENT BASED ON AN AMENDMENT COUNCILMEMBER -- COUNCILMEMBER SAKA BROUGHT. WE ARE MORE THAN CAPABLE REVIEWING THESE WHICH ARE RATHER TECHNICAL AMENDMENTS. THEY ARE NOT COMPLEX SUBSTANTIVE AMENDMENTS THAT TAKE TIME FOR US TO REVIEW OR THINK ABOUT OR CONSULT WITH. I HAVE HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO CONSULT WITH MY COLLEAGUES TODAY AND I HAVE HAD AN OPPORTUNITY OF PEOPLE REACHING OUT TO ME WITH DELAYING THE VOTE. I RESPECTFULLY DISAGREE THAT THAT SHOULD BE THE BASIS FOR CONTINUANCE. SUBSTANTIVE QUESTIONS ABOUT OTHER THINGS THAT NEED TO HAPPEN, PERHAPS. I SUPPOSE I WOULD OFFER -- WE HAVE EVERYBODY HERE, LET'S NOT DELAY IT. IF IT IS REALLY A QUESTION OF YOU NEED ONE MORE WEEK TO READ THROUGH THESE TECHNICAL AMENDMENTS, THEN LET'S DO IT FOR ONE WEEK BUT THIS IS A RED HERRING WHEN WE SAY YOU NEED MORE TIME TO READ THESE AMENDMENTS. THAT CONTINUANCLIE.LEABOUT THINGS. T TOO MUCH DISHONESTY ON BOTH SIDES GOING FORWARD TODAY. >> POINT OF ORDER, COUNCIL PRESIDENT. >> IN MY OPINION, COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS -- I AM NOT CALLING YOU OUT IN PARTICULAR BUT I AM PREPARED AND ALLOWED TO HAVE MY OWN OPINION ABOUT HOW THIS PROCESS HAS PLAYED OUT. THERE HAVE BEEN A LOT OF COMMENTS MADE ABOUT HOW THIS PROCESS HAS PLAYED OUT TO WHICH I HAVE NOT RESPONDED OR ADDED MY OWN TWO CENTS. I AM NOT CALLING ANYONE OUT PARTICULAR AND IT HAS NOT BEEN A PARTICULARLY WONDERFUL PROCESS ON EITHER SIDE. WE ARE ALL IN A DIFFICULT POSITION SO I THINK IT IS FAIR TO ACKNOWLEDGE THAT. THERE ARE TWO SIDES TO EVERY COIN. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I YIELD. >> COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA AND THEN COUNCILMEMBER SAKA. >> THANK YOU, COUNCIL PRESIDENT. I WANT TO SAY SOME LEGAL ADVICE THAT MY COLLEAGUES JUST RAISED. WE HAVE ALL RECEIVED THE SAME LEGAL ADVICE. I HAVE NO CONCERNS MOVING FORWARD. I ALSO WANTED TO ADDRESS ONE ANOTHER THING BECAUSE I DID START MY EARLIER COMMENTS WITH, THIS IS A DIFFICULT ISSUE. I UNDERSTAND ON BOTH SIDES. I HAVE SAID THIS BEFORE, I AM A DAUGHTER OF UNION WORKERS. TODAY WOULD HAVE BEEN MY DAD'S BIRTHDAY IF HE WERE STILL ALIVE BUT HE IS NOT. YOU WAS A PROUD UNION WORKER AND A MEMBER OF THE FACTORY FOR MANY YEARS AS A WELDER. BECAUSE OF MY DAD, I AM HERE TODAY. I WILL SAY, THIS IS A HARD ISSUE ON BOTH SIDES. THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER MOORE FOR RAISING THAT. IT IS TRUE. IT IS A DIFFICULT ISSUE. THERE ARE TWO SIDES. THERE IS LABOR ON BOTH SIDES. I KNOW THOSE OF MY COLLEAGUES THAT I HAVE SPOKEN WITH, THIS IS A DIFFICULT ISSUE BUT THAT IS THE JOB. WE GOT VOTED TO MAKE REALLY TOUGH DECISIONS UP HERE AND WE WORK WITH OUR CONSTITUENTS AND WE HEAR AS MANY VOICES AS WE POSSIBLY CAN TO MAKE TOUGH DECISIONS. IT IS NOT EASY, BELIEVE ME. BUT, THAT IS THE JOB. IT IS A HARD ONE AND IT IS ONE THAT I TAKE VERY SERIOUSLY AND I TOO STAY UP LATE NOT JUST LAST NIGHT BUT MANY NIGHTS. I AM UP LATE BECAUSE I DO MY DUE DILIGENCE WITH EVERYTHING THAT I READ AND EVERY VOTE THAT I TAKE AND MAKE AND PEOPLE HAVE HEARD ME SAY ON MANY OCCASIONS, I WORK MANY LONG HOURS BECAUSE I WANT TO LISTEN TO ALL SIDES AND I DO MY DUE DILIGENCE AND MY DELIBERATION. SO, THIS IS REALLY DIFFICULT BUT IT BEING DIFFICULT IS NOT A GOOD REASON TO DELAY A VOTE. WE TAKE MANY DIFFICULT VOTES HERE AND IF WE WERE GOING TO RELY ON THE FACT THAT THEY WERE DIFFICULT, WE WOULD NOT MAKE MANY VOTES BECAUSE THEY ARE ALL DIFFICULT. WE HAVE A LOT OF VOTES COMING UP HERE. THE HARDEST IS ALWAYS BUDGET TIME AND EVEN DURING BUDGET TIME, AS I SAID EARLIER, WE HAD A FLOOR AMENDMENTS AND THAT IS AVAILABLE TO US BECAUSE THESE ARE HARD CHOICES AND WE NEED TO BE ABLE TO, EVEN DAY OF A VOTE, BRING AN AMENDMENT. I WANT TO THANK MY COLLEAGUE, COUNCILMEMBER MOORE FOR YOUR COMMENT AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT, I SEE MY TIME NOW, THANK YOU. >> COUNCILMEMBER SAKA? >> THANK YOU MADAME , COUNCIL PRESIDENT. I WANT TO THANK EVERYONE FOR TAKING THE TIME TO BE HERE TODAY. IRRESPECTIVE OF WHAT SIDE OF THIS PARTICULAR ISSUE YOU HAPPEN TO STAND ON, YOU COULD HAVE BEEN ANYWHERE IN THE WORLD BUT YOU CHOSE TO BE HERE WITH US TO SHARE YOUR PERSPECTIVE, YOUR FEEDBACK AND YOUR PRESENCE AND IT IS GREATLY APPRECIATED. IT SHOWS YOU CARE AND YOU ARE COMMITTED TO DOING BETTER AS A COMMUNITY AND AS A CITY. THANK YOU FROM THE BOTTOM OF MY HEART. YOU DON'T NEED ME TO TELL YOU THAT THIS IS A DELICATE, COMPLEX ISSUE. I HEARD A LOT OF GREAT CONCERNS, FOUR OR FIVE TIMES ALONE TODAY AND PUBLIC COMMENT. WE HEARD ABOUT THE U.S. COAST GUARD PENDING RECORD DECISION. A FEW OF MY COLLEAGUES EVEN MENTIONED IT HERE. SOME OF THE UNCERTAINTY PERTAINING TO THAT. WHEN I FIRST, MOST RECENTLY MET WITH THE PORT -- NOT RECENTLY BUT BACK IN JANUARY WHEN I MET WITH THE MISSION OR AND LEADERS FROM THE PORT, THAT WAS ONE OF THE CONCERNS THEY RAISED. I MET WITH THE LONGSHOREMEN. THAT WAS ONE OF THE CONCERNS THAT WAS RAISED. I MET WITH PORT PRESIDENT LAST WEEK. THAT WAS ONE OF THE CONCERNS THAT WAS RAISED. MARITIME LABOR UNION, SAME. I HEARD THAT CONCERN OVER AND OVER AGAIN AND IT IS A VALID ONE. THAT IS WHY I CREATED AN AMENDMENT WE WILL TALK ABOUT LATER TO PROVIDE MORE TIME. IT IS A VALID CONCERN. I THINK THERE IS ALREADY AN AMENDMENT TO ADDRESS THAT, AT LEAST IN PART . ACKNOWLEDGING THAT EVERYONE HAS BEEN HERE, TOOK THE TIME OUT OF YOUR BUSY LIVES TO BE HERE TODAY, I WANT TO HONOR AND RESPECT EVERYONE'S TIME AND NOT FURTHER DELAY AND KICK THIS DOWN THE ROAD. I KNOW THERE IS A STRONG COMMITMENT ON ALL SIDES AND I AM NOT GOING TO DO MY BEST TO AVOID OR IMPEDE ANYONE'S MOTIVE. I THINK EVERYONE IS GENUINELY INTERESTED IN WORKING TOGETHER TO MEET EVERYONE'S NEEDS AND CONCERNS TO DO SOMETHING TOGETHER. AND, NEGOTIATE IN GOOD FAITH TO DO EXACTLY THAT BUT I WOULD SUBMIT THAT EVEN IF WE TAKE THIS VOTE TODAY , THERE IS NOTHING STOPPING THE PARTIES FROM CONTINUING TO DO EXACTLY THAT, CONTINUING TO NEGOTIATE IN GOOD FAITH. SOME OF THAT MIGHT RISE TO THE LEVEL OF FUTURE COUNCIL ACTION. SOME OF IT MAY NOT . EVEN IF WE END UP VOTING TODAY, THERE IS NOTHING THAT IS GOING TO STOP ANYONE FROM WORKING TOGETHER. I AM JUST NOT CONVINCED THAT THE PENDING MOTION THAT WE HAVE IS FOR A JULY 15 DATE. MY AMENDMENT, WE WILL TALK ABOUT IT MORE LATER. IT SAYS JUNE 30. JUNE 30 IS AN EFFECTIVE DATE. IT ALLOWS FOR PLANNING. IT IS FAIR TO QUESTION WHETHER THAT IS ADEQUACY AND SUFFICIENCY OF THAT BUT IT ALLOWS FOR PLANNING. I AM JUST NOT CONVINCED THAT IF WE DELAY THIS VOTE TODAY -- THANK YOU. >> COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS? >> THANK YOU, COUNCIL PRESIDENT. THIS QUESTION ABOUT WHEN WE TAKE THIS UP IS NOT ABOUT A YES OR A NO. TO COUNCILMEMBER SAKA'S POINT, YOU'VE GOT AN AMENDMENT LATER TODAY TO MAKE THE EFFECTIVE DATE IN JUNE. IF WE HAVE A DISCUSSION HERE, OR IF WE LEARN NEW THINGS IN THE NEXT MONTH THAT MAKE US WANT TO CHANGE TODAY'S DECISION, WE CAN'T CHANGE THAT UNLESS WE COME BACK TOGETHER AND ASK EVERYONE TO COME BACK DOWN HERE. THAT IS WHY I AM ASKING TO GET THAT INFORMATION AHEAD OF MAKING THAT FINAL DECISION. THIS IS ONE OF -- THIS COULD POSSIBLY BE THE FIRST DECISION BEFORE THIS COUNCIL THAT COULD NOT BE TAKEN BACK. OTHER DECISIONS THAT WE HAVE MADE HERE AROUND POLICIES CAN BE AMENDED. THEY CAN BE PILOT PROJECTS. THEY CAN BE CHANGED IF THEY ARE NOT WORKING. THEY CAN BE AUDITED WITH BUDGETS. WE ARE ABLE TO EXPAND FUNDING. WE ARE ABLE TO SHRINK FUNDING. WE ARE ABLE TO MAKE THESE CHANGES. WE ARE ABLE TO PUT PERFORMANCE MEASURES ON THEM IF WE CHOOSE. THERE ARE OTHER TOOLS. ONCE THE BUILDING IS BUILT, THAT IS A CHANGE WE DON'T GET TO COME BACK FROM. I ABSOLUTELY HEAR -- I DON'T WANT TO ASK WORKING FOLKS TO LEAVE THEIR JOBS AGAIN. FOR ME, THIS PROCESS HAS NOT PUT PEOPLE AT THE TABLE AT THE SAME TIME TO HAVE THESE CONVERSATIONS. THIS PROCESS IS WHAT HAS PUT PEOPLE PITTED AGAINST EACH OTHER. I KNOW THAT FROM HAVING THE 23 MARITIME INDUSTRIAL WORK. THAT WAS A VERY LONG PROCESS. IT WAS FOCUSED ON COLLABORATION AND CONSENSUS AND WE WERE ABLE TO CREATE A SCHEDULE THAT WAS CLEARLY ARTICULATED WELL IN ADVANCE, A MONTH BEFORE THE BILL WAS EVEN TRANSMITTED WE WERE TALKING ABOUT THE DEADLINE FOR AMENDMENTS. THAT IS WHY WE DID NOT HAVE AMENDMENTS AT FULL COUNCIL BECAUSE EVERYONE WAS AFFORDED THE TIME THAT THEY NEEDED TO MAKE THAT DECISION. WHEN I TALK ABOUT AMENDMENTS, THAT IS JUST ONE FACTOR. THERE ARE MANY DIFFERENT FACTORS THAT MAKE ME WANT TO DELAY TODAY. I HEAR MY COLLEAGUES SHARING EXAMPLES OF WHY LAST-MINUTE AMENDMENTS ARE OKAY. I WILL POINT OUT THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THOSE EXAMPLES AND WHAT WE HAVE TODAY IS HOW MUCH WORK HAS BEEN DONE TO SHARE THE CONTENT AHEAD OF TIME. I AM NOT POINTING FINGERS. IT IS NOT A FAULT AT ANYONE ELSE BUT SOME OF THE AMENDMENTS WERE HELD CLOSE TO THE CHEST UNTIL BEING PUBLISHED AND THIS IS NOT ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT WE HAVE THE FORTITUDE TO STAY UP ALL NIGHT. EVERYONE LET THE RECORD REFLECT A JUDGE CAN STAY UP . TOUGH AS NAILS. IT IS NOT ABOUT STAYING UP LATE AT NIGHT AND DIGESTING INFORMATION. IT IS ABOUT ALLOWING FOR A PUBLIC PROCESS TO HAVE TRANSPARENCY AND PREDICT ABILITY. HOW MANY COUNCILMEMBERS UP HERE RIGHT NOW KNEW THAT THE PROJECT THAT IS BEING PROPOSED TO BE BUILT TODAY, IF THAT HOUSING WAS HOTELS? >> COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS, I APPRECIATE -- I WOULD LIKE TO CONTINUE THE PROCESS OF VOTING ON THIS. PLEASE DON'T INTERRUPT. POINT OF ORDER, PLEASE. LET'S KEEP OUR CONVERSATION TO THE MOTION AT HAND. I KNOW IT IS -- WOULD YOU LIKE TO HAVE A FINAL THING? >> I WOULD LIKE TO FINISH MY STATEMENT. >> GO AHEAD AND FINISH YOUR STATEMENT. >> THERE WAS A LOT RIDING ON THIS DECISION. THIS IS ONE THAT WE CAN'T TAKE BACK AND THAT WE SHOULD PROCEED CAREFULLY BECAUSE EVERYONE UP HERE FROM MY UNDERSTANDING ONCE THE MAKERS DISTRICT. WE WANT TO HAVE THE SMALL MAKERS MANUFACTURING. WHAT I HEARD TODAY IS THAT THE PORT HAS IN WRITING, INTEREST IN BUYING THAT SPACE. WHAT WE KNOW IS THAT WE WANT LABOR BUILT AFFORDABLE HOUSING. WHERE IT IS IS A DIFFERENT QUESTION. WHAT WE KNOW IS THAT THIS PROJECT COULD BE BUILT TODAY IF IT WAS A HOTEL BECAUSE WHEN WE PUT PEOPLE'S HOMES WITHIN 200 FEET OF NOT ONLY A FREIGHT ROUTE BUT ONE OF THE MOST USED FREIGHT ROUTES IN OUR CITY, IT IS NOT GOOD FOR THE FOLKS WHO LIVE THERE. I ASKED FOR A DELAY SO WE CAN CONTINUE THE CONVERSATION AND COUNCILMEMBER MOORE, IF THAT MEANS JUST A WEEK, I AM HAPPY TO HAVE THAT CONVERSATION. I SAID JULY BECAUSE I THOUGHT WE COULD GET SDOT TO GET ENGAGED . WE COULD HAVE GOTTEN SDOT ENGAGED HAD WE HAD A MORE SMOOTH PROCESS. THANK YOU. >> COUNCILMEMBER KETTLE? >> THANK YOU, COUNCIL PRESIDENT. I FIRST WANT TO WISH A HAPPY HEAVENLY BIRTHDAY TO COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA 'S DAD, A WELDER . IT IS INCREDIBLE BECAUSE MY DAD IS A WELDER AND THURSDAY WILL BE FOUR YEARS SINCE HE PASSED AND IT IS HIS BIRTHDAY ON THURSDAY. AND, TO THE COUNCILMEMBER RINCK'S POINT, WITH THAT BACKGROUND, IT IS BAD AND I UNDERSTAND LABOR COUNCIL IS LOOKING FOR ANSWERS BUT IT IS BAD, THIS SITUATION WE HAVE IN TERMS OF LABOR IN THE DIFFERENT SIDES OF LABOR. I ALSO LIKE THE WORD GRACE. GRACE IS MY FAVORITE WORD. RACE IS IMPORTANT. I UNDERSTAND WHEN SOMEBODY SAYS, HEY, DO AN ALL NIGHTER. GRACE WOULD TAKE INTO ACCOUNT WHEN A COLLEAGUE HAS A COUPLE OF LITTLE TERRIER DOGS, A YOUNG DAUGHTER AND A WORKING WIFE, GOING THROUGH QUITE A BIT RIGHT NOW. IT IS DIFFICULT. I THINK GRACE IS A KEYWORD WE SHOULD HAVE. THANK YOU, BY THE WAY, FOR THE PUBLIC COMMENT THAT WAS DONE BUT THIS IS A WORD THAT WE SHOULD BE LOOKING AT IF WE ARE -- I JUST WANTED TO ALSO SAY THAT I DON'T BELIEVE MY COMMENTS ARE A RED HERRING . IF YOU WORK THESE ISSUES, IF YOU KNOW THE MARITIME WORLD AND EVERYTHING ELSE, THE COAST GUARD DECISION IS HUGE. THAT IS GOING TO HAVE IMPACT. THE IMPACT DECISION ITSELF ON SOUTH COLGATE, THAT IS HUGE. IT IS GOING TO HAVE IMPACT. THE WET WEATHER TREATMENT FACILITY IS GOING TO BE HUGE. IT IS NEARLY 8 ACRES. THESE ARE NOT RED HERRINGS. WE TALKED ABOUT DIFFICULT DECISIONS. WE ARE SUPPOSED TO HAVE DATA DRIVEN DECISION MAKING BUT CLEARLY, JUST ON THOSE THREE EXAMPLES, WE HAVE INCOMPLETE DATA. THAT IS JUST A FACT. I DON'T BELIEVE THAT IS A RED HERRING. I JUST WANTED TO MAKE THAT POINT. THANK YOU. >> IS THAT AN OLD HAND OR A NEW HAND? COUNCILMEMBER MOORE? >> I WILL TAKE MY HAND OFF. >> ALL RIGHT. SEEING NO FURTHER COMMENTS, WILL THE CLERK PLEASE CALL THE ROLLBACK ON THE MOTION TO POSTPONE UNTIL JULY 15? >> COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS? >> YES. >> COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH? >> NO. >> COUNCILMEMBER KETTLE? >> YES. >> COUNCILMEMBER MOORE? >> NO . >> COUNCILMEMBER RINCK? >> COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA? >> NO. >> COUNCILMEMBER SAKA? >> NO. >> COUNCILMEMBER SOLOMON? >> NO. >> COUNCIL PRESIDENT NELSON? >> NO. >> THAT IS THREE IN FAVOR, SIX OPPOSED. >> ALL RIGHT. THE MOTION IS DEFEATED AND NOW WE WILL GO ON. WILL THE CLERK PLEASE READ ITEM ONE? >> AT THIS POINT, WE ARE READY TO MOVE THROUGH AMENDMENTS A THROUGH I. >> I WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS THE BASE LEGISLATION UNLESS THE TITLE HAS TO BE READ INTO THE RECORD. OKAY. ALL RIGHT, FOLKS. I WILL TRY TO KEEP THIS SHORT BECAUSE I KNOW WE NEED TO CONTINUE WITH THE ITEM AND WE HAVE HOW MANY AMENDMENTS? NINE. ANYWAY, I HAVE TO SAY THAT FOR SUCH A PROGRESSIVE PIECE OF LEGISLATION, THERE IS AN UNCOMMON AMOUNT OF OPPOSITION, AT LEAST FOR SEATTLE. THERE IS A LOT OF STRONG EMOTION ON EACH SIDE AND SOME CRAZY ACCUSATIONS WITH SOME ILL INTENT AS WELL AS FAR TOO MUCH FROM MY PERSPECTIVE APPEAR. IT JUST DOES NOT ADD UP TO THE FACTS. THIS IS ABOUT SEATTLE'S WORSENING HOUSING AFFORDABILITY PROBLEM. IT IS ABOUT SEATTLE'S WORSENING OF PORTABILITY PROBLEM FOR OUR SMALL BUSINESSES. WE ARE ESPECIALLY TALKING ABOUT WORKING-CLASS PEOPLE WHO CAN NO LONGER AFFORD TO LIVE IN SEATTLE. WE ARE G ABOUT SMALL MANUFACTURING BUSINESSES THAT ARE FORCED TO MOVE OUT OF SEATTLE BECAUSE THEY CAN'T FIND AFFORDABLE WORKSPACES. THESE, BY THE WAY, ARE THE BUSINESSES THAT ARE POISED TO BE INSPIRATIONS AND TO BE INCUBATORS AND TO BE THE LADDER OF UPLIFT AND OPPORTUNITY FOR OTHER MINORITY AND VULNERABLE ENTREPRENEURS IN OUR CITY. THEY ARE ESPECIALLY IMPORTANT TO TRY TO GET TO , TO HELP STAY HERE. ANYWAY, THE QUESTION BEFORE US TODAY IS SIMPLY, ARE WE GOING TO DO SOMETHING ABOUT ALL OF THIS OR NOT? ARE WE GOING TO BUILD MORE AFFORDABLE HOUSING OR NOT? ARE WE GOING TO SUPPORT OUR MAKERS BUSINESSES AND CREATE MORE SPACES OR NOT? IN OTHER WORDS, DO WE REALLY UNDERSTAND THE AFFORDABILITY CRISIS THIS CITY IS FACING AND ARE WE WILLING TO ACT WITH URGENCY AND DETERMINATION TO DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT? THAT IS HOW I SEE THIS. I DO WANT TO ADDRESS THE MESSAGING ON THE SIGNS, WE HAD A DEAL MESSAGE THAT IS COMING AT US. YEAH, THE DEAL WAS THE EIF AND THE PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE WHICH FOUND THAT HOUSING WOULD NOT ADVERSELY IMPACT THE PORT OF -- THE PORT'S OPERATIONS AND RECOMMENDED RESIDENTIAL USES IN THE STADIUM DISTRICT UP TO 990 UNITS, WHATEVER. THAT HOUSING, 50% OF WHICH WOULD BE AFFORDABLE AT 60% TO 90% OF THE AREA'S MEDIAN INCOME FOR 75 YEARS PER THE UNDERLYING ZONING. THAT IS WHAT WE'VE GOT GOING FOR US. THIS IS TRULY MIXED INCOME HOUSING LOCATED NEXT TO FREQUENT TRANSIT SUCH AS A LIGHT RAIL STATION AND THERE IS NO CONTROVERSY ABOUT THAT. THAT IS WHAT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT. THE DEAL WAS NEGOTIATED AMONGST STAKEHOLDERS FROM NOVEMBER 2019 WHEN THE INDUSTRIAL AND MARITIME STRATEGY ADVISEMENT COUNCIL WAS CONVENED UNTIL IT WAS PUBLISHED IN THE FINAL EIF AND THE PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE IN SEPTEMBER 2022. THAT IS THE DEAL I AM TALKING ABOUT HERE. I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE TERMS ARE OF ANY OTHER DEAL THAT IS BEING ELUDED TO HEAR BUT I AM JUST GOING ON THE FACT OF WHAT I HAVE AT MY -- THAT WERE PUBLICLY AVAILABLE AND THAT I HAVE AT MY DISPOSAL AS WELL. THE FACTS ARE THAT THIS PROPOSAL WILL ALLOW WORKFORCE HOUSING TO BE BUILT ON TOP OF SUBSIDIZED WORKSPACES FOR STRUGGLING SMALL BUSINESS IN AN UNDER UTILIZED TWO BLOCK STRETCH SOUTH OF T-MOBILE PARK THAT IS NOW PLAGUED BY SERIOUS CRIME. THIS WOULD BE BUILT WITH 100% UNION LABOR BACKED AND SIGNED BY PROJECT LABOR AGREEMENTS THAT FOLLOW THE PROPERTY EVEN IF IT IS SOLD AS LONG AS HOUSING IS APPROVED TO BE BUILT. THAT IS A PRETTY GOOD DEAL AND THAT IS WHY THIS IS BACKED A BROAD COALITION INCLUDING 22 LOCALS REPRESENTING 173,000 MEMBERS, 200 AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROVIDERS AND 700 MANUFACTURING BUSINESSES THAT ARE MEMBERS OF SEATTLE MADE AND THERE ARE A LOT OF OTHERS AROUND THE CITY. TWO PUBLIC STADIUM AUTHORITIES AND PIONEER SQUARE IN CHINATOWN INTERNATIONAL DISTRICT NEIGHBORHOOD GROUPS STRONGLY SUPPORTED THIS PROPOSAL FOR THE INCREASED SAFETY AT 24/7 ACTIVATION WOULD BRING. I COULD GO ON AND DECONSTRUCT THE OTHER REASONS FOR OPPOSITION TO THIS PLAN BUT I JUST WANT TO PUT FORWARD FOR NOW THAT I AM ADVANCING THIS BILL BECAUSE I THINK IT IS THE RIGHT THING TO DO FOR OUR WORKERS, OUR LOW INCOME FAMILIES AND SO MANY SMALL BUSINESSES AND THE VITALITY OF OUR FUTURE AND EVOLVING CITY. THIS LEGISLATION IS NOW BEFORE US FOR FURTHER COMMENT AND I WELCOME MY COLLEAGUES TO CHIME IN. >> THAT WAS THE INTRODUCTION. SEEING NO COMMENTS RIGHT NOW, I THINK WE CAN GO AHEAD AND MOVE THE VARIOUS AMENDMENTS. >> I WILL START WITH MINE. HOLD ON A SECOND. THERE IS -- I AM RECOMMENDING THAT WE SUSPEND THE RULES SO THAT OUR CENTRAL STAFF ANALYST CAN JOIN US AT THE TABLE JUST TO ANSWER ANY POLICY QUESTIONS, NOT THERE TO WALK THROUGH EACH AMENDMENT. I AM SEEING NO OBJECTIONS TO SUSPENDING THE RULES SO OUR CENTRAL STAFF MEMBERS CAN SIT AT THE TABLE. ALL RIGHT. LET'S MOVE ON. DO I GO AHEAD AND READ THE ACTUAL AMENDMENT? AMENDMENT A IS SPONSORED BY ME SO I WILL GO AHEAD AND PRESENT IT. AMENDMENT A IS -- I MOVE AMENDMENT A TO COUNCIL BILL 120933 . >> SECOND. >> IT HAS BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED. THIS AMENDMENT WOULD LIMIT THE TOTAL NUMBER OF RESIDENTIAL UNITS IN THE STADIUM TRANSITION AREA OVERLAY DISTRICT. BASICALLY, THIS IS IN RESPONSE A LITTLE BIT TO THE LETTER THAT WE GOT FROM THE PORT. THE FACTS ARE THAT IT WOULD LIMIT THE TOTAL NUMBER OF UNITS -- HOUSING UNITS TO 990. THIS IS CONSISTENT WITH THE GREATEST NUMBER OF UNITS THAT WERE STUDIED IN THE F EIF. THE POINT OF THIS AMENDMENT IS TO SEND A VERY CLEAR MESSAGE THAT WHAT WE ARE TRYING TO DO HERE IS BE CONSISTENT WITH WHAT WE HAVE STUDIED AND THAT THIS IS NOT AN INTENTION TO EXCEED WHAT WAS STUDIED AND THIS WILL ALSO ADDRESS CONCERNS THAT THERE IS A STEEPER VIOLATION AT PLAY. ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT MY AMENDMENT? >> COUNCIL PRESIDENT? >> GO AHEAD. >> DO WE HAVE TO VOTE YES AND NO ON AMENDMENTS AT FULL COUNCIL? THANK YOU. >> YES. >> ALL RIGHT. I AM NOT SEEING ANY OTHER QUESTIONS. WILL THE CLERK PLEASE CALL THE ROLLBACK ON THE ADOPTION OF AMENDMENT A. >> COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS? >> NO. >> COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH? >> YES. >> COUNCILMEMBER KETTLE? >> NO. >> COUNCILMEMBER MOORE? >> AYE. >> COUNCILMEMBER RINCK? >> NO. >> COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA? >> AYE. >> COUNCILMEMBER SAKA? >> AYE. >> COUNCILMEMBER SOLOMON? >> AYE. >> COUNCIL PRESIDENT NELSON? >> AYE. >> SIX IN PAPER, THREE OPPOSED. MOTION CARRIES END AMENDMENT A IS ADOPTED. MOVING RIGHT ALONG, GO AHEAD. ARE THERE ANY FURTHER COMMENTS ON THE BILL AS AMENDED? GO AHEAD. >> THANK YOU. I MOVED TO AMEND COUNCIL BILL 120933 AS PRESENTED ON AMENDMENT TO BE. >> SECOND. >> IT HAS BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED. >> GO AHEAD. >> WE HAVE HEARD A LOT OF GREAT FEEDBACK THE PAST COUPLE OF WEEKS, THE PAST COUPLE OF MONTHS IN MY JOURNEY TO LEARN MORE AND TO BETTER UNDERSTAND SOME OF THE SPECIFIC CONCERNS. ALL OF THEM GREAT, ALL OF THEM BAD. I TRY MY BEST, AGAIN, NOT TO IMPUGN ANY MOTIVES. I THINK ALL THE CONCERNS I HEARD ARE TOTALLY VALID. I DON'T THINK ANY OF THEM ARE FEAR MONGERING. THEY ARE ROOTED IN PEOPLE'S DEEP-SEATED VALUES, PRINCIPLES AND PRIORITIES. IF I, AS AN ELECTED OFFICIAL OR A POLITICIAN WERE TO TELL SOMEONE THAT THEY ARE FEAR MONGERING BASED OFF OF HOW THEY FEEL ABOUT A PARTICULAR POLICY PROPOSAL, I THINK IT IS A LITTLE DISRESPECTFUL . WHO AM I TO TELL YOU ALL HOW YOU SHOULD BE FEELING OR NOT BE FEELING ABOUT ANY PARTICULAR POLICY PROPOSAL? ALL OF THE CONCERNS ARE VALID. THERE IS TOO MUCH GOVERNMENT DOING THAT ANYWAY. ALL THESE CONCERNS ARE VALID. I AM JUST PERSUADED BY SOME MORE THAN OTHERS. THIS AMENDMENT IS IN DIRECT RESPONSE TO SOME SPECIFIC CONCERNS THAT I HEARD DURING MY STAKEHOLDER PROCESS. THIS IS ABOUT PROVIDING CLARITY FOR BOTH THE PORT AND THE COMMUNITY THAT GOING FORWARD, THE COUNCIL WILL MAINTAIN INDUSTRIAL LAND FOR INDUSTRIAL USES. MY AMENDMENT ALSO MAKES CLEAR THAT THIS COUNCIL UNDERSTANDS THE IMPORTANCE OF INDUSTRIAL LAND AND WILL PROACTIVELY SUPPORT ACTIONS TO LIMIT FURTHER ENCROACHMENT AND REZONING OF INDUSTRIAL LAND. I INTEND TO CEMENT THE CITY COUNCIL'S COMMITMENT TO MAINTAINING INDUSTRIAL LAND FOR INDUSTRIAL AND MARITIME USES. THE PORT AND OUR INDUSTRIAL BUSINESSES DO NOT HAVE TO COME OUT AND FIGHT THIS FIGHT EVERY TWO YEARS. WE LEARNED TWO YEARS AGO, SOME THOUGHT THIS ISSUE WAS PUT TO BED. OTHERS THOUGHT THAT IT WOULD BE RESURRECTED IN A FEW YEARS AND HERE WE ARE. BUT, EVERYONE DESERVES CONSISTENCY AND PREDICT ABILITY IN LAND USE POLICIES SO THEY CAN CONCENTRATE ON DOING THEIR BUSINESS. BECAUSE THE BILL BEFORE US IS A SHORT BILL AFFECTING ONLY THE STADIUM TRANSITION AREA OVERLAY DISTRICT, I AM TOLD FROM OUR CENTRAL STAFF THAT IT IS NOT THE BEST VENUE FOR MAKING THAT LARGER COMMITMENT. INSTEAD, THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN IS. WHEN THE COMP PLAN IS BEFORE THE COUNCIL, IT CURRENTLY IS , I WILL BE PUTTING FORWARD AMENDMENTS AS PART OF A BROADER PLAN TO MAKE SURE THAT NO ADDITIONAL HOUSING IS PERMITTED IN INDUSTRIAL AREAS AND INDIVIDUAL COUNCILMEMBERS AREN'T FREE TO WILLY-NILLY PROPOSE SUCH CHANGES WHENEVER THEY SEE FIT. IT HAS TO BE AS IT -- AT A RELIABLE, CONSISTENT, PREDICTABLE TIMEFRAME BUT I AM TOLD THIS LEGISLATIVE INSTRUMENT IS NOT THE APPROPRIATE LEGISLATIVE VEHICLE FOR THAT. WHERE WE LANDED IS, I WANT TO SIGNAL COUNCIL 'S INTENT HERE VIA RECITALS WITH AN EYE TOWARD TAKING STRONGER ACTION LATER DURING THE COMP PLAN PROCESS. COLLEAGUES, IRRESPECTIVE OF WHERE YOU LAND ON THE FINAL VOTE , I WOULD LOVE TO EARN YOUR SUPPORT FOR THIS AMENDMENT AND FRANKLY, ALL OF MY AMENDMENTS. I THINK THEY DO MAKE THE BILL BETTER. I ASK FOR YOUR SUPPORT. THANK YOU. >> COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS? >> COUNCILMEMBER SAKA, I APPRECIATE ENTIRELY THE INTENT -- WHERE THE INTENT YOU'RE COMING FROM IS. I FEEL LIKE LISTENING TO YOUR SPEECH, IT SOUNDED LIKE WHAT I SAID AT THE END OF 2023. WE NEED PREDICTABILITY. WE NEED TO SET UP A PROCESS WHERE HOUSING WILL NOT COME UP IN A REGULAR CONVERSATION. IN FACT, WE ADDED ELEMENTS OF THOSE INTO THAT INDUSTRIAL MARITIME READ ZONE CHANGE. WE HAVE COME TO DIFFERENT CONCLUSIONS. THE STADIUM TRANSITION OVERLAY DISTRICT IS AN AREA THAT IS A TRANSITION BETWEEN AN URBAN AREA AND AN INDUSTRIAL AREA. IN THOSE CONVERSATIONS THAT WE HAD IN 2022, 2023 AND EARLIER, -- IF DAN IS STILL IN THE ROOM, DAN YELLED AT ME IN A POLITE WAY. IT WAS ABOUT THE HOTEL, ABOUT JUST THE HOTELS COMING INTO THE STADIUM TRANSITION DISTRICT . AT THE END OF THAT WHOLE PROCESS -- I SAID, DAN, DON'T WORRY. WE HAVE A COMMITMENT, WE ARE GOING TO GET THIS DONE AND THIS IS WHERE WE ARE GOING TO LAND. EVEN STILL, HE SAID TO ME, IF WE PUT THREE HOTELS, DO WE HAVE THE SIDEWALK WITH TO ACCOMMODATE THAT? IT IS SOMETHING THAT HE BROUGHT UP YEARS AGO. AT THE END OF THAT 23 PROCESS, I SAID, IF WE ARE GOING TO CONTINUE, THERE WILL BE A PROCESS TO BRING EVERYONE TO THE TABLE. THAT WAS PART OF THE TRANSPORTATION RESOLUTION, PART OF THIS CONTINUING RESOLUTION. I WANT TO GET BACK. THE PROCESS AROUND THIS BILL HAS CREATED DIVISION RATHER THAN COLLABORATION. I SUBMIT TO YOU, MY FRIENDS, THAT YOU ARE ACCURATE. THE SPEECH THAT YOU JUST GAVE I FEEL WAS THE SPEECH I JUST GAVE AT THE END OF THE PROCESS IN 2023 BUT THE REALITY IS WE ARE BACK HERE TODAY AND THAT IS WHY I FEEL I CAN'T SUPPORT THESE WORDS BECAUSE I FEEL THAT OUR ACTIONS ARE HOLLOW. >> OKAY. ARE THERE ANY OTHER COMMENTS? I WOULD LIKE COUNCILMEMBERS TO ADDRESS THE ROOM, UNLESS ASKING A QUESTION. PLEASE STATE YOUR COMMENTS AND -- INSTEAD OF SPEAKING DIRECTLY TO EACH OTHER. ARE THERE ANY OTHER COMMENTS ON AMENDMENT TO BE? WILL THE CLERK PLEASE CALL THE ROLL ON AMENDMENT B ? >> GO AHEAD. I DID NOT SEE YOUR HAND. >> NO WORRIES. ARE WE GOING TO HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY FOR CENTRAL STAFF TO EXPLAIN SOME OF THESE? >> YESTERDAY, I SAID THAT WE WEREN'T GOING TO BECAUSE THERE ARE SO MANY BUT I DO THINK IT IS A BETTER IDEA AND ANOTHER COUNCILMEMBER DID ASK THAT SO, WOULD YOU PLEASE GO AHEAD WITH THE DESCRIPTION? >> FOR COUNCIL CENTRAL STAFF, THIS AMENDMENT WOULD ADD FIVE TITLES TO THE BILL , CALLING OUT THE KEY POLICIES AND THE CONFERENCE PLANS, INDUSTRIAL POLICIES RELATED TO INDUSTRIAL LAND AND PRESERVING INDUSTRIAL LAND FOR INDUSTRIAL USES AND THAT IS TWO STATEMENTS STATING THAT ADDITIONAL HOUSING AND INDUSTRIAL AREAS OUTSIDE OF THE LIMITED INDUSTRIAL RELATED HOUSING CURRENTLY ALLOWED WOULD HAVE SIGNIFICANT IMPACT ON THE INDUSTRIAL AREAS AND STATING THAT THIS CITY INTENDS TO FURTHER STRENGTHEN POLICIES AND FURTHER LIMIT CHANGES TO INDUSTRIAL AREAS. >> OKAY. ANY OTHER COMMENTS? ALL RIGHT. I JUST WANT TO THANK YOU VERY MUCH, COUNCILMEMBER -- COUNCILMEMBER SAKA FOR BRINGING THIS FORWARD. I WANT TO TAKE THIS OPPORTUNITY TO RECOGNIZE HOW MUCH WORK YOU DID PUT INTO THIS LEGISLATION, TO LOOKING AT THE DETAILS, TO TAKING A VERY CLOSE LOOK AT THE MINUTIA AND FOR CARING SO MUCH AND FOR SO LONG ABOUT THIS PIECE OF LEGISLATION AND WHAT YOU ARE GOING TO DO ABOUT IT. I RECOGNIZE THAT THIS IS -- A LOT OF THE FOLKS THAT ARE DIRECTLY INVOLVED IN THIS LEGISLATION LIVE AND WORK IN YOUR DISTRICT SO THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR BEING SUCH A THOUGHT PARTNER IN PUTTING FORWARD THESE AMENDMENTS WITH SUCH CONVICTION AND HEART. I JUST WANTED TO SAY THAT. ALL RIGHT. WE HAVE A LOT MORE TO GO SO WILL THE CLERK PLEASE CALL THE ROLL NECK ON THE PASSAGE OF AMENDMENT B TO COUNCIL 120933? >> COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS? >> NO. >> COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH? >> YES. >> COUNCILMEMBER KETTLE? >> NO. >> COUNCILMEMBER MOORE? >> AYE. >> COUNCILMEMBER RINCK? >> NO. >> COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA? >> AYE. >> COUNCILMEMBER SAKA? >> AYE. >> COUNCILMEMBER SOLOMON? >> AYE. >> COUNCIL PRESIDENT NELSON? >> AYE. >> SIX IN FAVOR, THREE OPPOSED. THE MOTION CARRIES. AMENDMENT B IS ADOPTED. ARE THERE FURTHER COMMENTS? >> THINK YOU. I MOVED TO AMEND COUNCIL BILL 120933 AS PRESENTED ON AMENDMENT C . >> SECOND. >> IT HAS BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED TO AMEND THE BILL AS PRESENTED ON AMENDMENT C. COUNCILMEMBER SAKA, AS A SPONSOR, YOU ARE MOVED TO ADDRESS IT AND YOU CAN ALSO ASK OUR CENTRAL STAFF ARE TO DESCRIBE IT AS WELL. >> THANK YOU AND THANK YOU FOR ACCOMMODATING THE REQUEST TO ALLOW CENTRAL STAFF TO BE HERE TO EXPLAIN. I WILL YIELD IN A MOMENT TO CENTRAL STAFF TO EXPLAIN ALL OF THESE AMENDMENTS. EVERY LAST ONE ARE HIGHLY TECHNICAL AND NUANCED SO I THINK GETTING THE FACT PREDICATE RIGHT FROM A CENTRAL STAFF -- ALIGNING ON THE EFFECT OF THE AMENDMENT WILL HELP ME DESCRIBE THE POLICY GOALS AND PURPOSE OF THE AMENDMENT. GO AHEAD. WELL, I WILL YIELD TO CENTRAL STAFF. >> PLEASE. >> AS I THINK COUNCILMEMBERS KNOW, THE STADIUM TRANSITION AREA OVERLAY DISTRICT IS IN A CENTRAL LIQUEFACTION PRONE AREA. THAT MEANS THAT DURING AN EARTHQUAKE EVENT, THE SOILS COULD BE LOOSE AND ADDITIONAL ENGINEERING IS REQUIRED FOR CONSTRUCTION AREAS IN ORDER TO PREVENT SERIOUS HARM TO OCCUPANTS OF STRUCTURES IN THE AREA. IF A PROPERTY IN THE AREA IS DETERMINED TO BE LIQUEFACTION PRONE AND THAT IS BY OUTSIDE ANALYSIS, SDC I WILL REQUIRE A COVENANT TO THE CITY INDICATING THAT THE PROPERTY OWNER WILL MAINTAIN THE PROPERTY IN SUCH A MANNER THAT WILL PREVENT HARM TO THE PUBLIC, DECLARE THAT THEY ACKNOWLEDGE THE RISK OF HAVING A BUILDING IN A LIQUEFACTION PRONE AREA AND WAIVE ANY RIGHTS TO ASSERT A CLAIM AGAINST THE CITY FOR DAMAGES. THIS AMENDMENT BASICALLY JUST SAYS THAT IF SUCH A COVENANT IS REQUIRED, IT HAS TO BE PLACED IN PERPETUITY. >> THANK YOU FOR THAT. WOULD YOU LIKE -- >> THANK YOU, MADAM COUNCIL PRESIDENT. THIS AMENDMENT ADDRESSES VERY SPECIFIC CONCERNS THAT I HAVE HEARD RAISED REGARDING HOUSING AND DEVELOPMENT IN THE EQUIVOCATION ZONES. THIS AMENDMENT WOULD MAKE A CLEAR REQUIREMENT THAT COVENANTS REGARDING THE EQUIVOCATION ZONES ARE IN PLACE IN PERPETUITY AND RUN WITH THE LAND AND BE BINDING UPON THE SUCCESSORS WITH ALL OF THE PROPERTY. IMPORTANTLY, AGAIN, IN PERPETUITY. RECALL, CALLING US, THAT COVENANT MAY BE REQUIRED IN GEOLOGICAL HAZARDOUS ZONES. WE LEARNED ABOUT A MOMENT AGO AND I UNDERSTAND THAT THIS REQUIREMENT IS SIMILAR TO COVENANTS THAT EXIST WITH OTHER EXISTING PROPERTIES, RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES JUST NORTH OF THIS AREA, REQUIRING PROPERTY OWNERS TO MAINTAIN THE PROPERTY IN A WAY TO PROTECT OCCUPANTS AND THE PUBLIC, UNDERSTAND AND CONVEY THE RISK OF LIVING IN A LIQUID VACATION ZONE AND WAIVES CLAIMS AGAINST THE CITY. THIS AMENDMENT, IN LINE WITH THAT SIMILAR PROJECTS NORTH OF THIS AREA ENSURES THAT THOSE WHO CHOOSE TO LIVE IN THIS VIBRANT, DYNAMIC AND HISTORIC PART OF OUR COMMUNITY DO SO WITH THE FULL KNOWLEDGE THAT THERE ARE POTENTIAL RISKS INVOLVED IN LIVING IN HAZARDOUS GEOLOGICAL AREAS. INFORMATION FROM CURRENT PIONEER SQUARE RESIDENCE INDICATE THAT SUCH COVENANTS APPEAR BY ALL COUNTS TO BE WORKING IN BUILDINGS IN THE SAME EXACT LIQUID VACATION ZONE WHICH, BY THE WAY, IS MOST PARTS OF PIONEER SQUARE. PARTS OF SOTO INCLUDING THE PORT AND THE STADIUM IN GEORGETOWN AND SOUTHPARK. COLLEAGUES, I URGE A VOTE IN FAVOR. THANK YOU. >> COUNCILMEMBER SOLOMON? >> THANK YOU, COUNCIL PRESIDENT. I JUST WANTED TO THANK COUNCILMEMBER SAKA . I TOO LIVE IN A LIQUID VACATION ZONE AREA ON BEACON HILL. WHEN I WAS LOOKING AT DOING THE DEVELOPMENT ON MY PROPERTY, I ALSO HAD TO SIGN THOSE COVENANTS RECOGNIZING THAT I WAS IN A LIQUID VACATION ZONE, RECOGNIZING THAT I WAS AT A HIGH PEAK AREA AS WELL. HAVING THIS PROVISION, ACKNOWLEDGING WHAT THE GEOLOGICAL CONDITIONS OF THE AREA ARE, THAT HAS BEEN ONE OF MY CONCERNS REGARDING ANY KIND OF DEVELOPMENT WITHIN SODO . AGAIN, I GOT INTO MY OWN NEIGHBORHOOD ON MY OWN PROPERTY. THANK YOU FOR BRINGING THIS FORWARD. >> COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS? >> THANK YOU, COUNCIL PRESIDENT. THANK YOU FOR SHARING THAT . THANK YOU FOR SHARING THAT INFORMATION. IT REMINDS ME OF THE ANCIENT PEAT BOG THAT ORDERS DISTRICT 6 AND DISTRICT 5 HAVE AN AGREEMENT THAT HAS REAL IMPACT ON BUILDING THE BUILDING. WHEN A SAFEWAY WAS BUILT THERE MAY BE A DECADE OR SO AGO, IT PUMPED WATER OUT OF THE GROUND AND MADE OTHER HOUSES LEAK IN THE AREA. I BRING US BACK TO WHY LIQUEFACTION IMPORTANT WITH OUR POLICY DECISIONS AND DISCUSSIONS? I WILL FIRST POSE THE QUESTION OF, WHY WERE SKYSCRAPERS BUILT ON THE ISLAND OF MANHATTAN? THE ANSWER IS BECAUSE THE BEDROCK WAS EXPOSED. USUALLY YOU CAN SEE THE SMITH TOWER THROUGH THE OPEN WINDOWS. IT WAS THE TALLEST BUILDING THIS SIDE OF THE MISSISSIPPI FOR A LONG TIME. WHY? BECAUSE IT WAS ATTACHED TO THE BEDROCK. BECAUSE THE ANCIENT BAY STARTED AT THE EDGE OF WHERE SMITH TOWER IS TODAY. WHY IS HAVING SINGLE-STORY, DOUBLE STORY, OR UP TO THREE-STORY BUILDINGS IN AN INDUSTRIAL AREA THAT IS ALL LIQUEFACTION ZONE, WHICH IS DIFFERENT -- IT COULD BE DIFFERENT THAN WHAT COUNCILMEMBER SOLOMON WAS DESCRIBING BECAUSE THE LIQUEFACTION ZONE IN THE BAY IS ALL TILL FROM OUR HILLS WHICH IS DIFFERENT FROM THE SETTLING BOG THAT IS IN DISTRICT 6 AND DISTRICT 5. SO, COUNCIL PRESIDENT, TO YOU MY ESTEEMED COLLEAGUES TO MY RIGHT, DIRECTIONALLY CORRECT. AMEN TO THAT. WE DON'T WANT PEOPLE LIVING IN LIQUEFACTION ZONES AND IF THEY ARE, WE WANTED TO BE KNOWN BUT WHAT THIS FEELS LIKE TO ME IS SAYING WE HAD THE CHOICE TO MAKE A POLICY DECISION ABOUT WHERE AFFORDABLE HOUSING GOES AND INSTEAD, WE ARE MAKING A DECISION TO SAY YOU CAN LIVE THERE -- I WILL BE VOTING NO TODAY. THANK YOU. >> COUNCILMEMBER MOORE? >> THANK YOU, COUNCIL PRESIDENT. BEFORE I BEGIN, I JUST WANT TO APOLOGIZE TO MIKE COLLEAGUES FOR MY EARLIER INTEMPERATE WORDS. THANK YOU FOR THE GRACE FOR THAT. I HAD A QUESTION ABOUT MAINTAINING A PRETTY. THIS IS A QUESTION FOR LISH. WILL IT PREVENT HARM TO THE PUBLIC OR OCCUPANTS? WHAT DOES THAT ENCOMPASS? HOW DOES THAT PLAY OUT IN THIS REALITY? >> ASSUMING THERE ARE THINGS LIKE LOOSE ROOFING MATERIALS, ET CETERA, MAKING SURE THAT THE BUILDING WILL STAND DURING AN EARTHQUAKE AS IT IS DESIGNED TO DO. >> OKAY. >> SO JUST REINFORCING IT AS IT NEEDS TO BE REINFORCED. THANK YOU. >> PLEASE CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG. THEY DID NOTE THAT NEW CONSTRUCTION IN THE AREA WOULD GENERALLY TEND TO WITHSTAND SEISMIC ACTIVITY IN A WAY THAT THE BUILDINGS THAT ARE CURRENTLY THERE WOULD NOT? >> OUR ENGINEERING TECHNOLOGY IS MUCH BETTER THAN IT WAS 100 YEARS AGO. >> THANK YOU. I FULLY SUPPORT THE INTENT OF THIS AMENDMENT AS WELL. ARE THERE ANY OTHER COMMENTS? WILL THE CLERK PLEASE CALL DARRELL MACK ON THE PASSAGE OF AMENDMENT C? >> COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS? >> NO. >> THANK YOU. >> COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH? >> YES. SPECTRA NEED? >> NO . >> COUNCILMEMBER MOORE X >> AYE. >> COUNCILMEMBER RINCK? >> AYE . >> COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA? >> AYE. >> COUNCILMEMBER SAKA? >> AYE. >> COUNCILMEMBER SOLOMON? >> AYE. >> COUNCIL PRESIDENT NELSON? >> AYE. >> SIX IN FAVOR, THREE OPPOSED. AMENDMENT THREE IS ADOPTED. THE BILL IS ADOPTED. >> COUNCILMEMBER SAKA? >> I MOVED TO AMEND COUNCIL BILL 120933 AS PRESENTED ON AMENDMENT B -- D. >> IT HAS BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED TO VOTE AS PRESENTED ON AMENDMENT LETTER E. PLEASE GO AHEAD. >> THANK YOU. I WOULD ACTUALLY YIELD AND DEFER TO LISH TO CENTRAL STAFF . >> GO AHEAD. >> THE STADIUM TRANSITION OVERLAY DISTRICT HAS DETERMINED IN THE EIS THAT THERE IS VERY HIGH NOISE LEVEL. WHEN THE COUNCIL ADOPTED THE ADOPT REAL -- INDUSTRIAL CODE ENFORCEMENT SIN 2023, IT CHOSE TO INCLUDE A REQUIREMENT THAT ANY HOUSING INDUSTRIAL AREA BE DEFINED TO MAINTAIN INDOOR NOISE LEVELS AT OR BELOW 60 DECIBELS WHICH IS ABOUT EQUIVALENT TO A NORMAL CONVERSATION LEVELS. THIS AMENDMENT WOULD REQUIRE THAT WITHIN THE OVERLAY DISTRICT, RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTS BE DEFINED AT INDOOR NOISE LEVELS TO 45 DECIBELS WHICH IS EQUIVALENT TO A LIBRARY NOISE. IT IS SOFTER THAN A NORMAL CONVERSATION. >> COUNCILMEMBER MOORE? >> OKAY. ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS? WILL THE CLERK PLEASE -- I MUST SAY -- COUNCILMEMBER SAKA? >> MADAM COUNCIL PRESIDENT, POINT OF ORDER, MAY HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO EXPLAIN MY OWN AMENDMENT FOR MY PERSPECTIVE? >> YES. >> THANK YOU. >> COLLEAGUES, AGAIN, THIS AMENDMENT ADDRESSES SOME VERY SPECIFIC FOCUSED CONCERN THAT I HEARD FROM A VARIETY OF FOLKS THAT THOSE LOOKING TO LIVE IN THE STADIUM DISTRICT WILL BE SUBJECT TO CERTAIN DETRIMENTAL HEALTH IMPACTS INCLUDING THOSE STEMMING FROM LATIN EXCESSIVE NOISE. IT WOULD LOWER PERMITTED NOISE LEVELS IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD HOUSING IN THE STADIUM DISTRICT MEETS THE SAME NOISE STANDARDS AS DEVELOPMENTS WOULD IN OTHER NEIGHBORHOODS ACROSS THE CITY. THE STATEMENT THERE NOTES THAT THE FEDERAL HUD STANDARD IS 45 DECIBELS FOR RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD. SAME EFFECT STATEMENT ALSO NOTES THAT THE SEATTLE STANDARD FOR RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS IS ALSO FOR THE FIVE DECIBELS WHEN YOU LOWER THE DECIBELS, THAT REQUIRES INCREASED SOUND ATTENUATION. THIS AMENDMENT SEEKS TO PUT THIS ONE NARROW RESIDENTIAL AREA SEEKS TO DIRECTLY ALIGN THE CODE WITH CURRENT CITY POLICY AND FEDERAL POLICY PERTAINING TO RESIDENTIAL USES. I ASK FOR YOUR SUPPORT. THANK YOU. >> YOU JUST RAISED A QUESTION, IF I MAY ASK, FOR LISH TO ELABORATE . IS THE URBAN INDUSTRIAL ZONE NOISE LEVEL SET AT ANY PARTICULAR NOISE LEVEL? WAS THAT SAID IN THE UNDERLYING -- PACKET IS SET AT 60 DECIBELS WHICH IS THE CITY'S MAXIMUM NOISE LEVEL FOR RESIDENTIAL USES NEAR INDUSTRIAL AREAS. >> IS THERE ANYWHERE ELSE IN THE CITY THAT IS LOWER THAN 60 DECIBELS? >> A RESIDENTIAL AREA HAS 45 DECIBEL LIMIT DURING THE NIGHTTIME AND I THINK IT IS 55 DURING THE DAY. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >> COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS AND THAT I WOULD LIKE TO STATE MY POSITION. >> THANK YOU. LISH, MY APOLOGIES. COLLEAGUES, THERE WERE COMMENTS MADE EARLIER TODAY THAT IT IS OUR JOB TO GET THE BRIEFINGS THAT WE NEED TO BEFORE WE COME TO COMMITTEE. THAT CAN ONLY REALLY BE DONE WITH COLLABORATION. THIS IS AN AMENDMENT THAT I HAVE NOT HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO DIG INTO AND IT IS NOT BECAUSE I HAVE NOT BEEN WORKING HARD AND IT IS NOT BECAUSE I AM NOT SMART. IT IS NOT BECAUSE OF ANY OF THOSE REASONS. EVERYONE IS BEING PULLED IN MANY DIFFERENT DIRECTIONS. IF LISH WANTS TO BRIEF ANY OF US FOR AN HOUR , THAT IS LIVE -- NINE HOURS WORTH OF WORK. I'M GOING TO BE SITTING HERE AND HAVING FOR THE PUBLIC TO SEE COUNCILMEMBERS GETTING BRIEFED ON IT IS LIKE. WITH THAT, I KNOW THAT YOU HAVE ALREADY EXPLAINED IT A COUPLE OF TIMES. COULD YOU CLEARLY STATE WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THIS AMENDMENT AND WHAT WE PASSED IN 2023? >> THIS AMENDMENT REQUIRES THICKER WINDOWS AND MORE INSULATION IN DEVELOPMENT AND IT RESIDENTIAL PRODUCTS IN THE STADIUM DISTRICT THAN WOULD BE REQUIRED UNDER OTHER URBAN INDUSTRIAL ZONES. >> CAN YOU REMIND ME THE REQUIREMENTS OF ADDED SOUNDPROOFING AND INSTALLATION? IN THE 2023 LEGISLATION, WE HAD THOSE REQUIREMENTS BUT WE DID NOT ATTACH A DECIBEL LEVEL TO THAT. IS THAT CORRECT? >> WE DO HAVE A DECIBEL LEVEL. IT IS AT 60. RESIDENTIAL PROJECTS IN URBAN INDUSTRIAL AREAS NEED TO BE DESIGNED TO HAVE NOISE LEVELS OF 60 OR BELOW. THIS WOULD INCREASE THE REQUIRED INSULATION AND NOISE DAMPENING WITHIN THE DISTRICTS. I SEE THERE IS A VERIFICATION PROCESS BUT HOW IS THAT VERIFIED? IT HAS TO BE DESIGNED TO MEET THOSE NOISE LEVELS. THEY WILL DO NOISE MEASURING AT THE TIME OF DESIGNING THE PROJECT, BRING THAT DATA IN AND HAVE TO SHOW IN THEIR PLANS THAT THE PROPOSED PROJECT WOULD -- SO THIS IS NOT A STUPID QUESTION -- >> HOW DO YOU TEST FOR NOISE. THAT IS THE FIRST PART OF THE QUESTION BECAUSE WHAT IS THE INPUT THAT THOSE TESTS ARE USING. IS IT THE TRUCKS DRIVING DOWN THE STREET? IS IT A NEW INDUSTRIAL ACTIVITY COMING IN? DO THEY HAVE THOSE TYPES OF UNDERSTANDING? WHAT IS THIS BASED OFF OF? >> WE TEST WHAT THE NOISE IS, THE EXTERIOR NOISE LEVEL. >> SURE. >> I THINK YOU DO A 24 HOUR NOISE LEVEL. >> LET'S TAKE IT OUT BUT A NEW INDUSTRY COMES IN. IT CHANGES THAT. DO THEY HAVE ENFORCEMENT MECHANISMS TO REQUIRE ADDITIONAL INSULATION OR ARE WE OUT OF LUCK? >> THIS IS CODE LANGUAGE THAT WOULD APPLY AT THE TIME OF THE DESIGN PROJECT. >> SILICA CHANGES AND IT BECOMES LOUDER, INDUSTRIAL USES ARE NOT QUIET. THIS IS INEFFECTIVE, POTENTIALLY. THIS IS ALL ABOUT THE CURRENT STATE AS A DESIGN. >> I WILL NOTE THAT IT IS A VERY NOISY AREA. >> 100%. >> AND IT COULD BE LOUDER. THAT IS THE POINT I MAKE. I WILL JUST MAKE THE POINT AGAIN THAT THIS PROJECT COULD BE BUILT TODAY IF THOSE WERE HOUSING PROJECTS OR HOTEL UNITS. >> COUNCILMEMBER SAKA, THROUGH COUNCIL PRESIDENT TO YOU, I STILL DON'T KNOW HOW I WILL VOTE ON THIS ONE. THE INTENTION IS SPOT ON BUT I HAVE 100 MORE QUESTIONS LIKE THAT BUT I'M NOT GOING TO MAKE EVERYONE SIT THROUGH MY HOUR LONG BRIEFING. SERIOUSLY, THOUGH. YOUR INTENTION IS REALLY GOOD ON IT. >> I AM NOT SEEING ANYBODY ELSE WHOSE HAND IS RAISED. I WILL SIMPLY SAY THAT THE AREA THAT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT HERE IS -- THIS IS A DEPARTURE FROM HOW OTHER AREAS OF THE URBAN INDUSTRIAL ZONE IS TREATED. I AM THINKING ABOUT GEORGETOWN WITH ALL OF THOSE PLANES FLYING ABOVE AND I DID REACH OUT TO OUR COALITION PARTNERS WHO DON'T HAVE A BIG HEART ABOUT THIS AMENDMENT AND ALSO ONE OF THE PROPERTY MANAGERS THAT WILL BE BUILDING THIS. HE DID NOT MENTION ANY CONCERN ABOUT ADDITIONAL COSTS. I AM PREPARED TO SUPPORT THIS AMENDMENT. ARE THERE FOR THEIR COMMENTS? >> ALL RIGHT. WILL THE CLERK PLEASE CALL THE ROLL ON THE PASSAGE OF AMENDMENT D? >> COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS? >> NO. >> COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH? COUNCILMEMBER KETTLE? >> NO. >> COUNCILMEMBER MOORE? >> AYE. >> COUNCILMEMBER RINCK? >> NO. >> COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA? >> AYE. >> COUNCILMEMBER SAKA? >> AYE. >> COUNCILMEMBER SOLOMON? >> AYE. >> COUNCIL PRESIDENT NELSON? >> AYE. >> FIVE IN FAVOR, FOUR OPPOSED. THE MOTION CARRIES AND AMENDMENT D IS ADOPTED. ARE THERE FURTHER COMMENTS? COUNCILMEMBER SAKA? >> I MOVED TO AMEND COUNCIL BILL 120933 AS PRESENTED ON AMENDMENT D -- LETTER E. >> SECOND. >> IT HAS BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED. WILL YOU PLEASE PROVIDE AN OVERVIEW BEFORE COUNCILMEMBER SAKA ADDRESSES IT? >> MOST OF THE STREETS IN THE STADIUM TRANSITION AREA OVERLAY DISTRICT ARE MAJOR CROSS STREETS WHICH MEANS THEY HAVE BEEN DESIGNATED WITH FREIGHT AS A PRIORITY. THIS AMENDMENT WOULD SAY THAT AMONG MAJOR STREETS, RESIDENTIAL PARKING, GARAGE ENTRANCES AND EXITS ARE NOT ALLOWED EXCEPT IF NO OTHER OPTION IS AVAILABLE. >> COUNCILMEMBER SAKA? >> THANK YOU. DURING MY OWN COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT PROCESS, I HEARD VERY SPECIFIC CONCERNS THAT IT WOULD DETRIMENTALLY IMPACT FREIGHT AND CARGO MOBILITY AND SUPPORT STABILITY TO MOVE CARGO. THIS ADDRESSES THAT CONCERN, AT LEAST IN PART, ENSURING THEY PROTECT THE INDUSTRIAL AREA THAT PROHIBITS ACTIVE OFFSTREET PARKING AND LOADING FACILITIES FROM THE AREAS MAJOR TRUCK STREETS DEFINED TERMS SUCH AS FIRST AVENUE SOUTH, SOUTH ROYAL FROM WAY COLORADO COLGATE ATLANTIC. UNAFFECTED STREETS DIRECTLY BUTTING UP TO THE PROPERTY WOULD BE OCCIDENTAL. THEREFORE, WOULD BE ALLOWED FOR LOADING ZONES, PARKING ACCESS, ET CETERA. THIS WILL UNAVOIDABLY AND INVARIABLY REDUCE CONFLICTS BETWEEN RESIDENTIAL TRAFFIC AND FREIGHT TRAFFIC AND REDUCE CONGESTION ON THOSE MAJOR TRUCK STREETS, PROJECTING -- PROTECTING THE FREIGHT CORRIDOR. WILL ELIMINATE THE CONFLICTS? NO BUT IT GOES WITH GREAT STRIDES TOWARD REDUCING THOSE. THIS AMENDMENT WILL HELP ENSURE EXACTLY THAT HAPPENS. I ASK FOR YOUR SUPPORT. >> THANK YOU. >> COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS? >> THANK YOU, COUNCIL PRESIDENT. THROUGH YOU TO COUNCILMEMBER SAKA, AGAIN, DIRECTIONALLY CORRECT . YOU HAVE GOT TO SET UP PARAMETERS WE ARE DEALING WITH. A BETTER RESULT WOULD BE TO HAVE SDOT DO THE TRANSPORTATION STUDY THAT WAS REQUESTED DURING THE 2023 INDUSTRIAL PROCESS. A BETTER RESULT AND YOU ALREADY HAVE INSURED SDOT LEVY DOLLARS ARE GOING TO CONNECT AND SUPPORT I-90 AND I-95. I THINK A BETTER OUTCOME WOULD GET THEM TO DO THAT WORK AHEAD OF TAKING THIS VOTE. MY CONCERN IS THAT, WHILE DIRECTIONALLY CORRECT, THIS IS ACTUALLY A BAD AMENDMENT. THE REASON I SAY IT IS A BAD AMENDMENT IS BECAUSE, IN LEGISLATION, WE ARE STATING WHERE CURB CUTS AND CURB RAMPS COULD OR COULD NOT BE. LEGISLATION IN THE SEATTLE MUNICIPAL CODE IS HARD FOR THINGS TO CHANGE. THIS LEVEL OF DETAIL AND INPUT IS MUCH BETTER WHEN LOOKING AT THE WHOLE SYSTEM, WHEN DOING THAT STUDY, WHEN DOING THE CORD OR IMPROVEMENTS BECAUSE WHAT IS TO SAY WE DON'T MAKE A CHANGE ON THE MAJOR TRUCK STREETS THAT PRIORITIZE FREIGHT GETTING FROM THE PORT TO THE INTERSTATE BUT THEN WE CAN'T PUT CURB CUTS THERE . THAT IS WHY I SAY, COLLEAGUES, WE ARE ALL GETTING AHEAD OF OURSELVES ON THIS. THERE ARE SO MANY FINE AND NUANCED DETAILS THAT NEED TO BE ATTENDED TO THAT, THROUGH THIS PROCESS, WE ARE RUSHING ACROSS. I APPRECIATE WHERE YOU ARE COMING FROM ON THIS AND I THINK THAT THIS IS ACTUALLY A BAD AMENDMENT. >> ADDITIONAL COMMENTS? >> COUNCILMEMBER MOORE? >> THANK YOU, COUNCIL PRESIDENT. I WOULD JUST LIKE TO HAVE LISH AND COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS ABLE TO ADDRESS THEIR CONCERNS. >> I WILL STATE THAT CURRENTLY IN THE DISTRICT OVERLAY, THERE IS A RESTRICTION ON CURB CUTS. THERE IS A LIMIT OF THREE CURB BLOCKS ON NORTH SOUTH STREET. IT IS NOT UNCOMMON WHERE CURB CUTS CAN BE LOCATED. >> IF I MAY, I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS BE ABLE TO ADDRESS THE CONCERNS. >> IF YOU ARE WELCOME TO, I WILL WEIGH IN AFTER YOU. >> APPRECIATE YOU KNOW I LOVE YOU AND APPRECIATE OUR RELATIONSHIP, OUR COLLABORATIONS THAT WE DO PUBLICLY IN FRONT OF EVERYONE TO SEE AND BEHIND THE SCENES, THAT IS WHERE THE MOST IMPORTANT WORK HAPPENS. I DO AWARENESS AND CONTEXT TO KNOW IT IS NOT A NONSTANDARD DOUBLE NEGATIVE, THIS IS NOT OUT OF THE ORDINARY BECAUSE KNOWING WHAT I KNOW NOW, KNOWING WHAT I KNOW NOW, PARDON ME, KNOWING WHAT I KNOW NOW, I DO KNOW THAT CODES AND ORDINANCES, LEGISLATION SUCH AS THIS IS INTENTIONALLY INTENDED AS A GENERAL PREPOSITION TO BE VERY SPECIFIC AND HAVE, AND THE PROLIXITY OF A CODE IS EXPECTED TO BE VERY SPECIFIC. AGAIN, I DIDN'T HAVE TO SAY THAT BECAUSE WE LEARNED THAT THIS IS NOT TOGETHER THEY NONSTANDARD. BUT, I'D APPRECIATE THE FEEDBACK. >> THANK YOU. >> COUNCIL PRESIDENT. >> ONE MOMENT, PLEASE. I WILL BE VOTING , I WOULD BE OPPOSING THIS SIMPLY BECAUSE I'M CONCERNED ABOUT THE IMPACT ON OCCIDENTAL WHICH IS ENVISIONED IN THE STADIUM DISTRICT TO BE MORE PEDESTRIAN FRIENDLY AND I AM CONCERNED IF WE PRECLUDE CARS GOING IN AND OUT FROM FIRST, WHERE THERE ARE ALREADY CURB CUTS THAT ARE ALLOWED FOR IN THE EXISTING CODE, THAT WILL PUT A LOT OF TRAFFIC PRECISELY IN THE AREA WHICH IS, IS ENVISIONED TO BE FRIENDLY FOR , FOR PEDESTRIANS, NOT ONLY RESIDENTS OF THE HOUSE AND THERE BUT ALSO PEOPLE WHO WILL BE PASSING BY AND VISITING THE SMALL NEIGHBORHOOD SPACES. COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS. >> DON'T WORRY, IT IS EASY. I'M NORWEGIAN AND SWEDISH. FINISH. I DON'T KNOW WHY EVERYONE IS GETTING CONFUSED. I JUST WANT TO SAY THAT REGARDING THE COMMENT EARLIER ABOUT PROCESSING AND AMENDMENTS, WHILE IT IS LEGAL AND WITHIN WANTS TO BRING AMENDMENTS IN THIS FASHION, IT DOESN'T HELP TRANSPARENCY AND IT DOESN'T HELP COLLABORATION. WHAT YOU ARE SEEING FROM YOU RIGHT NOW IS MAKING THE INFORMATION ABOUT THESE AMENDMENTS IN REAL TIME. THAT IS WHAT I MEAN, COUNCIL PRESIDENT NELSON, WHEN I SAY THAT THE PROCESS HAS BEEN SET UP TO SO DIVISION AND NOT COLLABORATION. THANK YOU. >> THAT IS ASCRIBING AND INTENT IN HOW I SET UP THIS PROCESS THAT IS NOT THE CASE. COUNCILMEMBER MOORE. >> THANK YOU. SO, I DO HAVE A QUESTION I GUESS DIRECTLY TO COUNCILMEMBER SAKA. THERE WAS SOME DISCUSSION ABOUT DOING A STREET VACATION ALONG OCCIDENTAL TO MAKE THAT A PEDESTRIAN PATHWAY WHERE THE HOUSING IS PROPOSED TO GO. WERE YOU AWARE OF THAT WHEN YOU WERE BRINGING FORTH THIS AMENDMENT? I UNDERSTAND THE THINKING AND I'M 100% SUPPORTIVE OF WHAT YOU ARE TRYING TO ACCOMPLISH . I'M JUST WONDERING IF YOU WERE AWARE OF THAT, HOW YOU ANTICIPATE PEOPLE, IF THERE IS A STREET VACATION FOR PEDESTRIAN ACCESS, HOW YOU ANTICIPATE PEOPLE ACCESSING PARKING. ARE WE LOOKING AT NOT PROVIDING PARKING? >> IF I MAY? >> GO AHEAD, TRAINING. >> THANK YOU MADAM COUNCIL PRESIDENT, THANK YOU COUNCILMEMBER MOORE FOR YOUR QUESTION. I WAS AWARE OF THAT POSSIBILITY WHEN CRAFTING THIS AND MY MAIN GOAL WAS TO HELP RESOLVE AND ADDRESS AND MITIGATE AND REDUCE SOME OF THOSE INJURIES, SERIOUS INJURIES AND DEATHS AS A RESULT OF SOME OF THE INEVITABLE CONFLICTS, WITH RESPECT TO FREIGHT, CARGO MOBILITY IN THE AREA AND THIS WOULD BE NEW RESIDENCES. FOR ME, THAT WAS A MORE COMPELLING RATIONALE AND JUSTIFICATION. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU COUNCIL PRESIDENT. MY UNDERSTANDING IS IF THERE IS A STREET VACATION ON OCCIDENTAL , WHILE I APPRECIATE YOUR INTENT, COUNCILMEMBER SAKA , I WANT TO SAY FOR THE RECORD I APPRECIATE ALL THE AMENDMENTS THAT YOU BROUGHT. FOR THAT MATTER, COUNCIL PRESIDENT AND COUNCILMEMBER MOORE BROUGHT TO TRY TO MITIGATE FOR THE IMPACTS OF THE LEGISLATION BEFORE US. AND, I REALLY APPRECIATE THE DUE DILIGENCE THAT YOU TOOK. ON THIS PARTICULAR ONE, BECAUSE OF THAT STREET VACATION ANTICIPATED ON OCCIDENTAL, WHICH I SUPPORT THE PEDESTRIAN STREET IN THAT PARTICULAR LOCATION, I THINK THIS PARTICULAR AMENDMENT WOULD HAVE AN ADVERSE IMPACT GIVEN THAT . SO, FOR THAT REASON, I WON'T BE SUPPORTING THIS PARTICULAR ONE BUT IT IS NOT BECAUSE I DON'T APPRECIATE WHAT YOU ARE TRYING TO DO. THANK YOU FOR COUNCIL PRESIDENT. >> COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS. >> THANK YOU, COUNCIL PRESIDENT. THIS GETS MORE INTERESTING BY THE MOMENT IN THIS COMMITTEE. DID I JUST HEAR THAT WE ARE GOING TO BE, I WAS GOING TO BRING THIS UP AS OUR TROUBLE QUESTION LATER ON IN MY SPEECH. WE ARE GOING TO, IS THERE A PROPOSAL TO VACATE OCCIDENTAL STREET IN THIS SECTION? I HAVE HEARD IT SAID THREE TIMES BUT THIS IS THE FIRST TIME I'M HEARING THIS. AND IS THE SAME, IS THIS THE SAME STREET VACATION THAT WAS VOTED DOWN A DECADE AGO? >> I KNOW WHERE THIS IS GOING. >> MY NEXT GUEST IS WE WILL BE CONFRONTED WITH A STREET VACATION AFTER PASSING THIS BILL. >> FOR MY PART, THERE IS NOT, THAT IS NOT PART OF THIS LEGISLATION. THAT IS CERTAINLY NOT PART OF MY INTENT WHEN I WAS TALKING ABOUT A FRIENDLY PEDESTRIAN ENVIRONMENT. IN THAT CASE, BECAUSE IT IS A NARROW STREET AND THAT IS WHERE THE SHOP FRONTS WILL BE FACING OCCIDENTAL BUT I NEVER SAID ANYTHING ABOUT A STREET VACATION. >> I HEARD IT THREE TIMES. I'M WONDERING WHERE IT IS COMING FROM. >> WOULD YOU LIKE TO? >> I CAN ADDRESS THAT. WHEN I WENT ON A WALKING TOUR OF THE STADIUM DISTRICT, I BELIEVE COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH JOINED ME AND A COMMENT WAS MADE I DON'T KNOW WHETHER IT WAS OFFHAND, OR NOT, BUT THERE WAS A COMMENT MADE ABOUT, SO YOU NEED A STREET VACATION HERE BASED ON THE HOUSING, TO WHICH THE ANSWER WAS WE MIGHT PURSUE THAT. THEN, IF YOU LOOK AT THE DESIGNS THAT HAVE BEEN SUBMITTED, IT DOES SHOW PEDESTRIAN WALKWAY. ONE SET OF DESIGNS SHOW A PEDESTRIAN WALKWAY FOR THAT PIECE BORDERING AT MARTINEZ AND THEN DRIVING A BLOCK SOUTH OF THAT. IT IS NOT BEFORE US TODAY. BUT, IT WAS MENTIONED. I DON'T THINK IT IS SOMETHING I WANT TO HIDE. WE OUGHT TO HAVE EVERYTHING OUT IN THE OPEN, ACTUALLY. THANK YOU. >> COUNCIL PRESIDENT, I HAVE MORE COMMENTS. >> ONE MOMENT, PLEASE. I APPRECIATE THAT WHEN WE ARE TALKING WITH SOME STAKEHOLDERS AND SUPPORTERS, WE HEAR INFORMATION. BUT, THIS IS, THIS IS OUTSIDE OF THE LEGISLATION AT HAND. STREET VACATIONS TAKE TIME TO APPROVE AND CERTAINLY HAS THE HISTORICAL, LET'S SAY THE HISTORY OF THIS PARTICULAR AREA. I WOULD RESPECTFULLY REQUEST THAT PEOPLE FOCUS ON THE LEGISLATION THAT IS BEFORE US AND MAKE A DECISION ABOUT THE MERITS OF THE PROJECT THAT IT WILL FACILITATE. WHEN WE, WE CAN ADDRESS INFORMATION THAT IS PROVIDED ON A HEARSAY MANNER LATER. COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS. >> THANK YOU COUNCIL PRESIDENT. WE ALL LOVE UNION BUILT, WE LOVE ANYTHING UNION BUILT. WE LOVE AFFORDABLE HOUSING. WE LOVE MAJOR SPACE. WE WANT TO SEE OUR SMALL MANUFACTURERS THRIVE. WHAT I DON'T LOVE IS BEING SOLD SOMETHING THAT I'M NOT BEING SOLD SOMETHING ELSE THEN I AM ACTIVELY BEING TOLD. IF THE NEXT STEP FROM HERE IS AN ALLEY VACATION, THIS ISN'T ABOUT AFFORDABLE HOUSING OR UNION BUILT ANYTHING. THIS IS BACK TO 2016, ABOUT A WHOLE DIFFERENT CONVERSATION. I WAS BRINGING IT UP, I WAS GOING TO BRING IT UP AS A JOKE. PLEASE, DO:. I WAS GOING TO BRING IT UP AS A JOKE THAT THE NEXT THING YOU SEE IS A STREET VACATION. THE FACT THAT IT IS ALREADY BEING CONSIDERED, IT IS ALREADY BEING DISCUSSED, AND I KNOW THAT COUNCIL RULES. >> PLEASE DO NOT IMPUGN THE MOTIVES OF OTHER MEMBERS HERE. >> I AM NOT IMPUGNING THE MOTIVES OF ANYONE ON THIS DAIS. I AM NOT IMPUGNING THE MOTIVES OF ANYONE IN THESE TUBERS. WHAT I'M SAYING IS THAT I KNOW THAT SDOT HAS A STREET VACATION PROPOSAL WRITTEN UP AND IT HAS BEEN SITTING ON THE SHELF AND IS READY TO GO ANYTIME. AND, IF THIS CONVERSATION IS A PRECURSOR TO THAT, THE OUTCOME OF PASSING THIS LEGISLATION IS PIECEMEAL AND TOGETHER A DEAL THAT WAS REJECTED . >> AS THE SPONSOR, I CAN ASSURE YOU THAT IS NOT THE CASE. COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA. >> THANK YOU COUNCIL PRESIDENT. MY APOLOGIES IF THE , I SAW THE SAME, I WENT ON THE SAME WALKING TOUR. SO, THE REMARK ABOUT A POTENTIAL IN THE FUTURE, I DID NOT MEAN TO CREATE CONFUSION. WE ARE NOT LOOKING AT THAT NOW. ACTUALLY, WE DON'T HAVE ANYTHING BEFORE US NOW. BUT, IF THERE WAS SOMETHING CONTEMPLATED LIKE THAT IN THE FUTURE THAT WOULD HAVE AN IMPACT, THAT IS THE ONLY REASON I BROUGHT THAT UP I WANTED TO CLARIFY FOR THE RECORD THERE IS NOTHING FOR THIS. >> COUNCILMEMBER MOORE. >> I WANT TO CLARIFY THIS WAS AN OFF-THE-CUFF REMARK. JUST TO CLARIFY, OFF-THE-CUFF REMARK. >> THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. MOVING ON. IT HAS BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED TO AMEND THE BILL. WOULD THE CLERK PLEASE TWO. >> COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS. >> NO. >> COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH. >> NO. >> COUNCILMEMBER KETTLE. >> NO. >> COUNCILMEMBER MOORE. >> AYE. >> COUNCILMEMBER RINCK. >> AYE. >> COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA. >> NO. >> COUNCILMEMBER SAKA. >> AYE. >> COUNCILMEMBER SOLOMON. COUNCIL PRESIDENT NELSON. >> NO. >> THAT IS TWO IN FAVOR, SEVEN OPPOSED. >> THE MOTION FAILS. ARE THERE ANY OTHER COMMENTS ON THE LEGISLATION BEFORE US? COUNCILMEMBER SAKA? >> COUNCIL PRESIDENT, I MOVED TO A AMEND COMFORTABLE AS PRESENTED ON AMENDMENT OF. >> SECOND. >> HAS BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED TO A AND AMEND THE AS PRESENTED IN AN INTIMATE. WOULD YOU PROVIDE AN OVERVIEW BEFORE TRAINING CAN ADDRESS IT? >> YES, AS REFERRED, THERE ARE IN TO LIVING IN THE STADIUM DISTRICT. THERE IS NOISE, POTENTIAL IN EQUIPMENT IMPACTS. THIS AMENDMENT WOULD REQUIRE THERE BE SIGNS AROUND RESIDENTIAL PROJECTS DECLARING THOSE IMPACTS SO THAT ANYONE LIVING IN THE AREA OR THINKING ABOUT LIVING IN THE AREA WILL UNDERSTANDABLY IMPACTS THAT WE MIGHT EXPERIENCE. >> COUNCILMEMBER SAKA. >> THANK YOU MADAME COUNCIL PRESIDENT. COLLEAGUES, THIS AMENDMENT ADDRESSES VERY SPECIFIC CONCERNS THOSE SEEKING TO MOVE IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD MAY NOT BE AWARE OF THE INHERENT RISKS THAT COME WITH LIVING IN AN INDUSTRIAL ZONE. AT ITS CORE, THIS AMENDMENT IS ABOUT THREE THINGS. IT IS ABOUT BOOSTING TRANSPARENCY, PROVIDING ENHANCED DISCLOSURES, AND STRENGTHENING HELPFUL NOTICES. ALL WITH THE HELPFUL GOAL OF BETTER FACILITATING A SHARED UNDERSTANDING OF THE UNIQUE OPPORTUNITY, AND ASSOCIATED RISKS, PERTAINING TO THIS PROJECT. IT WOULD REQUIRE CLEAR AND CONSPICUOUS NOTICES THAT THERE ARE RISKS OF LIVING IN THE STADIUM DISTRICT THROUGH SIGNAGE INVISIBLE LOCATIONS SUCH AS BODIES, LEASING OFFICES, AND MAIN ENTRANCES OF THE BUILDING, THE SIGNAGE WOULD EXPLICITLY ACKNOWLEDGE THAT THIS HISTORIC NEIGHBORHOOD IS, AND WILL REMAIN, IN AND AROUND AN INDUSTRIAL AREA. THAT ISN'T CHANGING, NOR SHOULD IT. THOSE WHO CHOOSE TO LIVE IN THIS AREA FOR THIS HISTORIC NEIGHBORHOOD, WITH ELECTRIFICATION PRONE SOILS, SHOULD BE AWARE THAT THERE ARE INHERENT RISKS TO LIVING IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD. AND, WE HAVE ONE VEHICLE FOR DOING THAT, THE COVENANT THAT RUNS WITH THE LAND, RUNS IN PERPETUITY. THAT IS IMPORTANT . AS A NOW NONPRACTICING LAWYER, I WROTE A LOT OF CONTRACTS, INCLUDING COVENANTS. AND I WILL BE, I WILL ADMIT I DIDN'T ALWAYS, I DON'T ALWAYS READ THEM MYSELF. AND, EVEN WHEN YOU DO READ THEM, THOSE LEGAL DISCLOSURES AND DOCUMENTS AND CONTRACTS AND LEGAL PROVISIONS, THEY ARE EASY TO FORGET AND EASY TO AVOID. OUT OF SIGHT, OUT OF MIND. THE SIGN REQUIREMENT POSES AN OBLIGATION FOR THE PROPERTY OWNER , NOT THE CITY, TO POST THINGS THAT MAKE IT CLEAR THOSE THINGS I MENTIONED EARLIER. THIS IS ALL ABOUT BOOSTING TRANSPARENCY, PROVIDING BETTER DISCLOSURES AND STRENGTHENING NOTICES. AND, I ASK FOR SUPPORT. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM COLLEAGUES? >> MADAM PRESIDENT. >> GO AHEAD, PLEASE. >> QUICK QUESTION, WHEN WE LOOK AT REQUIRING THE COVENANTS FOR THE BUILDERS AND TENANTS, TO ACKNOWLEDGE THEY ARE IN A LIQUEFICATION ZONE, AMENDMENT F SEEMS TO DOUBLE DOWN ON THAT . SO, I'M WONDERING, GIVEN AMENDMENT C HAS PASSED, DO WE NEED AMENDMENT F? >> AMENDMENT C WOULD NORMALLY BE EFFECTUATED THROUGH TERMS IN A LEASE. IT WOULD MOST LIKELY BE MORE PROMINENT THAN WHAT WOULD OCCUR AS PROPOSED IN AMENDMENT C. >> TO FOLLOW UP WITH THAT , AGAIN, USING THE EXAMPLE OF MY PROPERTY, IF I WERE TO PRINT OUT MY PROPERTY, I WOULD HAVE TO DISCLOSE, OR SHOULD DISCLOSE IT IS IN THE SOIL LIQUEFACTION AREA . IT IS IN THE HIGH PEAT AREA. FOLLOWING THE 2011 QUICK, I HAD TO HAVE PINPOINT ROLES TO STABILIZE MY HOUSE TO PREVENT IT FROM SINKING IN FOR THE BECAUSE MY HOSTED THINK ABOUT 6 INCHES OFF THE SOUTH SIDE. FORTUNATELY, EVERYTHING IS LEVEL NOW. BUT, AGAIN, IT GETS TO SOMEONE OCCUPYING THE SPACES WOULD ACKNOWLEDGE THE KIND OF AREA THAT THEY ARE IN AND THAT IS WHY I'M WONDERING, IF THEY ARE ACKNOWLEDGING UP FRONT THAT THEY KNOW THEY ARE IN A SOIL LIQUEFACTION ZONE AND THE BUILDING IS DESIGNED IN SUCH TO MITIGATE ANY KIND OF DAMAGE FROM EARTHQUAKE OR LIQUEFACTION, IF THAT IS ACKNOWLEDGED GOING IN, IS SIGNAGE THEN REALLY REQUIRED? >> THAT IS A POLICY CHOICE FOR YOU TO DECIDE. >> THANKS. >> COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH. >> THANK YOU , COUNCIL PRESIDENT. CAN YOU POSSIBLY EXPLAIN WHERE THE NUMBER THREE CAME FROM? ONE AT 50 SIGNS? WHERE DID THREE SIGNS COME IN? >> THAT WAS THE SPONSOR'S DECISION. >> THERE IS NOTHING IN THE SEATTLE MUNICIPAL CODE THAT SAYS A BUILDING HAS TO HAVE THREE SIGNS? IT IS JUST ANOTHER THAT WE CHOSE, NOT WE BUT THE SPONSOR? OKAY. THAT WAS MY QUESTION. THANK YOU. >> YOU WANT TO ANSWER THAT QUESTION? >> THANK YOU COUNCIL PRESIDENT. THE CHOICE WAS MADE BECAUSE THAT SETS THE POOR, NOT THE CEILING. SO, THE IDEA IS THERE WOULD BE A MINIMUM OF THREE SIGNS, AT LEAST THREE SIGNS IN CLEAR AND CONSPICUOUS LOCATIONS THAT ARE OPEN, ACCESSIBLE, AND READILY AVAILABLE FOR ALL TO SEE AND SO IF THERE IS AT LEAST THREE, THEN, THERE ARE, THEY ARE FREE TO ADD MORE SIGNS BUT AT LEAST THREE IS THE INTENT THERE. IF I MAY ADDRESS COUNCILMEMBER SOLOMON'S EARLIER LINE OF QUESTIONING, MADAME COUNCIL PRESIDENT, SO, ONE COURT , I AGREE, IT IS PRINCIPALLY A POLICY DECISION ON WHETHER THIS IS TRULY NEEDED. I HAPPEN TO THINK IT IS NEEDED. HENCE, I DRAFTED IT AND I AM THE AMENDMENT ALSO HERE. THIS IS THE BELT AND SUSPENDERS APPROACH . SOME WOULD ARGUE JUST THAT BELT IS FINE, SUFFICIENT. I THINK GIVEN THERE ARE UNIQUE SETS OF CIRCUMSTANCES IN THE SOIL LIQUEFACTION ZONE, THIS IS INDUSTRIAL AND OUTLIER, I HOPE, FOR HOUSING AND INDUSTRIAL LIENS AND. WITH MY PRACTICAL EXAMPLE EARLIER IS THAT I AM A LAWYER, NONPRACTICING. BUT, I DON'T ALWAYS READ A REASONABLE PROVISION AND EVERY SINGLE CONTRACT, EVEN READ EVERY SINGLE CONTRACT THAT IS PUT IN FRONT OF ME. I CERTAINLY DON'T REMEMBER THE SPECIFIC PROVISIONS. THIS IS ANOTHER ANALOGY WAY TO THINK OF THIS IS THE COVENANTS IS THE BELT, THIS IS THE SUSPENDERS TO MAKE CRYSTAL CLEAR FOR THE AVOIDANCE OF DOUBT, LET IT BE KNOWN. THANK YOU. >> OKAY. I SEE YOUR HAND AND I WANT TO NOTE IT IS NUMBER 5:20 AND WE HAVE FOLKS THAT ARE PROBABLY INTERESTED IN GETTING HOME TO FAMILIES AND KIDS, IN ADDITION TO STAFF, WHO ALSO NEED TO TAKE BREAKS. AFTER THAT, AFTER WE VOTE ON THIS, IS THIS YOUR LAST, COUNCILMEMBER SAKA? I BELIEVE THIS IS THE LAST, NO. OKAY. JUST SO EVERYONE KNOWS, I WILL CALL FOR A FIVE MINUTE RECESS WHICH WE HAVE COMPLETED COUNCILMEMBER SAKA'S AMENDMENTS, IN CASE YOU WERE WONDERING. GO AHEAD, COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS. >> THANK YOU. TO ANSWER THE QUESTION ABOUT WHY WAS THREE CHOSEN, SCHOOLHOUSE ROCK TEACHES US THAT THREE IS A MAGIC NUMBER, MUCH LIKE HOW A BILL BECOMES ABLE. WITH A PROCESS THAT SHOULD INCLUDE EVERYONE WHO THE DECISION IS BEING MADE ABOUT TO BE AT THE TABLE. EVEN IN THE CASE OF TODAY'S CONVERSATION, MORE INFORMATION HAS COME TO LIGHT TO ME THAT GIVES ME EVEN GREATER CONCERN. AT THE END OF TODAY'S PROCESS, BEFORE WE GO TO ABLE TO, I WILL ASK FOR A DELAY UNTIL NEXT MONDAY. I SUGGEST THAT WE GET THROUGH THE AMENDMENTS TODAY BECAUSE THIS IS BEING TREATED AS A COMMITTEE MEETING RATHER THAN A FULL COUNCIL MEETING. SO, I WILL ASK AT THE END, FOR A DELAY OF ONE WEEK. BUT, TO GET TO THE QUESTION AT HAND THIS IS, THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A PEAT BOG AND SODO IS ONE OF THE PEAT BOG, THERE IS BEDROCK BELOW. THERE IS NO. BECAUSE THE DECOMPENSATION OF THE HIGH PEAT AT A DIFFERENT RATE THAN THE SOIL, THAT IS HOW YOU HAVE THE SETTLING. WHAT WE HAVE UNDERNEATH THE TILL OF SEATTLE THAT HAS BEEN POURED INTO ELLIOTT BAY, WHAT IS UNDER THAT PHIL IS WATER. THAT IS THE DIFFERENCE IN THE SOIL LIQUEFACTION ZONE. IT IS THE SAME IN THE INNER BAY. WHILE I WOULD LOVE TO BUILD HOUSING NEXT TO THE MARKET AND THE OLD ARMORY, IT IS A BAD IDEA BECAUSE THE 1936 AERIAL PHOTO OF THE AREA SHOWS WATER THERE LESS THAN 100 YEARS AGO. THAT IS THE DIFFERENCE FOR ME ABOUT LIQUEFACTION GENERALLY AND LIQUEFACTION IN THIS SPECIFIC PLACE THAT ARE THE TWO BLOCKS, TWO STOPLIGHTS, THE FEW BLOCKS BETWEEN THE PORT AND THE INTERSTATES THAT CONNECT US TO THE REST OF THE WORLD. I'M, AGAIN, THROUGH YOU, COUNCIL PRESIDENT, TO THE SPONSOR, DIRECTIONALLY CORRECT. WE SHOULDN'T BE BUILDING IN A SOIL LIQUEFACTION ZONE. IF WE ARE, THEY SHOULD BE AWARE. FOR ME, THIS FEELS LIKE WE ARE MAKING A POLICY DECISION TODAY AND THEN WE ARE MAKING A POLICY DECISION TODAY TO ALLOW HOUSING TO BE PULLED IN A SOIL LIQUEFACTION ZONE AND STICKING A SIGN ON THE FRONT DOOR THAT SAYS YOU KNOW YOUR RIGHTS, YOU CAN'T SUE US. AGAIN, I WILL LEAVE FOR THE RECORD TODAY THIS SAME PROJECT, THIS SAME NUMBER OF UNITS THAT PEOPLE CAN SLEEP AND COULD BE BUILT TODAY WITHOUT A LEGISLATIVE CHANGE IF THEY WERE HOTELS. >> ONE LAST COMMENT, COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA, THEN WILL GO FOR A BOAT. >> THANK YOU COUNCIL PRESIDENT. I KNOW YOU WORKED ON INDUSTRIAL LIENS IN NEW YORK AS WELL. FOR THOSE, AND THERE WAS A LOT OF NOISE AND ITS INDUSTRIAL LIENS. WERE THERE SIGNS THERE? FOR THAT MATTER, GEORGETOWN AND SODO HAVE INDUSTRIAL LANDS AS WELL. ARE THERE SIGNS THERE? DID WE LEGISLATE? I GUESS THAT IS THE QUESTION. >> WE DON'T LEGISLATE THIS FOR OTHER AREAS. I DON'T RECALL THAT NEW YORK CITY REQUIRES IT. >> THANK YOU. APPRECIATE. >> CAN I CALL FOR A VOTE? >> SHORT. IF I MAY , TO CLOSE THIS OUT, COLLEAGUES, AND ASK FOR YOUR SUPPORT. GIVEN THE VERY UNIQUE NATURE OF THIS PROJECT, THIS IS A SCENARIO WHERE I THINK IT IS PERFECTLY APPROPRIATE TO DO SOMETHING NONSTANDARD. AND, BECAUSE A LOT IS AT STAKE. THIS IS THE BELT AND SUSPENDERS APPROACH AND I HUMBLY ASK FOR YOUR SUPPORT. THANK YOU. >> WILL THE CLERK CALL THE ROLL ON THE ADOPTION OF AMENDMENT F? >> COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS? >> NO. >> COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH? >> NO. >> COUNCILMEMBER KETTLE. >> NO. >> COUNCILMEMBER MOORE. COUNCILMEMBER RINCK. >> NO. >> COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA. >> AYE. >> COUNCILMEMBER SAKA. >> AYE. >> COUNCILMEMBER SOLOMON. >> AYE. >> COUNCIL PRESIDENT NELSON. >> AYE. >> THAT IS FIVE IN FAVOR, FOUR OPPOSED. >> THE MOTION CARRIES. AMENDMENT F IS ADOPTED. ALL RIGHT, I'M GOING TO GO THROUGH, EXCUSE ME, MY NOTES. MY SCRIPT SAYS WE ARE GOING TO GO INTO A RECESS BUT WE WILL GO AHEAD AND ACCEDE TO AMENDMENT G. ARE THERE ANY COMMENT? >> AND MOVE TO AMEND CB 120933 AT SPECIFICALLY PRESENTED ON THE AMENDMENT G. >> SECOND. >> MOVED AND SECONDED TO GO FORWARD WITH AMENDMENT G. THE WOULD YOU PLEASE GO AHEAD AND PRESENT AS LISTED ON THE AGENDA AS AMENDMENT G. GO AHEAD, PLEASE. >> SO, STANDARD AFFECTED EIGHT FOR AN ORDINANCE IS 30 DAYS AFTER THE MAYOR SIGNS IT, WHICH WOULD PUT, AFTER THE COUNCIL VOTES TO APPROVE THIS LEGISLATION WOULD MAKE IT EFFECTIVE TOWARD THE END OF APRIL THIS AMENDMENT WOULD STATE THAT THE EFFECTIVE DATE IS JUNE 30th INSTEAD. >> GO AHEAD, YOU MAY ADDRESS YOUR AMENDMENT. >> THANK YOU, COUNCIL PRESIDENT. WE TALKED ABOUT THIS IN THE PROCEDURAL VOTE BUT THIS AMENDMENT IS DESIGNED TO ADDRESS SPECIFIC FEEDBACK AND ELEMENTS OF THE FEEDBACK COMING TO THE PENDING UNCERTAINTY PERTAINING TO THE U.S. COAST GUARD RECORD DECISION THAT THE LATEST TO DATE, WE HAVE HEARD, VIA PUBLIC TESTIMONY, IS ANTICIPATED RELEASE DATE IS APRIL 30th. THIS WOULD EXTEND IT BY TWO MONTHS TO ALLOW, WITH THE GOAL OF ALLOWING MORE TIME, MORE PLANNING TO, IF THIS, SHOULD THIS BILL PASS TO I JUST AND SORT OF FIGURE OUT WHAT ALL THIS MEANS. THIS IS ANOTHER WAY OF DOING IT. IT IS A IN MECHANISM TO ENABLE MORE PLANNING AND I ASK FOR YOUR SUPPORT. THANK YOU. >> COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA. OKAY, COUNCILMEMBER MOORE. >> THANK YOU COUNCIL PRESIDENT. I WOULD ADDRESS THIS QUESTION HOWEVER. COUNCILMEMBER SAKA . WHAT EXACTLY DOES THIS MEAN? SO, WE GET THE COAST GUARD REPORT AND THEY ARE GOING TO KEEP THE FACILITY, HOW DOES THAT AFFECT WHAT HAPPENS WITH THE HOUSE AND IF THIS AMENDMENT GOES THROUGH , HOW DOES THAT CHANGE ANYTHING KNOWING WHAT IS GOING TO HAPPEN WITH THE COAST GUARD? >> YOU ARE WELCOME TO RESPOND. >> THANK YOU COUNCIL PRESIDENT, THANK YOU COUNCILMEMBER MOORE. HOW DOES IT CHANGE? IT WOULDN'T KILL OR SUBSTANTIALLY DELAY THE CONSTRUCTION OF THIS MAKERS DISTRICT. WHAT IT WOULD DO, AND, AGAIN, IT IS PROVIDED AND OFFERED TO ADDRESS SOME SPECIFIC CONCERNS THAT WE HAVE HEARD HERE TODAY ABOUT THE UNCERTAINTY OF THAT DECISION AND WHAT THAT MEANS. GENERALLY, IT IS WIDELY UNDERSTOOD THAT THE UNITED STATES COAST GUARD IS GOING TO EXPAND IN THEIR CRIMINAL TO SOME DEGREE. WHAT IS CURRENTLY UNKNOWN IS THE SCOPE OF THAT EXPANSION INTO THE TIMELINE FOR WHEN THAT, WE THINK THE LATEST ESTIMATE IS APRIL 30th. IT WOULD ALLOW MEMBERS FROM THE PORT TO HAVE EXTRA TIME TO FIGURE OUT WHAT IT NEEDS FROM THEIR PERSPECTIVE. BUT, IT WOULDN'T, IT WOULDN'T SIGNIFICANTLY, AND IT IS NOT INTENDED TO SIGNIFICANTLY DELAY OR IMPEDE THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE PROJECT AT ISSUE HERE. >> SEE NO FURTHER QUESTIONS. GO AHEAD. PLEASE BE BRIEF. >> COUNCIL PRESIDENT, ARE YOU ASKING ME TO LIMIT MY COMMENTS? >> NO, I'M NOT. I'M SUGGESTING THAT WE NEED TO GET THROUGH THESE ITEMS. >> THE PROCESS COULD HAVE BEEN SET UP THAT WOULD HAVE AVOIDED THESE CIRCUMSTANCES. >> PLEASE GO AHEAD AND STICK YOUR COMMENT. >> THE PACKAGE OF AMENDMENTS BEFORE A SAMPLE DEMONSTRATES THAT THERE ARE PROBLEMS WITH THIS PROPOSAL. THE AMENDMENTS IN THIS PACKAGE IN TOTAL DEMONSTRATE ACKNOWLEDGMENT BY COUNCILMEMBERS THAT THERE ARE ISSUES WITH THE PROPOSAL BEFORE US. THIS AMENDMENT IS GOOD. AND, IT DEMONSTRATES, IN WRITING, THAT THE COUNCILMEMBERS VOTING DO NOT HAVE FULL INFORMATION ON ALL OF THE VARIABLES THAT ARE IMPACTING THESE VERY FEW SQUARE BLOCKS. IT IS THE EXACT SAME REASONING I ASKED FOR A DELAY. ALMOST REPEAT THEM. I WILL SUPPORT THIS BUT I DON'T KNOW WHAT IT WOULD CHANGE. AND, WHAT I MEAN BY THAT IS LET'S SAY THE COAST GUARD COMES BACK AND SAYS WE ARE EXPANDING, THEN, THAT MEANS EACH OF THESE CRANES THAT WE CAN SEE FROM THE DAIS THAT ARE MILLIONS OF DOLLARS TO INSTALL AND REQUIRE TRAINED AND SKILLED OPERATORS TO MOVE THE TOOLS THAT WE BUILD THINGS WITH FROM HARBOR FREIGHT AND WE BUILT AND BY THOSE HARBOR FREIGHT TOOLS EVERY OTHER WEEK BECAUSE OF A BRICK TO QUICKLY, IF THEY DON'T EXPAND AND THAT SAYS WE ARE GOING TO CONTINUE USING THESE MULTI-MILLION-DOLLAR CRANES TO IMPORT THE GOODS THAT BUILD OUR BUILDINGS AND WE SEND IT TO FEED THE FOLKS IN SOUTHEAST ALASKA, IF THEY DON'T EXPAND, DOES THAT MEAN THAT WE ARE GOING TO COME BACK AND MAKE A DIFFERENT DECISION? THESE ARE THE QUESTIONS THAT I WRESTLE WITH. AGAIN, I THINK THAT THIS IS CORRECT BECAUSE IT DEMONSTRATES THAT WE HAVE MORE INFORMATION TO RECEIVE BECAUSE NOT ALL DECISIONS, WE HAVEN'T EVEN TALKED ABOUT WASCA TODAY. LET'S SAY THE COAST GUARD DOESN'T EXPAND AND WE KEEP TERMINAL 46 OPERATING MOVING GOODS IN AND OUT OF THE COUNTRY, DOES THAT MEAN WE WILL COME BACK AND CHANGE THE PROPOSAL BEFORE US? THAT IS WHAT I AM STRUGGLING WITH. THANK YOU COUNCIL PRESIDENT. >> DO YOU HAVE ANY CLOSING REMARKS? WILL THE CLERK PLEASE CALL THE ROLL ON THE PASSAGE OF 2021? >> COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS. >> YES. >> TRAIN FOR. >> YES. >> COUNCILMEMBER KETTLE. >> NO. >> COUNCILMEMBER MOORE. >> AYE. >> COUNCILMEMBER RINCK. >> NO . >> COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA. >> AYE. >> COUNCILMEMBER SAKA. >> AYE. >> COUNCILMEMBER SOLOMON. >> AYE. >> COUNCIL PRESIDENT NELSON. >> AYE. >> THE MOTION CARRIES. AMENDMENT G IS ADOPTED. AND, WE WILL, BEFORE GOING ON TO OUR NEXT AMENDMENTS, IT IS NO 5:30, WE WILL TAKE , I WANT TO PUSH IT TO SEVEN MINUTES SO THAT PEOPLE CAN GET TO THE RESTROOM. WE WILL TAKE A RECESS UNTIL -- >> I WOULD SAY WE JUST KEEP GOING. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR THAT. WE WILL TAKE A BRIEF BREAK UNTIL NUMBER 5:40. WE ARE IN RECESS NOW. >> IF THERE ARE TWO MEMBERS IN THEIR OFFICES WHO CAN HEAR ME, PLEASE COME BACK TO THE CHAMBERS. WE ARE GOING TO RESUME OUR MEETING. >> WE DO HAVE QUORUM. WE CAN RESUME THE MEETING. PLEASE CALL THE ROLL. >> COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS. COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH. >> HERE. >> COUNCILMEMBER KETTLE. COUNCILMEMBER MOORE. COUNCILMEMBER RINCK. COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA. >> PRESENT. >> COUNCILMEMBER SAKA. COUNCILMEMBER SOLOMON. COUNCIL PRESIDENT NELSON. >> PRESENT. >> SEVEN PRESENT. >> I WILL ANNOUNCE OTHER MEMBERS AS THEY RETURN. WE STOPPED AFTER VOTING ON AMENDMENT G. NOW WE ARE ON THE AMENDMENT H. ARE THERE ANY COMMENTS ? ON THE LEGISLATION? OR ANY COUNCIL MEMBERS WHO WOULD LIKE TO PRESENT AN AMENDMENT? >> THANK YOU COUNCIL PRESIDENT. I WOULD LIKE TO MOVE CB 120933 AS PRESENTED ON AMENDMENT H. >> SECOND. >> THAT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED TO MOVE THE BILL AS PRESENTED WITH AMENDMENT H. >> AS YOU ALL KNOW, THE CB 120933 WOULD ALLOW HOUSING AS A CONDITIONAL USE IN THE STADIUM DISTRICT. THIS WOULD STATE THAT AREAS IN THE DISTRICT WEST OF FIRST AVENUE, THE AREAS CLOSEST TO THE PORT FACILITIES, BUT NOT BE ALLOWED TO HAVE HOUSING. HOUSING WOULD BE ALLOWED AS A CONDITIONAL USE EAST OF FIRST AVENUE. >> THANK YOU FOR THAT. COUNCILMEMBER MOORE. >> THANK YOU COUNCIL PRESIDENT. I HAVE SOME CONCERNS ABOUT THIS LEGISLATION BASED ON THE COMMENTS THAT I HAD HEARD FROM OPPONENTS . I WAS CONCERNED ABOUT THE ELIMINATION OF THE 200 FOOT BUFFER ZONE . LOOKED AT WHETHER IT WOULD BE POSSIBLE TO MAINTAIN THAT AND STILL ALLOW FOR THE IMPORTANT HOUSING TO BE DEVELOPED AND IT DID NOT APPEAR THAT WAS GOING TO BE POSSIBLE. IT DOES APPEAR POSSIBLE FOR THE PROJECT TO GO FORWARD AND ALSO MAINTAIN A BUFFER ZONE WEST OF FIRST AVENUE SOUTH RUNNING THE LENGTH OF THE STADIUM DISTRICT. THAT IS ALL THE WAY UP THROUGH SOUTH KING STREET. I WOULD NOTE THAT AT THE MOMENT, THIS DOES NOT AFFECT THE AREA BECAUSE IT IS ZONED MNL. SHOULD THAT ZONING CHANGE, THIS WOULD PROVIDE ADDITIONAL PROTECTION FOR THE WASCA AREA. FOR THOSE REASONS , I WOULD ASK FOR MY COLLEAGUES SUPPORT. >> ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? ALL RIGHT. COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS. >> COUNCIL PRESIDENT. THREE YOU, TO THE SPONSOR, YOUR INTENT IS CORRECT. I THINK IT GETS AT THE ROOT OF THE ISSUE. I WILL SPEAK THE SAME FACTS I STATED AT THE END OF THE LAST AMENDMENT, WHICH IS THE PACKAGE OF AMENDMENTS THAT WE HAVE BEEN VOTING ON DEMONSTRATE THE AWARENESS OF COUNCILMEMBERS ON THE DAIS THAT THIS PROJECT HAS FLAWS AND I WILL STATE AGAIN, IF WE WERE NOT TALKING ABOUT HOUSING UNITS AND WE WERE TALKING ABOUT HOTEL UNITS, HOTEL ROOMS, THIS PROJECT COULD HAVE BEEN BUILT AS SOON AS THE INDUSTRIAL MARITIME PACKAGE WAS PASSED IN 23. TO THE SPONSOR, I APPRECIATE THIS. I WILL BE VOTING NO. I DID HEAR ABOUT THIS ONE ON FRIDAY, WHICH WAS THE EARLIEST OF ALL OF THE AMENDMENTS I HAVE HEARD ABOUT. THIS GOES BACK TO THE PROCESS THAT THE COUNCIL PRESIDENT HAS SET UP FOR US. THANK YOU. >> ARE THERE ANY ADDITIONAL COMMENTS? SEEING NONE, WILL THE CLERK PLEASE CALL THE ROLL ? I DO WANT TO SAY THAT I APPRECIATE YOU THINKING ABOUT THIS LEGISLATION VERY THOROUGHLY, COUNCILMEMBER MOORE. YOU AND I SPOKE AT LENGTH ABOUT THIS AMENDMENT WHEN YOU ARE BRINGING IT FORWARD. I WILL BE SUPPORTING THIS. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. ANYBODY ELSE? OKAY, WILL THE CLERK PLEASE CALL THE ROLL ON AMENDMENT H? >> COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS. >> NO. >> TRAIN FOR. >> YES. >> COUNCILMEMBER KETTLE. >> NO. >> COUNCILMEMBER MOORE. >> AYE. >> COUNCILMEMBER RINCK. >> NO. >> COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA. >> AYE. >> COUNCILMEMBER SAKA . COUNCILMEMBER SOLOMON. >> AYE. >> COUNCIL PRESIDENT. >> AYE. >> SIX IN FAVOR, TO BE OPPOSED. >> MOTION CARRIES. AMENDMENT H IS ADOPTED. ARE THERE ANY FURTHER COMMENTS ON THE BILL AS AMENDED QUESTION >> I WOULD LIKE TO MOVE CB 120933 AS PRESENTED ON AMENDMENT ONE VERSION 2, WHICH WAS DISTRIBUTED BY EMAIL THIS MORNING. >> SECOND. >> IT HAS BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED. WILL STAFF PLEASE GO THROUGH AND PRESENT THE AMENDMENT? >> THIS AMENDMENT WOULD ADD ONE MORE CRITERIA TO DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT HOUSING WOULD BE PERMITTED IN THE DISTRICT. IT WOULD STATE THAT AN APPLICATION MUST INCLUDE AN AGREEMENT STATING THAT THE DEVELOPMENT HAS NOT USED CITY FUNDING AND WILL NOT USE CITY FUNDING AND WILL NOT SEEK CITY FUNDING FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE PROJECT, MAINTENANCE OF THE PROJECT, OR ANY ENVIRONMENTAL REMEDIATION OF THE SITE. >> THANK YOU. COUNCILMEMBER MOORE. >> THANK YOU. SO, I DO NOTE THAT THIS WAS AMENDED THIS MORNING IN RESPONSE TO COUNCILMEMBER SAKA'S AMENDMENT ABOUT THE COVENANT REQUIRING MAINTENANCE OF THE PROJECT TO RUN INDEFINITELY. SO, THAT IS THE MAIN, THAT IS THE ONLY CHANGE TO THIS. THE REASON THAT I HAVE BROUGHT THIS AMENDMENT IS BECAUSE ONE OF THEM BENEFITS OR ADVANTAGES OF THIS PROJECT IS THAT IT IS GOING TO BE FUNDED ALTHOUGH WITH PRIVATE MONEY AND WE ARE GOING TO GET A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF HOUSING AND SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING WITHOUT HAVING TO FURTHER BURDEN OUR TAXPAYERS. SO, WHAT I WANTED TO BE CLEAR THAT THAT, IN FACT, WAS THE REALITY NOT JUST A PROMISE THAT WAS LATER NOT ABOUT. AND, I THINK IT IS IMPORTANT, GIVEN THE PRIVATE BENEFIT THAT IS ALSO ACCRUING FROM THIS PROJECT TO ENSURE THAT IT IS NO CITY MONEY GOES INTO IT, PARTICULARLY WITH CONCERN AROUND THE SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL REMEDIATION COST THAT I ANTICIPATE WILL BE PART OF THIS, GETTING THIS DEVELOPMENT READY TO PROCEED. IT IS JUST ADDITIONAL PROTECTION FOR THE CITY. I WOULD ASK FOR MY COLLEAGUES SUPPORT. >> I FULLY SUPPORT THIS AMENDMENT BECAUSE YOU ARE RIGHT, IT DOES HIGHLIGHT THE UNIQUE NATURE OF THE OPPORTUNITY BEFORE US. WE DO HAVE A PROPERTY OWNER WHO IS GOING TO BE DEVELOPING THIS HOUSING THAT IS REQUIRED TO BE AFFORDABLE 50% OF IT HAS TO BE AFFORDABLE AT 60 TO 90% OF THE AREA MEDIAN INCOME. AND, THE, IT WILL, THE PROPERTY OWNER, THE DEVELOPMENT WILL ALSO BE PROVIDING FOR ACCESSIBLE, AFFORDABLE WORKSPACES. THIS IS BECAUSE OF THE FACT THAT WAS, THIS IS A PRIVATE DEVELOPMENT AND IT IS GOOD TO ALSO GET IN WRITING SO THAT THE PEOPLE THAT ARE LOOKING AT THIS YEARS FROM NOW RECOGNIZE THAT THIS IS A UNIQUE SITUATION AND THE CITY IS, WE ARE NOT INTERESTED IN PUBLIC RESOURCES INTO THIS PROJECT. ARE THERE FURTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS. >> THANK YOU COUNCIL PRESIDENT, THROUGH YOU TO THE SPONSOR OF THE AMENDMENT, THANK YOU FOR THE INTENT OF THIS. I WILL BE VOTING NO AGAIN TODAY. THIS FEELS LIKE IS SAYING WE CAN BUILD AUDIBILIZING THERE DESPITE THE PROBLEMS WE KNOW TO EXIST WITH LIQUEFACTION AND POLLUTION AND IF THAT DOESN'T HAPPEN, EVEN THOUGH WE HAVE ALLOWED IT, THAT WE WANT, THAT WE SHOULDN'T USE PUBLIC DOLLARS . IT FEELS THAT IF WE ARE AT A POINT WHERE WE ARE SAYING PUBLIC DOLLARS SHOULD NOT BE USED FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING HERE, WHAT ARE WE BUILDING HOUSING YOU? ESPECIALLY, I'M JUST GOING TO SAY IT AGAIN, I THINK EVERYONE IS GOING TO REPEAT IT WITH ME AT THE END OF THIS MEETING, THIS PROJECT COULD BE BUILT IF THE HOUSE AND WAS HOTELS, TODAY, WITHOUT A LEGISLATIVE CHANGE. I WILL BE OPPOSING THIS BECAUSE, AT THE ACE OF IT, IF WE ARE SAYING THAT WE SHOULDN'T BE USING OUR CITY MONEY ON THIS PROJECT YOU SHOULD THIS PROJECT OF HOUSING, THE HOUSING PORTION, MAKER SPACE, ALL SUPPORTIVE, ALL OF THE OTHER WORKSPACE, WE ARE SUPPORTIVE OF IT. IT IS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A HOTEL UNIT AND A HOUSING UNIT. THANK YOU. >> OKAY. THIS IS AMENDMENT I . WILL THE CLERK PLEASE CALL THE ROLL? GO AHEAD. >> THANK YOU. YES, THIS ISN'T ABOUT THAT WE SHOULDN'T THE INDIVIDUAL WHO IS GOING TO BE DEVELOPING THIS PROPERTY IS A MULTIMILLIONAIRE AND IS GOING TO RECEIVE A FAIR AMOUNT OF BENEFIT FROM THIS, AS ARE MANY OTHER PEOPLE. YOU KNOW, THE WORKERS AND PEOPLE WHO THE 60 AND 80% AMI PEOPLE WHO ARE GOING TO BE ABLE TO LIVE THERE. THERE IS A SIGNIFICANT PRIVATE BENEFIT. ONE OF THEM PITCHES WAS THAT NO PUBLIC MONEY WOULD NEED TO GO INTO PROVIDING AFFORDABLE HOUSING BECAUSE OF THE BENEFIT THAT WAS GOING TO A PRIVATE DEVELOPER. AND , WE NEED TO USE OUR PUBLIC DOLLARS WE ARE WE DON'T HAVE PEOPLE STANDING UP WITH A LOT OF RESOURCES TO SAY I WILL BUILD THIS PUBLIC HOUSING. WE HAVE SO MUCH NEED FOR PUBLIC HOUSING ACROSS THE CITY THAT WE NEED TO UTILIZE THOSE DOLLARS WHERE WE CAN SAVE THOSE WHERE WE DON'T HAVE THIS OFFER. ADDITIONALLY, I WOULD NOTE THAT MHA USES PRIVATE DEVELOPMENT DOLLARS TO FUND PUBLIC HOUSING. I DON'T KNOW. BUT, I ALSO DON'T WANT ALL OF THIS PRIVATE BENEFIT TO BE SUBSIDIZED BY PUBLIC DOLLARS. IT ISN'T ABOUT THAT THE CITY SHOULDN'T BE USING IT BECAUSE THERE ARE PROBLEMS WITH IT, IT IS THAT WE CAN BETTER UTILIZE OUR RESOURCES WHICH ARE LIMITED, AND FOR WHICH WE HAVE GREAT NEED. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I'M NOT SEEING ANY OTHER HANDS RAISED. WILL THE CLERK PLEASE CALL THE ROLL ON AMENDMENT I. >> COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS. >> NO. >> COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH. COUNCILMEMBER KETTLE. >> NO. >> COUNCILMEMBER MOORE. >> AYE. >> COUNCILMEMBER RINCK. >> NO. >> COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA. >> AYE. >> COUNCILMEMBER SAKA. >> AYE. >> COUNCILMEMBER SOLOMON. >> AYE. >> COUNCIL PRESIDENT. >> AYE. >> THAT IS SIX. WANT TO BE OPPOSED. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH, THE MOTION CARRIES. AMENDMENT I VERSION 2 IS ADOPTED. ARE THERE ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS ON THE BILL AS AMENDED? WE NOW HAVE THE AMENDED BASE OF LEGISLATION BEFORE US. COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS. >> THANK YOU, COUNCIL PRESIDENT. THIS HAS BEEN A REVEALING MEETING. I HAVE LEARNED THINGS THAT I DIDN'T KNOW BEFORE. AND, I SAY THAT BECAUSE THE PUBLIC SHOULD AND ALL COUNCIL MEMBERS, SHOULD HAVE COME INTO THIS MEETING, A DECISION-MAKING MEETING, WITH FULL INFORMATION. I WAS VERY SURPRISED, I MEAN, CANDIDLY INSERTED A JOKE INTO MY TALKING POINTS ABOUT THE STREET VACATION AND COME TO FIND OUT THAT IS A REAL PROPOSAL BEFORE US RIGHT NOW IS UNNERVING. THE BASIC FACT THAT THIS PROJECT, AS PROPOSED, GOOD PEOPLE IF THE HOUSING UNITS WERE HOTEL UNITS IS SOMETHING THAT MY BEST GUESS IS THAT NOBODY ON THE DAIS FOR TODAY. AND, WE HAD A NUMBER OF AMENDMENTS, UP. WE'VE HAD A LOT OF ROBUST DISCUSSION. AND, TYPICALLY, THIS LEVEL OF WORK WOULD OCCUR FROM A PROCESS STANDPOINT. WHEN WE HAVE CENTRAL STAFF BRIEFING US ON AMENDMENT, WE ARE HAVING DISCUSSION AND TAKING VOTES, THAT HAPPENS IN COMMITTEE. THIS BILL DIDN'T GO TO THE LAND USE COMMITTEE. MY SUGGESTION TODAY IS THAT WE HAVE ALL THE AMENDMENT ATTACHED TO THE BILL AND WE TAKE A FINAL VOTE NEXT WEEK. WITH THAT, I PROPOSE TO POSTPONE COUNCIL BILL 120933 UNTIL MARCH 25th, 2025. >> SECOND. >> YOU HAD YOUR HAND UP, COUNCILMEMBER. >> SORRY, COUNCIL PRESIDENT. MY AUNT WAS UP JUST BEFORE THE REMARKS. >> COLLEAGUES, I STRONGLY I WOULD STRONGLY REQUEST A NOTE ON THE MOTION TO FURTHER DELAY THIS LEGISLATION. WE HAVE, ONE WEEK WILL NOT, IN MY MIND, MAKE ANY DIFFERENCE IN THE OUTCOME HERE. WE HAVE SPENT A LOT OF TIME LEARNING ABOUT THESE AMENDMENTS AND LEARNING MORE ABOUT THE PROPOSAL FOR THE STADIUM MAKERS DISTRICT. I THINK WE ARE ALL TOGETHER AT THE DAIS ALL NINE OF US RIGHT NOW AND WE OWE IT TO NOT JUST THE PEOPLE WHO CAME TO THIS MEETING AND HAVE SAT THROUGH HOURS AND HOURS AND HOURS OF DISCUSSION NOT JUST TO THE PEOPLE WHO MIGHT, WHO MIGHT BENEFIT FROM THE HOUSING THAT IS FACILITATED BY THE PASSAGE OF THIS LEGISLATION OR TO THE SMALL BUSINESSES WHO WILL BENEFIT FROM INCENTIVIZING THE CONSTRUCTION OF AFFORDABLE AND ACCESSIBLE SMALL MAKER SPACE IS TO KEEP THESE PEOPLE IN TOWN AND PROVIDING JOBS AND OPPORTUNITIES FOR ENTREPRENEURS LIKE THEMSELVES, WE ALSO WILL BE TO EACH OTHER. WE OWE IT TO EACH OTHER BECAUSE WE HAVE ALL PUT IN A LOT OF WORK RIGHT NOW LEADING UP TO THIS MOMENT. AND, DISCUSSION ABOUT , WE HAVE, THIS WAS INTRODUCED ON JANUARY 9th AND WE HAD OUR FIRST DISCUSSION ON JANUARY 24th. THEN, A PUBLIC HEARING. AND, THEN A COMMITTEE VOTE OF 3-2. AND, HERE WE ARE NOW READY TO MAKE A DECISION. AND I, WHILE THE INFORMATION IS STILL FRESH ON OUR MINDS, I WOULD RECOMMEND, PLEASE, AND REQUEST, PLEASE, TO VOTE NO TO THE MOTION TO DELAY SO THAT WE CAN FINISH THIS VERY IMPORTANT WORK THAT WE HAVE BEFORE US IN THE MIDST OF A HOUSING AFFORDABILITY CRISIS AND THE FACT THAT WE ARE LOSING SMALL BUSINESSES, 2 TO 3 A MONTH. WILL THE CLERK PLEASE CALL THE ROLL ON THE MOTION? >> YOU HAVE HANDS RAISED . >> COUNCILMEMBER MOORE. >> JUST DIRECTING THROUGH YOU MY COMMENT TO COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS, WHICH IS WHAT WOULD BE GAINED BY CONTINUING THE VOTE ANOTHER WEEK? >> YOU MAY RESPOND. >> THREE YOU TO THE ENTIRE BODY, BECAUSE I WAS HAVING THAT CONVERSATION WITH MYSELF, WHAT ARE WE GOING TO GAIN? WHAT WE ARE GOING TO GAIN IS SOME CLARITY. WHAT WE RECEIVED IN WRITING TODAY IS A STATEMENT THAT THE PORT IS INTERESTED IN PURCHASING THIS PROPERTY. WHAT WILL WE GAIN? WE HAVE THE ABILITY TO ASK SDOT, WHAT IS YOUR PLAN FOR THE AREA? WHAT ARE WE GOING TO GAIN? WE ARE GOING TO BE TO MAKE SURE THAT BEYOND AN EMAIL THAT WAS PASSED OUT, THAT WAS PRINTED, THERE ARE NO ADDITIONAL LEGAL CONCERNS THAT HAVE BEEN, THAT WE WERE DELIVERED TO THOSE ADDITIONAL LEGAL CONCERNS 15, 20 MINUTES BEFORE THIS MEETING STARTED AND WE HAVEN'T HAD THOSE DISCUSSIONS. WHAT ELSE DO WE GAIN? LET ME GET TO THE OUTCOME. THE OUTCOME DOESN'T CHANGE ANYTHING. WE HUNG AN AMENDMENT TO THIS BILL THAT SINCE THE EFFECTIVE DATE IS JUNE 30th. WE TYPICALLY, A BILL BECOMES EFFECTIVE 30 DAYS AFTER PASSAGE. BECAUSE WE HAVE PUT A DATE CERTAIN ON THE EFFECTIVE DATE, IT DOESN'T CHANGE ANYTHING IN THE BILL. THIS IS NOT ABOUT ME, THIS IS NOT ABOUT OWING IT TO OUR COLLEAGUES, THIS IS ABOUT OWING IT TO THE PUBLIC BECAUSE WE ARE WORDS ON BEHALF OF THE SYSTEM AND THE PUCESS . AS A COUNCIL MEMBER, I AM LEARNINEW INFORMATION ABOUT THIS PROPOSAL ON THE DAIS AND THAT MEANS THE PUBLIC ALSO DOESN'T HAVE THE FULL INFORMATION. I WAS TAUGHT IS WHEN SOMEONE IS TRYING TO RUSH SOMETHING, THERE IS SOMETHING THAT COULD BE HIDDEN. SO, THE QUESTION BACK IS WHEN WE HAVE AN EFFECTIVE DATE OF JUNE 30th, WHAT DO WE HAVE TO LOSE? BY TAKING TIME TO MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE THE RIGHT POSITION. THANK YOU. >> COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA. >> THANK YOU COUNCIL PRESIDENT. I WANT TO LEND MY VOICE TO YOUR SON I DO NOT SUPPORT FURTHER DELAY. I WOULD NOT CHARACTERIZE THIS AS A RUSH. WE HAVE BEEN TALKING ABOUT THIS SINCE BEFORE JANUARY BECAUSE YOU HAD A PANEL THAT OCCURRED BEFORE JANUARY TO START THESE CONVERSATIONS. IT IS NOW MARCH 18th. THE PORT IS WITHIN ITS RIGHT, AND CAN, APPROACH THE PROPERTY OWNER TO PURCHASE THE PROPERTY. THAT CHANGE IF WE PASS THIS LEGISLATION TODAY. THERE IS NO, THERE IS NO, IN TERMS OF, LIKE I SAID EARLIER AS TO THE LEGAL ADVICE THAT MY COLLEAGUE RAISED, AGAIN, WE ALL HAVE RECEIVED THE SAME LEGAL ADVICE. I HAVE NO CONCERNS ABOUT MOVING FORWARD. I CAN'T SAY MORE THAN THAT, OBVIOUSLY. AND I FEEL THAT THIS, I AGREE WITH MY COLLEAGUE IN TERMS OF THE PUBLIC AND WHAT WE OWE THE PUBLIC. THEY HAVE COME HERE MULTIPLE TIMES TO TESTIFY ON THIS BILL. THEY'VE TAKEN TIME OFF FROM WORK TO COME DOWN HERE TO TESTIFY AND GIVE PUBLIC COMMENT. WE HAD A PUBLIC HEARING. WE DID ALL THE THINGS THAT WE WOULD HAVE DONE FOR ANY LEGISLATION THAT WE ARE LOOKING AT. AND, I DON'T THINK IT SERVES THE TOPIC, OUR CONSTITUENTS, AND THIS BODY TO DELAY WHEN THERE IS NO DIFFERENT OUTCOME IN TERMS OF MORE INFORMATION THAT WE WOULD HAVE. WE RECEIVED ALL THE INFORMATION, WE HAVE ALL TALKED TO CENTRAL STAFF. I KNOW I HAD CONVERSATIONS WITH LEGITIMATELY PARTICULAR AMENDMENTS THAT OUR COLLEAGUES PROFFERED, WHICH I THOUGHT WERE ACTUALLY IN RESPONSE TO A LOT OF WHAT THEY HEARD FROM THE STAKEHOLDERS INVOLVED. THE AMENDMENTS WERE DIRECTLY TO ADDRESS THAT. SO, I REALLY THINK WE NEED TO TAKE A VOTE. AND, YOU KNOW, AGAIN, I APPRECIATE EVERYONE WHO GAVE THE COMMENT DURING THIS ENTIRE PROCESS. IT IS IMPORTANT. I'M GLAD THAT THEY DID, AND GLADLY SHOWED UP. I'M MINDFUL THIS IS A DIFFICULT DECISION. JUST BECAUSE IT IS A DIFFICULT DECISION, I DON'T THINK WE SHOULD DELAY OR POSTPONE MAKING IT. THAT IS NOT A GOOD REASON TO DO SO. SO, THANK YOU COUNCIL PRESIDENT. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. IT IS MY OPINION THAT WE SHOULD NOT MAKE DECISIONS BASED ON HEARSAY OR RUMOR THAT THE PROJECT, THE PROPERTY MAY CHANGE OWNERSHIP. THAT IS SOMETHING THAT IS BETWEEN THE OWNER AND THE POTENTIAL BUYER. WE DO NOT HAVE COMPLETE INFORMATION ABOUT THAT. IT IS MY UNDERSTANDING LAST TIME I TALKED TO A REPRESENTATIVE, AND I UNDERSTAND THAT SEVERAL OF YOU HAVE RECENTLY, THAT THE, THERE IS NOT CURRENTLY INTEREST TO SELL THE PROPERTY, BUT, REGARDLESS I WANT TO REMIND FOLKS THAT THE LETTER OF INTENT IS SIGNED COMMITTING TO A PROJECT LABOR AGREEMENT. THEY ASSIGNED AN ADDENDUM STATING THAT COMMITMENT WILL BE BINDING ON FUTURE OWNERS. THE PORT OR WHOEVER, IF IT IS EVER SOLD, AS LONG AS IT IS TIED TO HOUSING. IN OTHER WORDS, AS LONG AS THIS LEGISLATION TO ALLOW FOR HOUSING TO BE BUILT IN THE STADIUM DISTRICT PASSES. IF WE ALL WANT MORE HOUSING AND WORKFORCE HOUSING, THEN, THIS IS THE OPPORTUNITY RIGHT NOW. THERE ARE ALSO , UNITE HERE HAS SIGNED A MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT THAT ENJOYS THAT HOTEL EMPLOYEES WILL BE UNIONIZED. LOCAL 6 HAS SIGNED A LETTER OF INTENT COMMITTING TO THE USE OF UNION SECURITY OFFICERS AND JANITORS AND THEY HAVE SIGNED AN ADDENDUM THAT WILL ALSO REQUIRE THAT THAT COMMITMENT TO CARRY FORWARD NO MATTER WHO THE PROPERTY OWNER IS, AS LONG AS HOUSING IS, AS LONG AS HOUSING AS PROPOSED IN THIS PIECE OF LEGISLATION GOES FORWARD. SO, FOR, TO COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS'S POINT THAT MAYBE THE PORT WANTS TO BUY THE PROPERTY , WE NEED TO, WE NEED TO MAKE DECISIONS BASED ON CURRENT FACTS THAT WE HAVE AT HAND AND THAT IS, AGAIN, WHY I BELIEVE THAT NOTHING WILL CHANGE BETWEEN NOW AND NEXT WEEK. VERY LITTLE CHANGE BETWEEN NOW AND NEXT WEEK. WE HAVEN'T EVEN HAD TO CALL THE ROLL. THAT IS WHY WE HAVE TO ACT TODAY. GO AHEAD. PROCEED. >> COUNCIL PRESIDENT. FOR ALL OF THE REASONS THAT YOU JUST LISTED, ALL OF THE UNIONS THAT COULD BE INVOLVED IN THE PROJECT, THAT ALL COULD STAY THE SAME IF THE HOUSING UNITS WERE HOTEL UNITS. I THINK THAT IT IS BENEFICIAL FOR PUBLIC TRANSPARENCY IF WE WAIT A WEEK TO TAKE THE FINAL VOTE NOW THAT ALL OF THE AMENDMENTS ARE HUNG BECAUSE A WAY TO UNDERCUT TRANSPARENCY WITH THE PUBLIC IS TO PUBLISH AN AMENDMENT THE SAME DAY OR THE DAY BEFORE A FINAL VOTE IS TAKEN BECAUSE PEOPLE DON'T HAVE THE ABILITY TO INTERACT. SO, COUNCIL PRESIDENT, TWITTER, TO THE CODES THAT HAVE SPOKEN ABOUT WHY WE SHOULD NOT DELAY, IT IS APPARENT TO ME THAT YOU ARE MINDS ARE MADE UP. THAT IS OKAY. FOR ANYONE WHO MAY NOT BE, WHO MAY BE INTERESTED TO KNOW THE ANSWERS TO SOME OF THE QUESTIONS RAISED TODAY, WE SHOULD WAIT A WEEK, EVEN IF ALL OF YOUR QUESTIONS HAVE BEEN ANSWERED TO TAKE THE WEEK SO THAT THE PUBLIC CAN CATCH UP TO WHERE WE ARE BECAUSE THIS IS ABOUT TRANSPARENCY. THANK YOU. >> WILL THE CLERK PLEASE CALL THE ROLL ON THE MOTION TO POSTPONE? >> COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS. >> YES. >> COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH. >> AYE. >> COUNCILMEMBER KETTLE. >> AYE. >> COUNCILMEMBER MOORE. >> NO. >> COUNCILMEMBER RINCK. >> AYE. >> COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA. >> NO. >> COUNCILMEMBER SAKA. >> NO. >> COUNCILMEMBER SOLOMON. >> NO. >> COUNCIL PRESIDENT. >> NO. >> THAT IS FOUR IN FAVOR, FIVE LIST. >> THE MOTION IS DEFEATED. OKAY. MOVING ON. NOW IS THE OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE, TO TALK ABOUT THE BASE LEGISLATION AT HAND. I INVITE MEMBERS TO RAISE YOUR HANDS IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO MAKE COMMENTS. COUNCILMEMBER KETTLE. >> THANK YOU COUNCIL PRESIDENT FOR EVERYONE HERE WHO REMEMBERS THE COMMITTEE MEETING. I'VE ASKED COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH TO HIT ME IF I GET ANYWHERE CLOSE TO THE GENERAL RECOMMENDED TIME FOR COUNCILMEMBERS TO SPEAK. AGAIN, THANK YOU FOR ANYONE WHO HAS COME OUT TODAY, TONIGHT. JUST A BRIEF REMARKS, JUST TWO PAGES. OUR NATION NEEDS OF THE PORT OF SEATTLE. IT IS A GREAT GEOSTRATEGIC INTEREST. I HAVE SPOKEN BEFORE THE L.A. FIRES AND IF THEY WENT SOUTH OVER THE L.A. WARM BEACH PORTS, THEY WOULD HAVE NEEDED US. OUR NATION WOULD HAVE NEEDED US. REMINDED OF OUR EXPERIENCE DURING THE PANDEMIC. THE STATE NEEDS THE PORT OF SEATTLE. IT IS A GREAT ECONOMIC INTEREST, CONFIRMED BY THE STATE LEGISLATURE TO INCLUDE THE SEATTLE DELEGATION, LOCAL GOVERNMENT AND BUSINESSES THROUGHOUT THE STATE. OUR CITY MEETS THE PORT OF SEATTLE TO BREAK BUDGETARY INTERESTS. IT IS A KEY REVENUE SOURCE YEAR IN AND YEAR OUT, TAKE IT IN, THE KID OUT, CENTURY IN AND CENTURY OUT. IT IS A KEY REVENUE SOURCE IN THE FACE OF SEVERE PHYSICAL HEADWINDS. OUR CITY NEEDS THE PORT OF SEATTLE, YES, BUT ALSO, AND VERY IMPORTANTLY, THE PORT OF SEATTLE NEEDS OF THE CITY OF SEATTLE, WHICH IS A GREAT MUTUAL SUPPORT INTEREST. THE PORT IS A DISCRETIONARY PORT IN A CUTTHROAT SHIPPING INDUSTRY. THE 2023 INDUSTRIAL MARITIME LEGISLATION ADDRESS THIS AND WAS THE BASIS OF THE ONE SEATTLE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN APPROACH TO THE INDUSTRIAL MARITIME LANDS. I'VE ASKED BEFORE, WHAT IS THE MARITIME INDUSTRIAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF THIS BILL? WHAT IS THE IMPACT OF OUR FREIGHT PROGRAM FROM THE SEATTLE TRANSPORTATION PLAN AND THE LOBBY? THE PORT MEETS THE CITY TO HONOR ITS COMMITMENT FROM THE 2023 INDUSTRIAL MARITIME ACT. YES, OUR CITY NEEDS OUR CITY NEEDS AFFORDABLE HOUSING . IN AN INDUSTRIAL ZONE? I FIND IT INTERESTING, JUST A WEEK AGO TODAY THERE WAS AN ARTICLE IN "THE NEW YORK TIMES,", THE HEADLINE WAS "EPA PLANS TO CLOSE ALL ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE OFFICES." IT STARTS, "THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION INTENDS TO ELIMINATE ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY OFFICE IS RESPONSIBLE FOR ADDRESSING THE HIGH LEVELS OF POLLUTION FACING POOR COMMUNITIES, ACCORDING TO A MEMO FROM LEE ZELDIN, AGENCY ADMINISTRATORS ." THE "NEW YORK TIMES" ARTICLE THEN SAYS IN PARAGRAPH THREE, "LEE ZELDIN ! ENDS THREE DECADES OF WORK AT THE EPA TO TRY TO EASE THE POLLUTION THAT BURDENS POOR AND MINORITY COMMUNITIES, WHICH ARE FREQUENTLY LOCATED NEAR HIGHWAYS, POWER PLANTS, INDUSTRIAL PLANTS, AND OTHER POLLUTING FACILITIES. STUDIES HAVE SHOWN THAT PEOPLE WHO LIVE IN THESE COMMUNITIES HAVE HIGHER RATES OF ASTHMA, HEART DISEASE, AND OTHER HEALTH PROBLEMS COMPARED TO THE NATIONAL AVERAGE." WE CAN TALK ABOUT THE FEIS. I READ THAT AND I UNDERSTAND THAT AND I THINK THERE IS A DISCONNECT BETWEEN WHAT THE EPA HAS BEEN TRYING TO DO FOR THREE DECADES AND THIS PIECE OF LEGISLATION . IT ALMOST HINTS THAT, IN A WAY, WE ARE ALIGNED WITH THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION AND THAT IS CONCERNING TO ME. OUR CITY NEEDS AFFORDABLE HOUSING BUT IN A SOIL LIQUEFACTION ZONE? IN FEIS, IT STANDS FOR FLAWED AND AS I NOTED, IT GIVES A FAILING GRADE BECAUSE IT DOESN'T ADDRESS , AS I NOTED BEFORE, THE COAST GUARD. 46 DECISION JUST TO OUR WEST. THE IMPACT OF THE AMTRAK BNSF ON SOUTH COLGATE STREET, JUST SOUTH OF THE PROPOSED REZONE. THE WET WEATHER TREATMENT FACILITY, COVERING COMBINED STORMWATER SEWER OUTFLOW RIGHT ALONG THE EAST CHANNEL, RIGHT THERE AT THE LOCATION OF WHAT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT. AND, TWO OF THE CSOS ARE RIGHT NEAR THE SPOT REZONE. WHY WOULD WE WANT TO PUT SOMEONE AT RISK OF AN EARTHQUAKE OR SALAMI? HAVE WE LEARNED THE LESSONS OF HURRICANE KATRINA AND OTHER DISASTERS? OUR CITY NEEDS TO INCREASE OUR STATUS AS A MAJOR PORT CITY WITH A BEAUTIFUL NATURAL DEEP WATER PORT, WHICH IS WHAT THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DOES. THE INDUSTRIAL MARITIME ACT IS PHASE ONE OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, WHICH IS OUR HOUSING PLAN. IT UNDERSTANDS THE POINTS THAT WE HAVE BEEN MAKING. I WOULD NOTE, KIND OF LIKE MY COLLEAGUE HAS NOTED, AMENDMENTS PRESENTED TODAY REALLY ACKNOWLEDGE MANY OF MY REASONS TO BE IN OPPOSITION TO THIS BILL. BUT, I WOULD ADD THAT TO FIX THE BILL. SO, TO CLOSE, I'M REMINDED OF MY CONVERSATION RECENTLY WITH FORMER COUNCIL PRESIDENT DEBORAH WHEREAS ON THIS BILL. SHE NOTED A FEW THINGS. FIRST, THE FACT PATTERN OF THIS BILL IS THE SAME AS 10 YEARS AGO. IT IS THE SAME AS 10 YEARS AGO. IF YOU MOVE FORWARD 10 YEARS AGO, IT IS KIND OF LIKE THE STREET VACATION POINT THAT CAME UP IN THIS MEETING. BUT WHAT'S UP WITH THAT FACT PATTERN , THEN, FORMER COUNCIL PRESIDENT DEBORAH WHEREAS SAID TO ME. SHE ALSO NOTED, AND I AGREE THAT THIS ISN'T ABOUT LABOR VERSUS BUSINESS, IT IS ABOUT OUR CULTURE AND OUR HERITAGE. THAT IS WHAT WE ARE, WE ARE IN MARITIME PORT CITY. THE WE SHOULD REMEMBER THAT. I JUST WANT TO CLOSE WITH THE QUOTE QUITE FAMOUS AT THE TIME, A DECADE AGO, "YOU CAN ALWAYS BUILD AN ARENA." INTERESTING, BY THE WAY." YOU CAN NEVER BUILD ANOTHER DEEPWATER PORT. WITH THAT, WITH RESPECT TO THOSE IN FAVOR OF THIS BILL, AND WILL BE VOTING NO. COUNCIL PRESIDENT. >> COUNCILMEMBER RINCK . >> THANK YOU COUNCIL PRESIDENT. I CHOSE TO VOTE NO ON ALL OF THE AMENDMENTS TODAY OUT OF PRINCIPLE THAT I EXPLAINED EARLIER. THE LIMITED TIME TO CONSULT WITH YOU AND OWNERS, FOLKS AT THE PORT, CONSTITUENTS THAT HAVE WEIGHED IN TODAY. WE HAVE RECEIVED 11 EMAILS, MY LETTERS, ONE LETTER WITH A BIPARTISAN SECTION OF 30 STATE LEGISLATORS, INCLUDING MUCH OF THE SEATTLE DELEGATION AND SOME OF OUR BIGGEST HOUSING, ENVIRONMENTAL AND LABOR CHAMPIONS, LIKE REPRESENTATIVE JULIA REED, REPETITIVE SHARON TAMIKA SANTOS, REPRESENTATIVE BARRY, PREVENTATIVE DEWAR AND REPRESENTATIVE STREEP FLAGGING THEIR CONCERN WITH THE PROJECT AS PROPOSED. I DON'T MAKE LIGHT OF ANY OF THAT FEEDBACK WE HAVE RECEIVED. A LOT HAS HAPPENED IN THE PAST 24 HOURS. WHILE I REFER TO THE CHARACTERIZATION THAT THE AMENDMENTS THAT WERE BEFORE US TODAY WERE TECHNICAL AMENDMENTS EVEN IF THEY WERE, I WOULD STILL REQUEST MORE TIME BECAUSE OF THE STATE OF OUR DIVISION AND THE SAKE OF OUR PARTNERSHIPS AND THE OPTICS OF TRAJAN IS SOMETHING THAT HAS BEEN SO CONTENTIOUS FOR YEARS AND GIVEN THE FACT THAT TEMPERS HAVE BEEN SO HIGH. WE HAVE HAD PRESIDENT FOR DELAYS ON CITY COUNCIL, WHETHER IT WAS WITH PICKUP, EDI OR PUTTING THE SOCIAL HOUSING MEASURE ON THE BALLOT. I STILL SEE AN OPPORTUNITY FOR COMPROMISE. MY OFFICE HAD HOPED TO DISCUSS THE SUPPORTED DISCUSSION THAT WOULD SEEK A COMPROMISE BECAUSE WE STILL THINK THERE CAN BE ONE. THERE WAS THE NOTE THAT THIS DELAY WAS A RED HERRING. TO THAT, I SAY, PLEASE DO NOT IMPUGN MY MOTIVES. I AUTHENTICALLY BELIEVE IN THE OPPORTUNITY TO FIND A COPY IS HERE AND THERE WAS A LOT OF TALK TODAY ABOUT SUPPORT FOR YOU TO BUILD AFFORDABLE HOUSING. I TRULY HOPE TO HEAR THAT SAME ENERGY WHEN WE TALK ABOUT SUPPORTING OUR OTHER OPPORTUNITIES FOR UNION BUILT AFFORDABLE HOUSING, PARTICULARLY WITH MAKING SURE THE SOCIAL HOUSING DEVELOPER IS SET UP FOR SUCCESS BECAUSE THAT WILL DELIVER ON GOOD UNION JOBS AS WELL . AND, I HOPE WE KEEP THE PROCESSING ENERGY UP WHEN WE TALK ABOUT THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND COMPREHENSIVE DISCUSSION AROUND HOUSING CITYWIDE AND ALLOW FOR MORE HOUSING IN OUR EXISTING NEIGHBORHOODS THAT HAVE CLEAR AIR, GREEN SPACES, SCHOOLS, BECAUSE WORKING FOLKS DESERVE TO LIVE IN THOSE NEIGHBORHOODS. I THINK THIS PROCESS WAS NECESSARILY PAINFUL. I IMAGINE A LOT OF FOLKS IN THIS ROOM MAY BE FEELING THAT PAIN AND I IMAGINE THAT IS OUR GOD IS NOT HERE WITH THIS BOAT. THIS WILL CONTINUE. WHILE I AM VOTING NO TODAY, I BEEN COMMITTED TO COVER MY IS TO WORKING PEOPLE AND TO A PRESS THAT SUPPORTS TRANSPARENCY AND PARTNERSHIP. THANK YOU. >> COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS. >> I AND THE NORWEGIANS READ OVER HERE . THIS IS NOT ABOUT BEING A YES OR NO. THIS IS ABOUT HOW WE GOVERN AND HOW WE LEAD BY EXAMPLE. THIS PROCESS HAS CREATED A VISION. I SIT UP HERE HEARING CURRENTLY THERE ARE TWO COUNCILMEMBERS THAT WERE HERE MORE THAN A YEAR AND A HALF AGO. ONE OF THE COUNCIL MEMBER WHO WAS HERE BEFORE THAT HAS SHARED A PERSPECTIVE ABOUT THE WAY THINGS OCCURRED AND WHAT HAPPENED. EVEN THOUGH I WAS THERE, I FEEL LIKE I WAS WATCHING A DIFFERENT MOVIE. I WASN'T JUST HERE, I WAS THERE NEGOTIATING THIS. I WAS MANAGING AND DISTORTING THE LAND USE, THE AT THAT TIME. AND, WHAT I FEEL RIGHT NOW IS THAT THERE IS A COLLECTIVE AMNESIA ABOUT WHAT WAS AGREED TO, WHAT WAS NOT. TO. AND, FROM THERE, WHAT WERE THE NEXT STEPS AND HOW WOULD WE COME TOGETHER? IN 2023, I WOULD SAY WAS COLLECTIVELY THE BEST RELATIONSHIP THAT WE HAD BETWEEN STAKEHOLDERS WHO HAVE TRADITIONALLY BEEN AT EACH OTHER AND STARTS FROM ACROSS THE CITY REGARDING INDUSTRIAL LANDS. THIS IS WHY THERE HAD BEEN NO ZONING CHANGES EVEN DURING NHA, EVEN DURING OTHER INCENTIVE ZONING CHANGES. THERE WERE NO ZONING CHANGES MADE TO THE INDUSTRIAL ZONES BETWEEN 2007 AND 2023. SO WHAT IS DIFFERENT ABOUT THIS VOTE, AS I HAVE SAID BEFORE, COMPARED TO THE OTHER VOTES THAT WE TAKE THIS IS NOT WHEN WE GET TO GO BACK TO. ONCE WE MAKE THIS CHANGE IN OUR DEEPWATER PORT IS FOREVER THREATENED. OUR PORT ACTIVITIES, AGAIN, SEATTLE WOULDN'T BE A CITY, TACOMA WOULD BE THE CITY. PORT TOWNSEND WOULD BE THE CITY, IF NOT FOR OUR RAAND DEEPWATER PORTS. ALL OTHER DECISIONS THAT WE HAVE BEFORE US, WE GET TO YOUNG MAN, WE GET TO CHECK OUT, SEE IF IT IS A PILOT AND WE GET TO SEE IF IT WORKS. THIS IS ONE THAT CANNOT BE UNDONE. AGAIN, SING IT WITH ME, THIS PROPOSAL COULD BE BUILT TODAY IF THE UNITS WERE HOTELS. SOMETHING THAT IS TAKEN FOR GRANTED TODAY IS THE CITY OF SEATTLE'S RELATIONSHIP WITH ANOTHER GOVERNMENT WITHIN OUR BORDERS AND THAT IS THE PORT OF SEATTLE. WHEN I CAME TO THE CITY COUNCIL IN 2020, I WAS INSTRUCTED THAT THE CITY OF SEATTLE AS AN ENTITY HAD A VERY POOR RELATIONSHIP WITH THE PORT OF SEATTLE. AND, I FOUND THAT TO BE TRUE. FLOODPLAINS IS SOMETHING WE ARE STILL WORKING THROUGH AND HAS REARED ITS HEAD A COUPLE TIMES. WHAT WE HAVE ALSO FOUND IS NOT THROUGH THE COURSE OF HAVING A PROCESS THAT FOCUSES ON CONSENSUS AND COLLABORATION THAT WE HAVE REPAIRED THOSE PAST DIFFERENCES. THIS CITY COUNCIL HAS BENEFITED FROM THAT POSITIVE WORKING RELATIONSHIP WITH THE PORT. THE CURRENT CITY COUNCIL HAS NEVER EXPERIENCED A POOR RELATIONSHIP WITH THE PORT BECAUSE HARD AND INTENTIONAL WORK OCCURRED TO REPAIR THAT HARM. THAT LEADS ME TO THE QUESTION, WHY HE WASN'T THERE AND APPEALED TO THE EIS? IF THESE ISSUES WERE AT THE FRONT OF THE MIND OF THE PORT AT THAT TIME, THE ANSWER IS BECAUSE WE WERE IN A GOOD RELATIONSHIP. THE ANSWER IS WE ARE GOING TO CONTINUE FORWARD BECAUSE THE ANSWER AT THAT TIME WAS IF THE PORT APPEALED, THE EIS, THE LEGISLATION WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN IN FRONT OF THE LAND USE COMMITTEE BEFORE RECESS, WHICH MEANS THAT IT WOULD HAVE BEEN ON A LOCATED, RUSHED SCHEDULE, OR IT WOULD HAVE HAD TO BE TAKEN UP AFTER BUDGET . THAT IS WHY. IT IS A REALLY FUNCTIONAL REASON. IT IS A VERY EASY ANSWER. THE REASON THERE IS NOT AN APPEAL TO THE EIS WAS BECAUSE WE WERE IN A GOOD RELATIONSHIP AND AN APPEAL WOULD HAVE DELAYED THE BILL TO POSSIBLY NOT HAVE BEEN VOTED ON. AND, TO THROW AWAY WORK THAT STARTED IN 2019 THAT REQUIRED A FACILITATOR BETWEEN STAKEHOLDERS? BECAUSE THE OPINIONS AND PERSPECTIVES WERE SO DISTANT? I MEAN, AGAIN, DAN McKISSON, LOVE YOU, MAN, YOU WERE MAD AT ME FOR ALLOWING THREE HOTELS. YOU WERE COMING AT MY REGULAR, IN A POLITE AND PROFESSIONAL MANNER. SO, THAT IS WHY I SAY THAT THERE IS A COLLECTIVE AMNESIA ABOUT WHAT HAPPENED IN 2023. HE AND, TO THE SPONSOR TO YOUR RECOLLECTION IS NOT ONE THAT I REMEMBER . I'M NOT GOING TO, I'M NOT TRYING TO IMPUGN ANY MOTIVES OR ANYTHING. I'M JUST SAYING I DON'T REMEMBER IT THAT WAY. AND, BECAUSE WE WERE IN A GOOD RELATIONSHIP WITH THE PORT, AND BECAUSE THEY CHOSE TO MOVE THE BILL FORWARD RATHER THAN INSTALL IT, THEY DIDN'T APPEAL. AFTER THIS EXPERIENCE, MY ONLY RECOGNITION TO ANYONE OUTSIDE OF THE CITY OF SEATTLE WOULD BE TO APPEAL BECAUSE EVEN IF I TRUST YOU AND YOU TRUST ME , I CAN'T TRUST THAT A FUTURE COUNCIL MEMBER WILL WEAPONIZED THIS MOMENT THAT WE HAVE TOGETHER. WHAT IS REALLY INTERESTING FOR ME, I WAS READING THE "SEATTLE TIMES" TODAY AND I SAW AN ADVERTISEMENT FOR THE PORT ABOUT THE PORT OF SEATTLE IS A WORKING WATERFRONT AND IT REALLY RESONATED WITH ME. IT IS BECAUSE I KNOW WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE BEHIND THE FENCE. FOR MOST PEOPLE, THEIR ONLY INTERACTION WITH THE PORT OR MARITIME FACILITIES IS BY DRIVING PAST A CHAIN-LINK FENCE. NEVER SEEING INSIDE. AND, NEVER LIVING A DAY INSIDE. IN BALLARD, ONE OF MY FAVORITE PLACES TO POINT OUT IS PACIFIC FISHERMAN SHIPYARD. AND WHEN I LOOK AT IT, IT HAS ALL THE SIGNS OF RETIRED CLOSED DOWN BUSINESSES FROM ACROSS BALLARD. I GOT CHEWED OUT ONE TIME I WENT DOWN THERE TRYING TO SHOW OFF THOSE SIGNS BECAUSE THE IMPORTANCE IS NOT THE HISTORY OF HOLDING BACK, BUT SUPPORTING ABOUT PACIFIC FISHERMAN SHIPYARD IS THE MACHINE SHOP, THE PAINT SHOP, THE FACT THAT THEY COLLECT ALL THEIR WATER AND DISTRIBUTED BACK INTO THE WATERWAY. YOU KNOW THAT RIDING THE BUS LOOKING DOWN. ALL YOU SEE ARE THE SIGNS. THAT IS WHAT I MEAN. WHEN I SAW THAT ADVERTISEMENT AT THE TIMES TODAY, IT GAVE ME A DIFFERENT FEELING ABOUT WORKING OUT AT THESE ORANGE CRANES OUT HERE, MULTIMILLIONS OF DOLLARS TO PUT IN. HOW MUCH TRAINING DOES IT TAKE TO GET A SKILLED OPERATOR? HOW MUCH INVESTMENT DOES IT TAKE ESTIMATE AND WE ARE GOING TO THROW IT AWAY? WE WILL KEEP THE TWO OF IT IN THE CONFERENCE ROOM. I SAY THIS BECAUSE BEHIND THE FENCE LOOKS SO DIFFERENT. AGAIN, COUNCIL PRESIDENT, YOU ARE READING THE FACTS ABOUT WHAT WAS SENT WHAT WAS NOT OCCURRING IN 2023 IS NOT IN SYNC WITH MINE. I AM NOT HERE TO IMPUGN THE MOTIVES OR SAY ANYTHING WITH THIS, I AM JUST SAYING YOUR READING OF THE SPECS DOES NOT ALIGN WITH MY UNDERSTANDING OF THE FACTS. IN 2023, AND, THROUGH THIS PROCESS, ACTUALLY, THE QUESTION YOU RAISED MULTIPLE TIMES ABOUT WHY WE DIDN'T MAKE THE BALLARD INTERBAY MANUFACTURING INDUSTRIAL CENTER, BOUNDARIES REMOVED AND THE CURRENT UNDERSTAND, WHY WAS THIS COMING UP? WHEN WE CHECKED OUT OF THE PROPOSAL THERE WERE NO, THERE WAS NO OPPOSITION. NOBODY SAID NO. AND, THE REASON THE BOUNDARIES CHANGE TWICE BECAUSE THERE WAS NO OPPOSITION . AND, WE ASKED ALL THE STAKEHOLDERS. IF THERE HAD BEEN ONE IOTA OF OPPOSITION TO CHANGING THOSE BOUNDARIES, WE WOULDN'T HAVE DONE IT. AND, I NOW HAVE A BETTER UNDERSTANDING OF WHY THAT CHANGE UPSET YOU, OR MAY HAVE UPSET YOU. >> POINT OF ORDER. PLEASE, LET'S STICK TO THE LEGISLATION HERE. >> AGAIN, ALL I CAN SAY IS THAT THE BASE LEGISLATION THAT THIS AMENDMENT IS CHANGING WOULD NOT HAVE INCLUDED A BOUNDARY CHANGE IF ANYONE HAD SAID NO. THIS PROCESS, SO, THAT PROCESS, A MONTH BEFORE IT WAS INTRODUCED, IT WAS DISCUSSED AT COUNCIL BRIEFING. WE HAD DEADLINES SET UP . WE HAD CLEAR COMMUNICATION SO THAT ALL STAKEHOLDERS HAD EQUAL FOOTING IN THAT CONVERSATION. THIS PROCESS BEGAN WITH A CITY COUNCIL BRIEFING THAT WAS CUT SHORT. ON THAT DATE, THE INTRODUCTION AND REFERRAL LETTER WAS SUBMITTED SEVEN MINUTES, FOUR OR FIVE MINUTES, I DON'T KNOW THE NUMBER OF MINUTES, IT WAS RIGHT NEAR THERE AT THE END. >> I WANT TO MAKE, ONE MOMENT, YOU HAVE BROUGHT UP THIS NOTION THAT PROCESS ONCE NOT PROPER IN THE INTRODUCTION AND REFERRAL CALENDAR, WE DID GET THE INTRODUCTION AND REFERRAL CALENDAR AND ON TIME. COUNCILMEMBER RINCK, PUTTING KNEW, DID NOT ADD PARTICULAR LEGISLATION SO WE RETRACTED IT AND WE PUBLISHED IT. >> THAT IS YOUR JOB TO LEAD AS OUR COUNCIL PRESIDENT. ALL I CAN SAY IS THAT, IN THAT CONVERSATION, WHEN COUNCIL BRIEFING USED TO BE A PLACE WHERE COUNCIL MEMBERS WOULD HAVE DISCUSSIONS AND ASK EACH OTHER QUESTIONS ABOUT THE LEGISLATION, AND BEFORE US, MY QUESTIONS WERE ANSWERED BY A ADJOURNMENT OF THE MEETING. WE THEN HAD A ONE-SIDED PANEL THAT WAS THANKFULLY BALANCED WITH A SECOND PANEL. IT IS NOT ABOUT SCIENCE, IT IS ABOUT THE TWO PANELS BEING TOGETHER AND WORKING OUT OF THEIR ISSUES. THE WAY WE GOT TO THIS IN 2023 WAS DOING A FACILITATOR. HERE AT THIS PROCESS, WE NEVER BROUGHT THOSE TWO SIDES TOGETHER. AND, THE REASON THIS PROPOSAL THAT IS BEFORE US TODAY WAS NOT INCLUDED IN THE 2023 CITYWIDE UP ZONE WAS BECAUSE THERE WAS NOT A COMPROMISE REACHED. PART OF DEMISE WAS ALLOWING HOTELS THE STADIUM AREA. THIS PROPOSAL COULD BE TODAY IF THE HOUSING UNITS WERE HOTEL UNITS. THE FLOW OF THIS PROCESS, FOR THIS BILL, WAS TO WANTED THAT WE HAD NINE AMENDMENTS TODAY. THAT MEANS IT WASN'T READY IF THERE WERE STILL CONCERNS AND STILL INFORMATION COMING OUT. THE PACKAGE OF AMENDMENTS COMING OUT DEMONSTRATES THAT COUNCIL MEMBERS HAD INTENT AND THEY KNOW THAT HOUSING IN THIS AREA IS A BAD IDEA TO FEEL COMPELLED TO VOTE ON THIS PROPOSAL FOR THIS PROPOSAL . TODAY, FOR EVEN ME, NEW INFORMATION HAS COME TO LIGHT WHICH FURTHER LEADS ME TO BELIEVE THERE WERE COMMITMENTS WITH THINGS SHARED IN PRIVATE. ONE OF THE FIRST PANELS THAT WE HAD A ON THIS PROCESS WAS WHO SAID WHAT TWO YEARS AGO. WITH THIS NEW INFORMATION THAT COMES TO LIGHT, IT BEGS THE QUESTION, IS THERE SOMETHING ELSE AT HAND? THIS PROPOSAL COULD BE BUILT TODAY IF THE HOUSING UNITS WERE HOTEL UNITS. FOR ME, I JUST HAVE TO ASK, WHY ELSE WOULD THIS PROCESS HAVE BEEN CONSTRUCTED IN THE WAY IT HAS? IT WAS INTRODUCED AT A TIME WHEN WE DIDN'T HAVE A LAND-USE CHAIR. IT WAS INTRODUCED WITH A COMEDY THAT IS NOT TO. WATCHING THE SEATTLE CHANNEL, A NOTE RELATED TO ZONING AND LAND USE IN THE GOVERNANCE COMMITTEE. THIS IS OUT OF STEP WITH PAST PRACTICE. IF THIS ONCE A TRANSPARENT AND THOUGHTFUL PROCESS , WE WOULD HAVE EITHER SENT IT TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN COMMITTEE, BECAUSE A FAMILIAR, ON THE RECORD, IF THE MAYOR'S OFFICE HAD DECIDED TO PROPOSE A CHANGE THIS YEAR, IT WOULD HAVE BEEN IN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. >> POINT OF ORDER, WE HAVE REACHED THERE ARE TIME LIMITS. >> WOULD YOU LIKE TO CUT ME OFF? >> WE HAVE OTHER HANDS RAISED. I AM JUST ASKING FOR SOME RESPECT FOR OTHER PEOPLE. GO AHEAD, PLEASE. >> THANK YOU. THERE HAVE BEEN A NUMBER OF TIMES YOU HAVE CUT ME OFF ON THE DAIS. ALL I'M SAYING IS IF THIS WAS GOING TO BE A TRANSPARENT, THOUGHTFUL PROCESS THAT WE WOULD HAVE WAITED FOR A NEW LAND-USE CHAIR TO COME, IT WOULD HAVE BEEN SENT TO THE COMP PLAN COMMITTEE OR IT WOULDN'T HAVE BEEN WASHED. WE STILL HAVE LEAVES FROM THE 2023 PROPOSAL, THE TRANSPORTATION RESOLUTION AND STUDY BUT ALSO FROM THE 2020. 2024 LEVY THAT HAS BEEN TRANSPORTATION MONEY TO CONNECT THE PORT TO THE INTERSTATES. THIS IS NOT A DECISION WE CAN UNDO. THIS PROPOSAL COULD BE BUILT TODAY IF THESE WERE HOTELS AND NOT HOUSING, NOT APARTMENTS. I WILL END WITH WHAT I STARTED WITH, AT THE BEGINNING, ON THE FIRST COMMITTEE. THIS PROPOSAL HAS MERIT. AND, THERE IS A PROCESS THAT WE HAVE TO GO THROUGH TOGETHER TO FIND THE SOLUTION . THIS PROCESS HAS NOT BEEN MET. I WILL BE VOTING NO TODAY. THANK YOU. >> COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA. >> THANK YOU COUNCIL PRESIDENT. I WANT TO CORRECT MY EARLIER STATEMENT. IT WASN'T REALLY JANUARY. IT FELT LIKE LONGER THAN THAT. IT IS MID-MARCH. NEVERTHELESS, STILL HAS BEEN SOME TIME. I WANT TO SAY THAT THIS PROPOSAL IS FOR LEGISLATION FOR WORKFORCE HOUSING IN A LIMITED AREA THAT HAD A EIS, WHICH INCLUDED HOUSING AND DID NOT SHOW ADVERSE EFFECTS TO THE AREA, TO TRAFFIC IN THE AREA, WHICH I KNOW WAS A MAJOR SOURCE OF CONCERN TO THE PORT ACTIVITIES. IF THE EIS HAD SHOWN DIFFERENTLY, I WOULD NOT BE SUPPORTING THIS LEGISLATION, AS I DO SUPPORT THE PORT AS WELL . THE NUMBER OF UNITS WE ARE TALKING ABOUT WERE THOSE THAT WERE CONTAINED IN THE EIS FOR THAT WORK FOR SOMETHING. WE HAVE TALKED ABOUT THE MAJOR SPACE AND ACTIVATING THE SPACE IN POSITIVE WAYS IN THIS VERY LIMITED AREA, WHICH WE KNOW IS ONE OF THE BEST WAYS TO ADDRESS PUBLIC SAFETY, WHICH IS ALSO AN ISSUE IN THE AREA. PLEASE KNOW THAT MY DECISION IS BASED ON DILIGENT REVIEW BASED ON THIS LIMITED PROPOSAL, WHICH WAS PART OF THE PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE BASED ON STAKEHOLDERS COMING TOGETHER WITH THE CITY AT THE TIME. I JUST, I REALLY DID NOT WANT TO TAKE A VOTE WITHOUT LETTING IT BE SAID THAT I DID DO MY DUE DILIGENCE IN REVIEWING. I SUPPORT ALL OUR UNION MEMBERS. I'M NOT TRYING TO TAKE SIDES HERE. THIS IS VERY LIMITED AREA. AND, THERE WAS THAT EIS. I WANT TO SAY THAT. I DON'T WANT TO ATTRIBUTE ILL WILL TO ANY OF MY COLLEAGUES. I DON'T THINK THAT THAT SERVES THIS BODY WELL. I DON'T THINK THAT IS WHAT THIS IS ABOUT. I HAVE ALWAYS SAID, YOU'VE HEARD ME SAY THIS BEFORE, WE CAN AGREE TO DISAGREE. AND, I ALSO REALLY WANTED TO SAY WHERE I WAS COMING FROM WITH THIS AND GIVE MY GUARANTEES. I DO DO MY DUE DILIGENCE WHEN I COMMITTED TO DO THIS JOB, THAT IS WHAT I COMMITTED TO DO. I TOOK AN OATH WHEN I TOOK THIS JOB, AS WE ALL DID, AND I TAKE THAT SERIOUSLY. SO, PLEASE NOTE THAT THIS IS, LIKE I SAID, I WAS A VERY THOUGHTFUL IN MY APPROACH. I KNOW THIS WAS A DIFFICULT DECISION AND NOT EVERYONE IS GOING TO BE PLEASED ABOUT IT. AND, I ALSO APPRECIATE THAT MY COLLEAGUES DID SOME AMENDMENTS TO GET US TO A PLACE WHERE I THINK THERE IS SOME, THERE WAS SOME FURTHER COMPROMISE TO BE HAD. AND, I VERY MUCH APPRECIATE THAT. PLEASE KNOW THAT AND THANK YOU. >> TRAIN FOR. >> THANK YOU COUNCIL PRESIDENT. I JUST WANT TO THANK EVERYONE FOR COMING TODAY AND BEING HERE. I KNOW THAT WE HAVE BEEN HERE FOR A LONG TIME SO I WILL NOT SPEAK FOR 10 MINUTES. I WILL DO TWO MINUTES. SOMEONE CAN TIME ME. I'M LOOKING AT THE CLOCK. I KNOW THAT ONE OF THE FRUSTRATING POINTS THAT I HAVE HAD ONE IS TRYING TO GET THROUGH THE TALKING POINTS SITES AT ENDICOTT STREET TO THE FACTS, TO BE HONEST. THAT WAS REALLY DIFFICULT, JUST TO UNDERSTAND BOTH POINTS. I KNOW THIS IS BEEN ON THE TABLE FOR A LONG TIME. TO HAVE THREE MONTHS TO GET CAUGHT UP AND UNDERSTAND EVERYTHING, UNDERSTAND BOTH SIDES, UNDERSTAND ALL OF THE LAYERS THAT HAPPEN, IT WAS TOUGH. SO, THAT I KNOW THAT THIS IS A TOUGH VOTE IN WHATEVER WAY THIS GOES. I HAVE SOMEONE IN THE AUDIENCE TODAY WHO I AM THE GOD. TO HIS TWO KIDS AND HE IS A LONGSHOREMAN. HE HAS RAISED HIS FAMILY ON THAT SALARY. AND, HIS FAMILY AND RAISED MY GOD KIDS TO BE THE PHENOMENAL MEN THAT THEY ARE TODAY. SO, I KNOW HOW IMPORTANT THIS IS. BUT, I ALSO WANT TO SAY, WHATEVER WAY THE VOTE GOES, THAT MY COMMITMENT AS THE CHAIR OF THE SELECT COMMITTEE FOR THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, WE ARE GOING TO BE LOOKING OBVIOUSLY INTO WAYS AND WORKING WITH THE BOARD TO MITIGATE INTENTIONALLY THE IMPACT AND JUST MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE PROTECTING OUR INDUSTRIAL LANDS. I THINK IT IS INCREDIBLY IMPORTANT TO OUR CITY. I GET IT, I KNOW THAT WE ARE A DEEP WATER PORT, HOW IMPORTANT THAT IS. I SAID THAT OBVIOUSLY IN COMMITTEE THAT I WAS SITTING IN FOR THIS ORIGINAL NUMBER WHEN IT WAS INTRODUCED IN THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND GOVERNANCE, HOW WE ARE A , ON'S REPORT. 70% OF THE PRODUCTS THAT COME HERE GO THROUGH US TO GET TO OTHER NETWORKS ACROSS THE COUNTRY. WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE TOP SEVEN PORTS, WE ARE THE NUMBER SEVEN BUT YOU LOOK AT THE OTHER PORTS, A LOT OF THEM ARE THE DESTINATION PORT. THEY CAN SUPPORT A LOT OF THE PRODUCTS THAT COME THERE. UNDERSTANDING THE IMPORTANCE OF OUR PORTS. NO MATTER WHICH WAY THIS GOES, AS THE CHAIR OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN COMMITTEE, I WILL BE DEDICATED TO MAKING SURE THAT WE CONTINUE TO PROTECT OUR INDUSTRIAL LANDS AND YOU HAVE THAT COMMITMENT FROM ME ON THE RECORD AS WELL AND ALSO IN FRONT OF THE GENTLEMAN HERE, WHO I IN THE GUT. TO THOSE HIS TWO KIDS AS WELL. THANK YOU. >> COUNCILMEMBER SAKA. >> THANK YOU MADAME COUNCIL PRESIDENT. I WANT TO THANK EVERY PERSON FOR BEING HERE TODAY . EVERYONE IN THE ROOM CURRENTLY, DWINDLING NUMBERS, AS EXPECTED, WITH FIVE HOURS INTO THIS THING . BUT, EARLIER, WHEN WE STARTED, IT WAS STANDING ROOM ONLY. I DO, AGAIN, WANT TO ESPECIALLY APPRECIATION AND GRATITUDE TO EVERYONE FOR CARVING OUT TIME TO BE HERE TODAY. IT IS IMPORTANT, YOUR FEEDBACK AND PERSPECTIVE IS IMPORTANT. THIS PROPOSAL IS ABOUT PEOPLE. PEOPLE IN THE ROOM, MANY PEOPLE IN THE ROOM HERE, I HAPPEN TO KNOW PERSONALLY. I KNOW YOU BECAUSE OUR KIDS PLAY ON THE SAME SOCCER TEAMS. THEY PLAY ON THE SAME SOFTBALL TEAMS. SOME OF YOU EVEN HAVE COACHED MY KIDS IN VARIOUS SPORTS. OUR KIDS GO TO THE SAME SCHOOLS IN SOME CASES. I'M NOT PARTICULARLY RELIGIOUS ANYMORE. I DON'T PRACTICE MY BORN INTO RELIGION, OR ANY RELIGION, FOR THAT MATTER, BUT, IF I HAD, I SUSPECT THAT MANY OF US WOULD BE WORSHIPING TOGETHER IN OUR COMMUNITY. I KNOW MANY OF YOU WELL BECAUSE WE ARE PART OF THE SAME COMMUNITY. MANY OF YOU HAPPEN TO BE MY OWN CONSTITUENTS. I HAVE A DUTY TO YOU. AND, THIS IS THE AREA AT ISSUE HERE TODAY IS MY OWN CITY COUNCIL DISTRICT, DISTRICT ONE. IT IS AN AREA THAT I KNOW VERY WELL. HAD BASKETBALL SKILLS CLINICS, THERE IS A GYM, A BASKETBALL GYM IN THE BUILDING. HAD BASKETBALL SKILLS CLINICS FOR MY OWN KIDS. USED TO WORK AT THE ACROSS THE STREET ON THE OTHER SIDE OF FIRST AVENUE FROM THIS SPACE. WHENEVER, FOR ABOUT A YEAR, WHENEVER I WENT INTO THE OFFICE, I LOOKED ACROSS AND SAW THE SAME PROPERTY AT ISSUE. LIKE MANY OF YOU, OTHER MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC, I REGULARLY ATTEND VARIOUS GAMES AND EVENTS AT THE NEARBY STADIUMS. I'M GOING NEXT MONTH. MONSTER TRUCKS ARE IN TOWN. KIDS ARE GOING TO SEE GRAVE DIGGER AND EL TORO LOCO. IT IS ANOTHER EVENT I WILL BE THERE. WE CAN QUIBBLE ABOUT 5 MILLION PEOPLE A YEAR, WHO KNOWS HOW MANY PEOPLE ARE IN THE AREA. I DO KNOW A LOT. AT LEAST 1 MILLION. I'M VERY, VERY FAMILIAR WITH THE AREA. IT IS MY DISTRICT. VERY, VERY FAMILIAR WITH THE STAKEHOLDERS. MANY OF THEM ARE MY DIRECT CONSTITUENTS. THAT IS WHY I HAVE TAKEN GREAT PAINS TO TRY MY BEST TO DO THE WORK OF UNDERSTANDING THE ISSUES, UNDERSTANDING THE UNDERLYING CONCERNS. SEEKING TO ADDRESS THOSE CONCERNS TO THE FULL EXTENT POSSIBLE IS PART OF MY AMENDMENTS. THEREFORE, I THINK WE ULTIMATELY CREATED A THOUGHTFUL, BALANCED PACKAGE AS THE AMENDED RULE PRESENTS . BUT, A LOT OF WORK WENT INTO THAT. DOZENS AND DOZENS OF MEETINGS AND CALLS AND HUNDREDS OF EMAILS. THAT WAS FROM COMMUNITY. I APPRECIATE ALL OF IT. THAT SAID, I ALSO ACKNOWLEDGE THAT THERE HAVE BEEN SOME VERY PASSIONATE OPINIONS AND DIVERGENT VIEWS ON ALL SIDES, ESPECIALLY, AND INCLUDING, BY MY OWN DISTRICT CONSTITUENTS. PORT AND LONGSHORE WORKERS, MARITIME INDUSTRIAL TRADE WORKERS . MANY OF THEM LIVE IN DISTRICT 1, PARTICULARLY IN WEST SEATTLE. ALSO, THE VALLEY AS WELL BUT ESPECIALLY WEST SEATTLE AND RESIDENTS AND BUSINESSES, BUSINESS OWNERS IN AND OUT OF THE STADIUMS, INCLUDING DISTRICT 1 AND PIONEER SQUARE IN THE SODO AND OTHERS . I AM ACCOUNTABLE FOR PRODUCING RESULTS ACROSS THE CITY AS AN ELECTED OFFICIAL IN POLICY AREAS SPANNING FROM PUBLIC SAFETY, PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE AFFORDABLE HOUSING , YOU NAME IT. ANYTHING WITHIN THE CITY'S WILL HOUSE, I AM ACCOUNTABLE FOR. THAT ABILITY IS SOMETHING I DON'T RUN AWAY FROM, I RUN TOWARD. THAT IS HOW I LEAN. THAT SAID, I PAID CLOSEST ATTENTION TO MY CONSTITUENTS IN THE DISTRICT 1, WHO I AM DIRECTLY ACCOUNTABLE FOR AND TO. AND, I HAVE LISTENED, READ, RESOURCES FROM, MET WITH, TAKING TOURS OF THE IMPACTED AREA ALONGSIDE CONSTITUENTS ON ALL SIDES OF THE ISSUES, STRIVING HARD TO LEAVE NO STONE UNTURNED AS BEST AS I COULD, AT LEAST. AND, I AM GRATEFUL FOR THE INTENT AND PASSIONATE CARE AND CONCERNS FOR THIS IMPORTANT AREA OF OUR CITY. AND, AS THE OVEN STATED ADAGE GOES COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA REFER TO IT, REASONABLE MINDS DISAGREE. WE CAN DISAGREE . THE RATIONAL THOUGHT AND SOUND JUDGMENT, USING VARIOUS INTERVENTIONS, PEOPLE CAN ARRIVE AT DIFFERENT CONCLUSIONS ON THE SAME EXACT ISSUE AND IT CAN ENGENDER DIFFERENT FEELINGS ABOUT SOMETHING. I AM NOT HERE TO TELL ANYBODY HOW THEY SHOULD BE FEELING ABOUT ANY POLICY PROPOSAL. WE'VE HAD TOO MUCH OF THAT LATELY. SO, AGAIN, MY AMENDMENTS WERE INTENDED TO REFLECT THE STRONG VALUES, THE SUPPORT FOR THE POOR, THE MARITIME INDUSTRIAL SECTOR, FREIGHT AND CARGO MOBILITY, OPERATIONS MORE BROADLY. THEY ARE SO CRUCIAL TO OUR ECONOMY AND FOR THE WELL-BEING OF RESIDENTS AND SMALL BUSINESSES ALIKE. FROM A POLICY PERSPECTIVE, I APPRECIATE THAT THERE ARE MANY RISKS IN EVERY DECITHERE ARE MEDICATIONS WE CAN OPPOSE NOW AND SHOULD COMPOSE NOW AND CONTINUE TO REVIEW, REASSESS, REEVALUATE AS WE MOVE FORWARD. CIRCUMSTANCES CHANGE. THAT'S ALWAYS GOING TO BE THE CASE. I ALSO RELY ON MAKING DATA-DRIVEN DECISIONS WHILE WEIGHING THE POTENTIAL RISKS AGAINST THE POTENTIAL BENEFITS. WHILE NO ONE HAS THAT MAGICAL CRYSTAL BALL WHO CAN CHANNEL THE FUTURE, WE WORK FROM THE KNOWN DATA AND KNOWN EVIDENCE THAT WE HAVE AVAILABLE AT ANY GIVEN TIME IN ANY GIVEN MOMENT. AND, TODAY, I WOULD BE SUPPORTING THIS LEGISLATION. FOR ME, MY SUPPORT IS ABOUT THREE THINGS. IT IS ABOUT: AFFORDABLE HOUSING, REVITALIZING AN UNDERUTILIZED AREA TO HELP SPARK FURTHER ECONOMIC ACTIVITY IN THE AREA. AND, I THINK IT DOES A GOOD JOB OF PRESERVING VITAL OPERATIONS AND JOBS. THE AMENDED VERSION. WE HAVE AN AFFORDABILITY, AFFORDABLE HOUSING CRISIS IN OUR CITY. IT IS NO SECRET. ONE OF MY HIGHEST PRIORITIES IS TO ADDRESS THIS CRISIS HEAD ON BY SUPPORTING POLICIES AND PROJECTS TO QUICKLY BUILD MORE AFFORDABLE HOUSING. COUNCILMEMBER RINCK, CHALLENGE ACCEPTED. I WOULD ARGUE IT STARTS NOW . THIS PROPOSAL WOULD CREATE WORKFORCE HOUSING IN SMALL COMMERCIAL SPACES AND GENERATE GOOD PAYING UNION JOBS. AND, I BELIEVE ALL WITHOUT ANY MATERIAL ADVERSE IMPACT ON VITAL OPERATIONS. NOT NO IMPACT, WITHOUT MATERIAL ADVERSE IMPACT. A UNIQUE OPPORTUNITY HAS PRESENTED ITSELF HERE, ONE THAT WOULD ENABLE UP TO 990 UNITS OF WHICH 50% MUST BE BETWEEN 60 AND 90 AMI, WITHOUT A SINGLE DIME OF CITY INVESTMENT TO BRING THIS TO LIFE. I WANT TO THANK COUNCILMEMBER MOORE FOR ENSURING AS MUCH WITH THAT THOUGHT WILL START THE AMENDMENT. THIS IS A VERY DEFINED, NARROW AREA FOR HOUSING. AS I NOTED, I INTEND TO MAKE SURE THAT NO FURTHER HOUSING CAN BE DEVELOPED VIA ADDITIONAL AMENDMENTS DURING OUR COMP PLAN PROCESS. I ALSO NOTE THAT THERE ARE SMALL, MICRO-ENTREPRENEURS AND MAKERS TODAY WHO WOULD BE ABLE TO AFFORD THESE NEW UNITS, OF WHICH ABOUT 70% ARE WOMEN AND PEOPLE FROM BLACK AND BROWN AND ASIAN COMMUNITIES. THIS STRIKES ME AS A GOOD PROPOSAL TO HELP CENTER THOSE COMMUNITIES AND BRING FEDERAL WORKFORCE HOUSING. YOU KNOW I'M A FAN OF WHAT OTHER CITIES ARE DOING . CERTAIN THINGS IN POLICY DISCUSSIONS WE HAVE HERE IN SEATTLE MIGHT BE A MATTER OF FIRST IMPRESSION FOR OUR CITY BUT THEY ARE NOT, ALMOST NEVER A MATTER OF FIRST IMPRESSION IN TERMS OF A POLICY PROPOSAL THAT HAS BEEN PROPOSED SOMEWHERE THROUGHOUT THE COUNTRY AND SOMEWHERE THROUGHOUT THE WORLD. YOU PROBABLY KNOW I FOCUS HEAVILY AND TRY TO UNDERSTAND BEST PRACTICES AND OTHER JURISDICTIONS, WHAT HAS HAPPENED AND OTHER CITIES WE KNOW SUCH AS BIRMINGHAM, PORTLAND, DENVER. THERE IS A MAKERS HOUSING RIGHT NEXT TO AN INDUSTRIAL AND LOFTS. I WAS JUST IN SAN FRANCISCO A FEW WEEKS AGO NEAR THE STADIUMS AND INDUSTRIAL AREAS. I SAW WHAT APPEARS TO BE HOUSING. SO, AFFORDABLE HOUSING IS MY TOP CONCERN AND REASON FOR SUPPORTING THIS BILL, PARTICULARLY GIVEN IT WOULD AUTHORIZE THE CONSTRUCTION OF CRITICALLY NEEDED WORKFORCE HOUSING IN PARALLEL. I THINK WE ARE ABLE TO ADD SOME SOLID SAFEGUARDS TO DRAW A FIRM LINE IN THE SAND TO MAKE CRYSTAL CLEAR THAT THIS IS IT AND TO MAKE IT MORE DIFFICULT TO DO ON A GOING FORWARD BASIS AND PROVIDE NEEDED CLARITY AND CERTAINTY TO ALL COMMUNITIES. THERE IS TALK OF THE TRAFFIC ROUTES AND ALL OF THIS STUFF IS CONFUSING. I UNDERSTAND IT. I WAS CONFUSED AT FIRST. THE STREET DESIGNATIONS CAN MAKE YOUR HEAD SPIN. FREIGHT CORRIDORS, MAJOR TRUCK STREETS. JUST TO NAME A FEW. IT IS TOTALLY UNDERSTANDABLE, IN MY VIEW, WHY THERE ARE WIDELY DIVERGENT CONCERNS AND POTENTIAL IMPACTS ON FIRST AVENUE SOUTH. I SHARE ANY CONCERNS THAT COULD FURTHER HAMPER CARGO MOBILITY TO THE PORT AND ANYTHING THAT COULD REDUCE JOBS. I DON'T THINK, I DON'T THINK THIS RISES TO THE LEVEL. THE EVIDENCE THAT I HAVE SEEN DOESN'T GIVE ME THAT CONCERN , PERSONALLY. WHO KNOWS WHAT CAN HAPPEN IN THE FUTURE AND WHO CAN PREDICT WHAT MIGHT HAPPEN ON A GOING FORWARD BASIS. BUT, I THINK IT IS INCUMBENT ON ALL OF US TO MONITOR AS DEVELOPMENTS ARISE. I KNOW I WILL BE CLOSELY BECAUSE THIS IS MY, AGAIN, THIS IS MY DISTRICT. FINALLY, I JUST NOTE THAT WE LEARNED FROM A COUPLE OF MY COLLEAGUES, COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS , COUNCILMEMBER KETTLE, OTHERS ABOUT THE UNIQUE HISTORY HERE , NOT JUST FROM A COUPLE YEARS AGO WHEN THIS WAS MOST RECENTLY ADDRESSED , BUT ALSO FROM ABOUT 10 YEARS AGO. 2015 OR 2016, IF I RECALL CORRECTLY. AS WAS NOTED, BACK THEN, IT WAS A TOTALLY DIFFERENT PROPOSAL, TOTALLY DIFFERENT PLAN . THE SCOPE WAS WAY DIFFERENT. THE UNDERLYING PROPERTY, THIS IS THE SAME EXACT PROPERTY THAT WAS AT ISSUE IN 2016, WHEN CITY COUNCIL VOTED IN A DIVIDED VOTE 5-4 AGAINST ON A PROPOSAL THAT WOULD HAVE ALLOWED THE CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW ARENA TO POTENTIALLY BRING BACK THE SONICS. I REMEMBER THINKING , ACTUALLY, NO ONE APPEARED ONCE SERVING ON THE CITY COUNCIL AT THE TIME. I DELIVERED AT THE TIME USING A MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC PAYING ATTENTION TO WHAT IS GOING ON, CYNICALLY ENGAGED, I REMEMBER AT THE TIME THINKING THAT SEEMS LIKE A FAIR, RATIONAL THING TO DO. IT IS VERY SPECULATIVE TO SAY WHAT YOU WOULD HAVE DONE OR HOW YOU WOULD HAVE APPROACHED SOMETHING IN HINDSIGHT. AT THE TIME, THINKING I PROBABLY WOULD SUPPORT THAT. AND, IF I WOULD SUPPORT THAT, IF IT MEANT BRINGING THE SONICS, I'M GOING TO SUPPORT THIS LIMITED CONSTRUCTION FOR HOUSING IN THE MIDST OF AN AFFORDABLE HOUSING CRISIS. IF I THOUGHT THERE WAS ANY COMPELLING EVIDENCE SHOWING THAT THE OTHER IS IN CONSTRUCTION OF THIS PROJECT IN AN UNDERUTILIZED PART SODO WOULD BE DETRIMENTAL AND ANY MATERIAL RESPECT TO PORT OPERATIONS, ACTIVITY, OR JOBS, I WOULD ABSOLUTELY NOT SUPPORT THIS . ARE THERE RISKS AND IMPACTS THAT ARE NOT YET FORESEEN? CERTAINLY POSSIBLE. ABSOLUTELY. THAT IS WHY I WOULD LIKE TO CONTINUE TO PARTNER WITH THE PORT, LABOR ORGANIZATIONS, IRRESPECTIVE OF WHICH SIDE OF THE ISSUE YOU WILL LAND ON, AND OUR NEIGHBORS, DISTRICT 1, ON HOW TO ENHANCE SUPPORT TO INCREASE EFFICIENCIES AND GROWTH OF MARITIME, FREED, AND THE CARGO INDUSTRIES. THIS IS NOT THE END, THIS IS THE BEGINNING OF AN IMPORTANT POSITION THAT WE WILL CONTINUE TO HAVE. FOR THOSE REASONS, I WILL BE SUPPORTING THIS BILL TODAY. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. COUNCILMEMBER SOLOMON. GO AHEAD. >> THANK YOU. I'M GOING TO KEEP THIS VERY BRIEF. THERE'S A LOT OF THINGS THAT HAVE BEEN SET ON THE DAYS TO THE FOLKS OUT THERE REGARDING THEIR THOUGHT PROCESS FOR THEIR PRIORITIES. AND, I FEAR A LOT OVER THE ROOMS. I'M NOT GOING TO TAKE TOO LONG. I WANT TO MAKE A COUPLE OF IN RICHMOND. I WANT TO ACKNOWLEDGE THE PORT. I WANT TO THANK YOU FOR THE TOUR WE HAD ON FRIDAY. THANK YOU FOR TAKING ME OUT TO TERMINAL FIVE AND SHOWED ME THE INCREDIBLE OPERATION OUT THERE. I HAD NO IDEA JUST WHAT KIND OF THROUGHPUT YOU ALL HAVE. AND AS HAS BEEN SAID, IF I THOUGHT IN ANY WAY THAT ANY PROJECT, I DON'T CARE WHAT PROJECT, IF ANY PROJECT WOULD BE THREATENING TO FREIGHT MOBILITY OR PORT OPERATIONS OR OUR MARITIME ECONOMY, WOULD IT BE FOR IT. I REALIZE THAT IT IS FAR TOO IMPORTANT. I ALSO RECOGNIZE THAT I HAVE FRIENDS IN THE ROOM REALLY WANT A MAKERS DISTRICT. THEY REALLY WANT THIS PROJECT IN SODO. AND, AS I HAVE SAID BEFORE, IT SEEMS THIS HAS BEEN PUTTING CITY COUNCIL AGAINST PORT, LONGSHOREMEN AGAINST BUILDERS COUNCIL MEMBERS AGAINST COUNCILMEMBERS. REGARDLESS OF HOW THIS SHAKES OUT, I DON'T SEE THIS AS THE END OF THE PROCESS. I SEE IT AS A CONTINUATION OF A PROCESS. A CONTINUATION OF THE COLLABORATION BECAUSE I DO BELIEVE THAT THERE IS A WIN-WIN FOR EVERYBODY INVOLVED. I DO BELIEVE THAT IT IS NOT EITHER OR. IT CAN BE BOTH A AND. SO, I DO BELIEVE IT IS POSSIBLE. REGARDLESS OF HOW THIS SHAKES OUT, IN THE WORDS OF THE BEATLES, "COME TOGETHER." WE CAN COME TOGETHER TO FIGURE THIS OUT. WE CAN COME TOGETHER TO MAKE IT WORK. LET'S DO THAT. LET'S COME TOGETHER. THANK YOU. >> COUNCILMEMBER MOORE. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH COUNCIL PRESIDENT. I WILL BE BRIEF IN MY REMARKS. I WANT TO THANK EVERYBODY WHO CAME HERE TODAY AND ALL THE PEOPLE WHO LEFT. I WANT TO THANK THE PORT FOUR OUTREACH AND FOR THE TOUR AND FOR FILLING ME IN. I WANT TO THANK THE PROPONENTS OF 242 AND THE MAKERS AND BUILDERS, THE CARPENTERS, ALL THE PEOPLE WHO HAVE OFFERED THEIR PERSPECTIVE AND OPPORTUNITY TO TOUR THE DISTRICT. I THINK IT IS CLEAR THAT I DON'T PRETEND TO LIKE THIS LEGISLATION, I DON'T PRETEND TO LIKE THE WAY THIS PROCESS HAS PLAYED OUT. WE CAN BE BETTER, WE CAN DO BETTER. WE ARE A WORK IN PROGRESS. AND, I DON'T WANT TO DOWNPLAY THE LEGITIMATE CONCERNS THAT I HEARD FROM THE PORT. I KNOW THAT I AM STEPPING INTO THIS, THIS HAS A LONG HISTORY AND I FEEL LIKE I'M STEPPING INTO THE CONFLICT IN NORTHERN IRELAND OR SERBIA, YOU KNOW, BROTHER AGAINST BROTHER, SISTER AGAINST SISTER AND IT IS AN UNCOMFORTABLE PLACE TO BE. AND, I THINK THE AMENDMENTS THAT I BROUGHT MADE IT CLEAR THAT I SHARE SOME OF THOSE CONCERNS AND ATTEMPTED TO ADDRESS THEM WITHIN THE CONFINES OF THE LEGISLATION AND I WANT TO SAY A TREMENDOUS THANK YOU TO MY COLLEAGUE, COUNCILMEMBER SAKA, FOR ALL THE AMENDMENTS THAT YOU BROUGHT PARTICULARLY THE CLAUSES AND I VERY MUCH ON WITH YOU AND MAKING SURE THAT WE DON'T CONTINUE TO MAKE PROMISES THAT WE BREAK OR THAT WE DON'T NECESSARILY HOLD TO IN A WAY THAT PEOPLE UNDERSTAND US TO HAVE MADE THEM AND THAT WE CONTINUE TO MAINTAIN INDUSTRIAL LAND. THAT IS INCREDIBLY IMPORTANT. BUT, I ALSO HAVE TO LOOK AT WHAT ARE THE OPPORTUNITIES THAT ARE PROVIDED HERE? WHAT I'M SEEING IS AN OPPORTUNITY TO PROVIDE A TREMENDOUS AMOUNT OF LIVING WAGE JOBS, UNION JOBS. I'M SEEING AN OPPORTUNITY TO PROVIDE JOBS FOR SMALL MAJORS AND SMALL BUSINESSES. I HAVE A SMALL BUSINESS IN MY DISTRICT, WHICH WOMEN'S INITIATIVE. THEY WORK WITH WOMEN FROM AFGHANISTAN. THEY WORK WITH WOMEN FROM SYRIA, THEY WORK WITH WOMEN FROM OTHER WAR-TORN NATIONS WHO COME HERE NOT BEING ABLE TO SPEAK A WORD OF ENGLISH, HAVING NEVER BEEN ABLE TO WORK OUTSIDE THEIR HOME. NOTHING IS GIVEN, WHICH THEY USUALLY COME HERE WITH IS BEING ABLE TO DO SO AND THEY WERE ABLE TO PUT THAT SKILL TO USE AND PROVIDE THESE WOMEN WITH JOBS, INDEPENDENCE, AND FUTURES. AND, THAT , THAT WORK IS THREATENED, REALLY, BY OUR CURRENT TRUMP ADMINISTRATION AND WE HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY HERE TO PROVIDE FOR THEM, TO HAVE A MAKERS DISTRICT, TO CONTINUE TO EXPAND, TO PROVIDE THE INCREDIBLE OPPORTUNITIES FOR THESE WOMEN. THAT IS JUST ONE EXAMPLE. THESE ARE THE TENSIONS THAT WE HAVE BEFORE US. IT REALLY ISN'T TRYING TO CHOOSE ONE OR THE OTHER . TRYING TO SEE HOW WE CAN FIND A MIDDLE GROUND. I KNOW IT DOESN'T FEEL LIKE THERE CAN BE MIDDLE GROUND. IT IS MY JOB TO TRY AND FIND IT. AT THE END OF THE DAY, WHAT THIS VOTING IN FAVOR OF THIS LEGISLATION IS VOTING IN FAVOR AND MORE UNION JOBS, CREATING MORE LIVING WAGE JOBS FOR UNION MEMBERS, FOR SMALL MAKERS, FOR PEOPLE OF COLOR, FOR WOMEN WHILE AT THE SAME TIME ATTEMPTING TO MAINTAIN JOBS AT THE PORT AND ATTEMPTING TO NOT ENCOURAGE FURTHER ON THAT IMPORTANT CAPACITY THAT IS SO CRITICAL TO THIS CITY, TO OUR COUNTY, AND TO OUR STATE. FOR THOSE REASONS, I WILL BE VOTING IN FAVOR. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU 2011. >> JUST WANTED TO RESPOND TO A COUPLE THINGS, THROUGH YOU, COUNCIL PRESIDENT, TO OUR COLLEAGUES, THAT COUNCILMEMBER SAKA AND COUNCILMEMBER MOORE SHARED. TO BOTH OF YOU, YOUR HEART IS IN THE RIGHT PLACE. I THINK THAT IF YOU HAD BEEN HERE A COUPLE YEARS AGO, LIKE AS WE WERE, THROUGH YOU, COUNCIL PRESIDENT TWO COUNCILMEMBER SAKA, AS WE WERE WALKING INTO THE HALL AFTER THE RECESS, I THOUGHT YOU STOLE MY SPEECH FROM TWO YEARS AGO. YOU DIDN'T, THOSE WERE YOUR OWN WORDS. FOR ME, THOSE WORDS RING HOLLOW TO COME BACK HERE WITHOUT A PROCESS THAT ENGAGES EVERYONE. SO, THAT FURTHER ENCROACHMENT, I ALREADY MADE THAT PLEDGE. I SAID WE ARE GOING TO HAVE THESE THREE HOTELS AND THAT IS IT. AND FOR US TO COME BACK AND SAY BUT A LITTLE IT'S NOT GOING TO HAPPEN AGAIN, FEELS HOLLOW TO ME. WHAT IS NEXT, INTERBAY? THERE WAS WATER LESS THAN 100 YEARS AGO. VERY SMALL MANUFACTURING SPACE THAT THE PORT OWNS. I WANT THAT LAND TO BUILD THE MEMORIAL MAGNOLIA PAGE. I SURE THAT BECAUSE WE HAVE ALREADY BEEN THROUGH THIS DANCE THAT BOTH OF YOU JUST EXPLAINED. THIS PROPOSAL, THROUGH YOU COUNCIL PRESIDENT. >> ROBERTS RULES DOESN'T HAVE A RESTROOM OPTION, JUST NOTING. PLEASE KINDLY REFRAIN FROM ADDRESSING YOUR COLLEAGUES. YOU ARE WELCOME TO MAKE YOUR POINT AND WE WILL ALL HEAR IT. >> YES, MEMBERS WILL KINDLY RETURN ADDRESS ALL REMARKS THROUGH THE CHAIR. >> THROUGH YOU TO MY COLLEAGUES. YOUR RECOLLECTION OF 2016 I HEAR THAT. THIS VOTE WOULD BRING THAT BACK. THE JOBS THAT WERE CREATED TO BUILD THE STADIUM, NEVER LOST. IN FACT, REBUILDING CLIMATE PLEDGE ARENA IS WHAT LED TO CONSTRUCTION AND BUILDING TRADES OUT OF THE PANDEMIC RESTRICTIONS FASTER THAN IN OTHER PLACES BECAUSE FOLKS LIKE MONTY AND BILLY GOT DOWN TO WORK AND MAKE SURE THAT THE SITE COULD OPEN FASTER WITH GOOD AND SAFE PROCEDURES THAT WERE THEN USED STATEWIDE. AND, BECAUSE OF THEIR WORK, WE HAVE AN NBA LOCKER ROOM TODAY. THIS WOULD CHANGE. THIS BILL BEFORE US DOESN'T CHANGE THAT. I SEE WHERE I BELIEVE BOTH OF YOU ARE COMING FROM. IT IS THE SAME POSITION I WAS IN. I THINK WE ARE REALLY CLOSE TOGETHER, IT IS JUST WE HAVE A SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVE. THANK YOU FOR YOUR ENGAGEMENT. THAT IS ALL, COUNCIL PRESIDENT. >> THANK YOU, EVERYBODY, FOR YOUR COMMENTS. I PUT THIS FORWARD BECAUSE I THOUGHT IT WAS THE RIGHT THING TO DO FOR LOW INCOME PEOPLE, SMALL BUSINESSES, AND FAMILIES, AND ALSO THE VIBRANCY OF THE CITY. THE PEOPLE THAT ARE BEING LEFT OUT BY THE SKYROCKETING ON AFFORDABILITY IN THIS CITY. THIS IS A PROPOSAL THAT WE HAVE ON THE TABLE TO ADDRESS SOME OF THOSE ISSUES AND CONTINUE TO WORK TOGETHER ON SOME OF THE BIGGER ISSUES THAT FACE US. I BELIEVE WHAT IS REALLY ON THE TABLE IS THE THREATS THAT WILL COME FROM THINGS LIKE TRADE POLICY, FROM , LET ME JUST START AGAIN. I THANK EVERYBODY FOR HAVE SAID. YOU'VE MADE MY POINTS ALREADY. I WANT TO THANK THE PARTNERS IN THE ROOM. THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR ATTENTION. AND, I APPRECIATE EVERYBODY'S ATTENTION IN STAYING HERE FOR SO LONG. I BELIEVE OUR HEARTS ARE IN THE RIGHT PLACE. WE FILTER INFORMATION DIFFERENTLY AND WE COME TO DIFFERENT CONCLUSIONS. UNLESS THERE ARE ANY OTHER COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS, I WOULD LIKE TO CALL FOR A VOTE. I'M SEEING NONE. CLERK, PLEASE CALL THE ROLL ON COUNCIL BILL 120933. >> COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS. >> ABSOLUTELY NOT. >> TRAIN FOR. >> YES. >> COUNCILMEMBER KETTLE. >> NO. >> COUNCILMEMBER MOORE. >> AYE. >> COUNCILMEMBER RINCK. >> NO. >> COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA. >> AYE. >> COUNCILMEMBER SAKA. >> AYE. >> COUNCILMEMBER SOLOMON. >> AYE. >> COUNCIL PRESIDENT NELSON. >> AYE. >> SIX IN FAVOR, THREE OPPOSED. >> THE MOTION CARRIES, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I WILL SIGN THE LEGISLATION. THANK YOU, EVERYBODY. >> TIME ?