2:03. I'M SARA NELSON, CHAIR OF THE COME TEAM. WILL THE CLERK PLEASE CALL THE ROLL. >> COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA? >> PRESENT (. >> COUNCILMEMBER SOLOMON? >> HERE. >> COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH? >> HERE'S. >> COUNCILMEMBER KETTLE? >> HERE. >> CHAIR NELSON? >> PRESENT. >> FIVE PRESENT. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU TO EVERYONE WHO HAS JOINED US TODAY, INCLUDING COUNCILMEMBER MOORE AND COUNCILMEMBER RINCK. WE HAVE A REALLY FULL AGENDA AND HAVE TO GET THROUGH THE FIRST THING ON OUR AGENDA IS RESOLUTION 32170, GRANTING CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL TO THE DOWNTOWN SEATTLE ASSOCIATION TO INSTALL, MAINTAIN, AND OPERATE INTERACTIVE KIOSKS DOWNTOWN. NEXT WE'LL HAVE A PRESENTATION AND DISCUSSION OF THE DRAFT DIGITAL TERM PERMIT COUNCIL BILL FOR THOSE KIOSKS AND THEN FINALLY, A POSSIBLE VOTE ON COUNCILMEMBER MOORE'S COUNCIL BILL 120978 RELATING TO THE CODE OF ETHICS AND THERE ARE FIVE AMENDMENTS TO THAT LEGISLATION. SO I WANTED TO GET THROUGH THE FIRST TWO ITEMS RELATIVELY QUICKLY AND LEAVE THE BULK OF OUR MEETING TIME TO DISCUSS THE LAST ITEM. SO JUST FOR HOW THINGS WILL GO DURING DISCUSSION AND I MIGHT REPEAT THIS AGAIN LATER, BUT WHEN DISCUSSING THE ITEMS ON THE AGENDA, I'LL RECOGNIZE NONCOMMITTEE MEMBERS AFTER STANDING COMMITTEE MEMBERS HAVE HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO ASK THEIR QUESTIONS AND PROVIDE THEIR COMMENTS WITH THE EXCEPTION OF COUNCILMEMBER MOORE WHEN WE'RE DISCUSSING THE ETHICS LEGISLATION BECAUSE SHE'S THE AUTHOR OF THE COUNCIL BILL. THAT PROVIDES AN OPPORTUNITY TO ANSWER DIRECT QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS ABOUT THAT PIECE OF LEGISLATION. THEN IF COUNCILMEMBERS HAVE FOLLOW-UP COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS FOR OUR PRESENTERS, I ASK THAT YOU RAISE YOUR HAND TO BE RECOGNIZED INSTEAD OF ENGAGING IN A BACK AND FORTH WITH PRESENTERS. WITH THAT, IF THERE'S NO OBJECTION, THE AGENDA WILL BE ADOPTED. HEARING NO OBJECTION, THE AGENDA IS ADOPTED. WE'LL NOW PROCEED TO OUR HYBRID PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD. CLERK, HOW MANY SPEAKERS ARE SIGNED UP TODAY? >> CHAIR, WE HAVE 49 IN PERSON AND WE HAVE 15 REMOTE. >> WE'LL GIVE EVERYBODY ONE MINUTE TO SPEAK. MY INTENTION WAS TO PROVIDE UP TO AN HOUR OF PUBLIC COMMENT. THAT LEAVES AN HOUR LEFT AT THE END OF OUR MEETING. COUNCIL BILL C4 STATES TOTAL PUBLIC COMMENT PERIODS SHALL NOT EXCEED 20 MINUTES UNLESS EXTENDED AT THE DIRECTION OF THE PRESIDING OFFICER. IT IS COMMON PRACTICE TO EXTEND THAT PUBLIC COMMENT, BUT AGAIN, WE DO HAVE A TIME -- THIS IS A SCHEDULED TWO-HOUR MEETING AND WE DO HAVE A TIME LIMIT AT THE END OF THE MEETING. SOME COUNCILMEMBERS HAVE TO GET TO SOME OTHER THINGS. WE WILL BE -- THAT IS HOW WE WILL BE PROCEEDING WITH PUBLIC COMMENT. AGAIN, JUST A REMINDER THAT DISRUPTIONS DURING PUBLIC COMMENT OR SPEAKING BEYOND THE ALLOTTED TIME SIMPLY TAKES UP TIME FOR OTHER SPEAKERS TO HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE THEIR COMMENT. ALL RIGHT. SO DO YOU HAVE THE LIST, CLERK, READY TO GO? WE'LL DO ALTERNATING TEN IN PERSON, TEN REMOTE AND THE TIME IS NOW 2:07. SO PUBLIC COMMENT WILL CONTINUE FOR AN HOUR UNTIL 3:07 UNLESS WE END EARLIER. >> I'LL CALL ON SPEAKERS IN THE ORDER THEY SIGNED UP STARTING WITH IN-PERSON PUBLIC COMMENTERS. SPEAKERS WILL HAVE ONE MINUTE. WHEN YOU HEAR THE CHIME, YOU'LL HAVE TEN SECONDS LEFT. IF YOU EXCEED THAT TIME, YOUR MICROPHONE MAY BE CUT OFF. IF YOU'RE OFFERING REMOTE COMMENT, PLEASE MAKE SURE TO PRESS STAR 6 TO UNMUTE YOURSELF. WITH THAT, CAN WE GET NUMBERS 1 THROUGH 10 DOWN TO THE FRONT PLEASE. THANK YOU. >> GOD BLESS AMERICA. ONE MINUTE IS BETTER THAN 30 SECONDS. MY DIRTY FASCIST PIG. MY NAME IS ALEX TSIMERMAN. I HAVE 60 DAY FOR TRESPASSES FIVE TIMES YOU PROSECUTE ME. MY QUESTION TO YOU, COUNCIL, YOU KNOW WHAT THIS MEAN, ACCOUNTABILITY. I'M TOTALLY CONFUSED. SO I CANNOT UNDERSTAND WHAT THIS MEAN WORD ACCOUNTABILITY. YOU GIVE ME 18 TRESPASSES FOR MY RIGHT SPEAK FOR TWO MINUTE OR ONE MINUTE BUT TWO DAYS AGO COUPLE DOZEN PEOPLE TOTALLY DESTROY EVERYTHING, CONSTITUTION AND EVERYTHING, AND YOU COUNCIL NELSON, VERY QUIET. YOU NEVER QUIET WHEN I SPEAKING. WHAT DOES -- WHAT DOES YOU CHOICE TO UNKIND PEOPLE DIFFERENT FROM ANOTHER BECAUSE COUNCIL SOLVENT, SAME FASCIST LIKE YOU. >> THANK YOU. CAN WE GET -- >> COUNCIL PRESIDENT NELSON AND MEMBERS OF SEATTLE CITY COUNCIL, MY NAME IS RACHEL SNELL. I'M TESTIFYING PROUDLY AGAINST THE PROPOSAL TO ROLL BACK RENTERS AND ETHICS PROTECTIONS AT A TIME WHEN VOTERS ALREADY FEEL DIVIDED FROM THEIR ELECTED OFFICIALS. ROLLING BACK ETHICS PROTECTIONS WILL INCREASE A LACK OF TRUST IN YOUR CONSTITUENTS. YOU'VE HEARD HUNDREDS OF TESTIMONIES AND PROTESTS AND CHANTS THAT YOU NOT GO AGAINST THE WILL OF THE PEOPLE, PEOPLE THAT ELECTED YOU TO OFFICE. WHY CHANGE A SYSTEM THAT'S WORKED FINE FOR DECADES? IF YOU DISREGARD THE NEEDS OF CONSTITUENTS, THE VOICES WILL BECOME LOUDER BEYOND THESE CHAMBERS. IF YOU DON'T WANT PEOPLE ENGAGING IN DISRUPTIVE BEHAVIOR IN CITY HALL, DON'T ENGAGE IN DISRUPTIVE BEHAVIOR BY UNROLLING ETHICS PROTECTIONS. IF YOU DO, THE JOKE'S GOING TO BE ON YOU. >> WHENEVER YOU'RE READY. >> GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME'S EDDIE LYNN. I'M A PROUD BEACON HILL RENT. TRUST IN GOVERNMENT IS AT AN ALL TIME LOW. WE SHOULD BE RESTORING TRUST IN LOCAL GOVERNMENT BY STRENGTHENING OUR ETHICS RULES. I'VE SPOKEN WITH HUNDREDS OF DISTRICT 2 RESIDENTS AND FOLKS ACROSS THE CITY RECENTLY. NOT A SINGLE ONE WHO HAS HEARD OF THIS PROPOSAL SUPPORTS IT. OUR CURRENT SYSTEM IS DESIGNED TO UPHOLD STATUS QUO FOR THE WEALTHY. ALLOWING COUNCILMEMBERS WHO ARE LANDLORDS AND BUSINESS OWNERS TO VOTE ON LEGISLATION IN THEIR OWN FINANCIAL INTERESTS FURTHER DISENFRANCHISES RENTERS, WORKERS, AND MARGINALIZED COMMUNITIES. WE MUST MAINTAIN OUR CURRENT STRONG ETHICAL STANDARDS. TRUMP AND HIS CRONIES ARE ENGAGED IN UNPRECEDENTED CORRUPTION. WE SHOULD BE HOLDING THE LINE, NOT MAKING IT EASIER FOR CORRUPTION TO HAPPEN HERE, TOO. PLEASE VOTE NO ON ROLLING BACK ETHICS RULES AND STAND UP FOR THE PEOPLE AND GOOD GOVERNANCE IN OUR CITY. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. ] CROWD CHANTING ] >> NEXT PERSON COME ON DOWN, NUMBER 4, PLEASE. >> GOOD AFTERNOON, COUNCILMEMBERS. MY NAME IS CHRIS JOHNSTON AND I'M A MID SUPERVISOR AT DOWNTOWN SEATTLE ASSOCIATION, METROPOLITAN IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT. I'M HERE TO VOICE STRONG SUPPORT FOR BRINGING IKE DIGITAL KIOSKS TO DOWNTOWN SEATTLE. THESE KIOSKS WILL DRAMATICALLY IMPROVE WAY FINDING, THE INTERACTIVE REALTIME INFO WILL BE BENEFICIAL FOR ALL. THE 108,000 DOWNTOWN RESIDENTS, 335,000 DOWNTOWN WORKERS, AND 9.72 MILLION ANNUAL VISITORS. IN 2024 MID AMBASSADORS PROVIDED 50,000 CONCIERGE SERVICE INTERACTIONS. KIOSKS WILL CONNECT PEOPLE TO LOCAL BUSINESSES, EVENTS, AND CULTURAL SPOTS, DRIVING FOOT TRAFFIC IN SUPPORT OF A DOWN ECONOMY. I URGE YOU TO SUPPORT THE INSTALLATION OF IKE KIOSKS TO SUPPORT AN EVEN MORE WELCOMING AND INVITING CITY FOR ALL. >> THANK YOU. [ CROWD CHANTING ] >> GO AHEAD, PLEASE. PLEASE BEGIN. >> GOOD AFTERNOON. I'M KURT PAINTER AND I REPRESENT LOCAL SEATTLE. WE'RE A LOCAL SIGNAGE BUSINESS. WE HAVE TRIED UNSUCCESSFULLY TO ENTER OUR OWN PROPOSAL FOR DIGITAL SIGNAGE KIOSK IN SEATTLE. DESPITE BEING IGNORED BY THE DOWNTOWN SEATTLE ASSOCIATION, THE MAYOR'S OFFICE AND YOUR OWN OFFICE DESPITE REPEATED ATTEMPTS. THE OVERWHELMING MAJORITY OF SEATTLITES OPPOSE THIS CONCEPT. THE TECHNOLOGY IS ANTIQUATED TO SAY THE LEAST. WAY FINDING IS CONTENT THAT MIGHT HAVE BEEN RELEVANT IN 1999 BUT NOT 2025. I'M ASKING YOU TO STOP THIS IN ITS TRACKS OR AT LEAST PAUSE THE PROCESS SO A COMPETITIVE ENVIRONMENT CAN TAKE PLACE. IF YOU ARE GOING TO LITTER THE STREETS AND EYES OF SEATTLE, WHY NOT USE A TRULY LOCAL COMPANY AND PROVIDE TRULY LOCAL BENEFIT FOR SOMETHING THAT WILL BE HERE LONG AFTER EVENTS LIKE THE WORLD CUP. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. [ CROWD CHANTING ] >> PLEASE BEGIN. >> ARE YOU READY? [ CROWD CHANTING ] >> ARE YOU READY? WHENEVER YOU'RE READY. >> HI. MY NAME IS AUSTIN SHEA AND I'M A RENTER IN DISTRICT 7 AND I STAUNCHLY OPPOSE PROPOSED CHANGES TO THE ETHICS CODE THAT WILL UNDERMINE THE TRUST BETWEEN THE COUNCIL AND ITS CONSTITUENTS. YOU ARGUE THE PURPOSE OF THE BILL IS TO ENSURE EVERY DISTRICT HAS REPRESENTATION, BUT PASSING THIS LEGISLATION WITHOUT ALLOWING US TO VOTE ON IT DOES THE OPPOSITE. THE RECENT ACTIONS OF THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT HAVE BEGUN TO ERODE THE TRUST IN OUR INSTITUTIONS. WE KNOW TO KNOW THAT OUR CITY'S WITH US, NOT AGAINST US. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. NEXT UP? >> HI. HOWARD DALE, DISTRICT 7. SO THIS BILL NEEDS TO BE HELD BACK. IT SHOULD BE VOTED DOWN, BUT IT ABSOLUTELY HAS TO BE HELD BACK. ON MARCH 5th, 2025, THE SEEC SAID THERE ARE NUMEROUS EXAMPLES THAT SHOWED SEATTLE'S CURRENT ETHICS LAW IS A BIT OF AN OUTLIER. THAT WAS SIMPLY FALSE INFORMATION. 87% OF THE PEOPLE LIVING ON THE WEST COAST LIVE UNDER LOCAL OR STATE SYSTEM OF RECUSAL. ON A STATE LEVEL THE PERCENTAGE IS 100%. IT'S IN THE WASHINGTON CONSTITUTION SINCE 1879 THAT ALL STATE LEGISLATORS NEED TO RECUSE THEMSELVES, BUT YET SEATTLE WANTS A DIFFERENT RULE. ALSO YOU WERE LIED TO WHEN IT WAS SUGGESTED BY DIRECTOR BARNETT THAT EAST COAST CITIES OR MASSACHUSETTS HAS SOME DIFFERENT KIND OF RECUSAL LAWS. IN FACT, MASSACHUSETTS HAS HAD RECUSAL FOR ALL LEVELS OF GOVERNMENT FOR DECADES. SO AGAIN, YOU WERE FACED WITH A LOT OF MISINFORMATION. THE LAST AMENDMENT WAS JUST POSTED YESTERDAY AT 5:26. >> THANK YOU, SIR. >> YOU NEED TO WITHDRAW THIS LEGISLATION. >> THANK YOU. YOUR TIME IS UP. [ CROWD CHANTING ] >> ARE YOU READY? [ CROWD CHANTING ] >> WHENEVER YOU'RE READY. >> GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS MICHAEL WOODY, CHIEF STRATEGY OFFICER AT BUSINESS SEATTLE. I'M HERE TO VOICE STRONG SUPPORT FOR THE RESOLUTION 32170 AND THE TERM PERMIT ORDINANCE WHICH TOGETHER WOULD ADVANCE THE INSTALLATION OF INTERACTIVE WAY FINDING KIOSKS IN OUR DOWNTOWN CORE AND PARTICIPATING NEIGHBORHOOD BUSINESS DISTRICTS. THESE KIOSKS ARE A DYNAMIC TOOL TO ENHANCE THE VISITOR EXPERIENCE AND PROMOTE LOCAL BUSINESSES AND SUPPORT THE BROADER ECONOMIC RECOVERY. IN 2024 WE WELCOMED 40 MILLION VISITORS WHO SPENT OVER $8.8 BILLION IN KING COUNTY AND SUPPORTED OVER 68,000 LOCAL JOBS, BUT OUR RESEARCH SHOWS MANY VISITORS ARRIVAL WITHOUT A DETAILED PLAN AND THEY REALLY BOOK LODGING AHEAD OF TIME. SO THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY TO GET THEM AROUND THE COMMUNITY AND TO SPEND MONEY IN OUR LOCAL BUSINESSES. WE SEE THESE KIOSKS AS AN EXTENSION OF OUR VISITOR INFORMATION CENTERS, BRINGING TIMELY INFORMATION TO STREET LEVEL. >> THANK YOU. >> WE ENCOURAGE YOU TO SUPPORT THE LEGISLATION. >> THANK YOU. NUMBER 9 AND 10 AND THEN TEN REMOTE. >> THANK YOU. I'M NATURE FREEMAN SPEAKING IN OPPOSITION TO THE PROPOSED CHANGES IN THE ETHICS CODE. I AM A MEMBER OF THE BOARD OF WEIL AND OF SHARE BESIDES BEING A PARTICIPANT. I'VE ALSO BEEN A MEMBER OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF REAL CHANGE AND OF THE LOW INCOME HOUSING INSTITUTE. ALL OF THOSE AND EVERY OTHER NONPROFIT THAT I KNOW OF HAS A CODE OF ETHICS WHICH SAYS IF YOU HAVE AN INTEREST, A CONFLICT OF INTEREST, YOU HAVE TO DECLARE IT AND RECUSE YOURSELF. THE DECISIONS OF THE CITY COUNCIL AFFECT MORE PEOPLE THAN THE DECISIONS OF ANY OTHER NONPROFIT. THAT IS A REASON FOR STRENGTHENING YOUR ETHICS, NOT WEAKENING THEM. >> THANK YOU. [ CROWD CHANTING ] >> PLEASE APPROACH THE MIC. >> ALEX, PLEASE SIT DOWN. NUMBER 10, PLEASE COME UP. >> BY CHANTING IN BETWEEN SPEAKERS, YOU'RE ENGAGING IN DISRUPTIVE BEHAVIOR AND DELAYING THE ORDERLY PROGRESS WHICH IS NOT IN COMPLIANCE WITH COUNCIL RULES. [ CROWD >> NUMBER 10, COME DOWN, ELIZABETH STANTON. >> I WANT TO THANK THE COUNCIL FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK TODAY AND ALSO TO HISTORY OF RET FOR WAYNE BARNETT, BUT I ABSOLUTELY DISAGREE WITH HIM ON THIS ISSUE. YOU LOOK ACROSS THE COUNTRY AND WHAT WE'RE FACING TODAY IS THE GUARDRAILS ARE GONE. OUR CITIZENS ARE BEING YANKED OFF THE STREET, PEOPLE BORN HERE, AND IS NOT OUT OF THE COUNTRY TO PRISONS. WE CANNOT LET THIS GUARDRAIL GO. WE NEED TO KEEP THE ETHICS RULE IN PLACE. THANK YOU. T >> THANK YOU. >> WE WILL NOW PROCEED TO REMOTE COMMENT SPEAKERS. [ CROWD CHANTING ] GO AHEAD. >> NOW I'M GOING TO GO TO TEN REMOTE SPEAKERS. FIRST REMOTE CALLER IS GOING TO BE PETER CONDITT. PLEASE PRESS STAR 6 TO UNMUTE YOURSELF. THANK YOU. >> HELLO. MY NAME IS PETER CONDITT IN DISTRICT 6. FIRST, I ASK THAT YOU REJECT THE RESOLUTION TO PRIVATIZE SIDEWALK SPACE. THE NONCONSENSUAL KIOSKS ON SIDEWALKS THAT ARE ALREADY TOO NARROW WOULD STEAL OUR ATTENTION IN THE NAME OF CORPORATE PROFIT AND SHOULD BE BANNED. I ALSO ASK YOU REJECT BILL 109278. TELLING US YOU'RE GOING TO BENEFIT FINANCIALLY FROM A VOTE AND PROCEEDING TO TAKE THAT VOTE DOES NOT MAKE YOUR ACTION ETHICAL. IT MAKES YOUR MONEY GRAB MORE BRAZEN. I ASK THAT YOU REJECT IN PARTICULAR AMENDMENT 2B. IF AND WHEN LANDLORDS STAND TO BENEFIT FROM AN UPCOMING BILL, AMENDMENT 2B COULD REQUIRE RENTERS ON COUNCIL TO RECUSE THEMSELVES, SPECIFICALLY BECAUSE THEY ARE LESS FINANCIALLY IMPACTED THAN OTHER MEMBERS OF THE SAME PROFESSION, IE, COUNCILMEMBERS WHO OWN LAND. THIS WOULD GIVE COUNCILMEMBERS EVEN MORE POWER. SHAME ON YOU, CATHY MOORE. I HOPE THE COUNCIL REJECTS YOUR UNETHICAL BILL. >> PLEASE PROCEED WITH THE INSTRUCTIONS. >> NEXT REMOTE SPEAKER, MARSHALL BENDER. PLEASE PRESS STAR 6 TO UNMUTE YOURSELF. THANK YOU. >> HELLO. MY NAME IS MARSHALL BENDER AND I AM A RENTER IN DISTRICT 5. I'M TALKING TO THE COUNCIL TODAY TO ASK YOU TO DISAPPROVE OF THE PROPOSED ETHICS CODE AND VOTE DOWN HER BILL AS WELL AS COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH TO CHANGE THE LEGISLATION. LOWERING ETHICAL STANDARDS TO ALLOW ELECTED OFFICIALS LIKE YOURSELVES TO DO THEIR SELF-DEAL IS A TERRIBLE IDEA AND MOST LIKELY UNCONSTITUTIONAL IN WASHINGTON STATE. IF THIS CHANGE PASSES, COUNCILMEMBERS THAT OWN PROPERTY WILL BE ALLOWED TO DISCLOSE THE CONFLICT OF INTEREST RATHER THAN RECUSE THEMSELVES FROM VOTE AND THAT MEANS ALL YOU BIG MONEY GRABBERS, WHATEVER WILL HAVE ALL THE POWER AND EVERYBODY ELSE IN THE CITY WILL CONTINUE TO HAVE LESS. THAT'S NOT GOING TO SPELL OUT WELL FOR YOUR POLITICAL CAREER OR THE TRUST CONSTITUTE WENTS HAVE IN YOU. COUNCILMEMBER MOORE, I'D LIKE TO EXPRESS HOW DISAPPOINTING THIS IS YOU WOULD PROPOSE THIS AND HOW SHAMEFUL YOU ARE AS A POLITICIAN AND I LOOK FORWARD TO ALL OF YOU LOSING YOUR SEATS IN THE COMING ELECTION. THANK YOU SO MUCH. >> THANK YOU. >> WHY DON'T YOU READ THE NEXT THREE SPEAKERS. >> YES. THE NEXT THREE REMOTE SPEAKERS WILL BE COLEMAN MILLER, B.J. LAST, AND MICHAEL STEWART. COLEMAN MILLER, PLEASE PRESS STAR 6 TO UNMUTE YOURSELF. >> HI. MY NAME'S COLEMAN MILLER. I LIVE IN DISTRICT 2. THANKS FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK TODAY. I'M HERE TO DEMAND THE CITY COUNCIL REJECT COUNCILMEMBER MOORE'S CHANGE TO THE CONFLICT CAN OF INTEREST RULES. I RESPOND THE CITY COUNCIL FULL OF LANDLORDS AND BUSINESS OWNERS IS ALREADY UNREPRESENTATIVE OF OUR COMMUNITY. IF THE COUNCIL REALLY CARED ABOUT TRUE REPRESENTATION, THEY WOULD PASS CAMPAIGN FINANCE REFORMS TO ENSURE ALL SEATTLITES WOULD HAVE A FAIR CHANCE FOR OFFICE. THEY WOULD MAKE IT EASIER FOR THE MARGINALIZED TO MAKE THEIR VOICES HEARD AND MAKE IT IMPOSSIBLE FOR CERTAIN COUNCILMEMBERS TO CIRCUMVENT. INSTEAD THIS LEGISLATION HAS BEEN PUT FORTH THIS LEGISLATION WHICH ONLY SERVES TO GREASE THE WHEELS. IT'S TIME FOR THE CITY COUNCIL TO PUT ITS MONEY WHERE ITS MOUTH IS, NOT THE OTHER WAY AROUND. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. >> NEXT, B.J. LAST, CAN YOU PLEASE PRESS STAR 6 TO UNMUTE YOURSELF. THANK YOU. >> NAME IS B.J. LAST, A BALLARD HOMEOWNER AND I OPPOSE THE CHANGE TO ETHICS CODE WHICH LITERALLY NO ONE ACTUALLY SUPPORTS THIS OTHER THAN APPARENTLY SOME COUNCILMEMBERS. I ALSO OPPOSE THE RESOLUTION FOR THE KIOSKS. YOU ALL CALL THEM KIOSKS. THEY'RE NOT. THEY'RE BILLBOARDS. THEIR PRIMARY FUNCTION IS TO DISPLAY ADS. THAT'S WHAT THEY DO. THEY ARE BIG BRIGHT BILLBOARDS THAT THE DOWNTOWN SEATTLE ASSOCIATION WANTS TO PUT IN THE MIDDLE OF OUR SIDEWALKS AND MAKE OUR SIDEWALKS EVEN MORE LITTERING THEM A LOT, WHICH IS A NIGHTMARE FOR ANYONE THAT HAS MOBILITY ISSUES BECAUSE OUR SIDEWALKS ARE ALREADY REALLY CROWDED, A WAY TO MAKE THE CITY EVEN LESS FRIENDLY AND WELCOMING TO PEOPLE WITH MOBILITY ISSUES. THEY'RE ALSO REALLY, REALLY BRIGHT LIGHTS RIGHT AT EYE LEVEL. SO THEY'LL DISTRACT DRIVERS BECAUSE ADS ARE MEANT TO BE EYE CATCHING AND THIS CREATES ISSUES FOR PEOPLE SENSITIVE TO BRIGHT LIGHTS MAKING IT HARDER FOR THEM TO BE OUTSIDE IN THEIR OWN CITY. WI-FI IS NOT A BENEFIT THAT YOU HAVE TO STAND IN THE MIDDLE OF THE SIDEWALK TO ACCESS. IT'S NOT USEFUL. IF YOU CARE ABOUT DIGITAL -- >> NEXT THREE, WE'LL HAVE MICHAEL STEWART. [ CROWD CHANTING ] >> YOU ARE CONTINUALLY ENGAGING IN DISRUPTIVE BEHAVIOR. IT'S MAKING IT VERY DIFFICULT FOR US TO HEAR THE PEOPLE SPEAKING REMOTELY. >> NEXT THREE WE HAVE MICHAEL STEWART, RED REDD AND ALBERTO ALVAREZ. MICHAEL STEWART, PLEASE PRESS STAR 6 TO UNMUTE YOURSELF. THANK YOU. >> MY NAME IS MICHAEL STEWART. I SERVE AS EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF BOYER CHILDREN'S COMPANY, THE LARGEST PROVIDER OF EARLY SUPPORT FOR INFANTS AND TODDLERS IN SEATTLE. I HAVE A STRONG SUPPORT FOR THE BRIDGE PROGRAM, A VITAL RESOURCE FOR YOUNG CHILDREN WITH DEVELOPMENTAL DELAYS. THIS PROGRAM IS CURRENTLY FUNDED BY THE SWEETENED BEVERAGE TAX. THE BRIDGE PROGRAM IS FACING SIGNIFICANT FUNDING REDUCTIONS RECOMMENDED BY THE COMMUNITY ADVISORY BOARD FOR TRANSITION TO THE FAMILY, EDUCATION, PRESCHOOL AND PROMISE LEVY WHICH IS UP FOR RENEWAL. I STRONGLY URGE THE COUNCIL TO SUPPORT THIS RECOMMENDATION AND ENSURE EARLY LEARNING PROGRAMS LIKE BRIDGE ARE INCORPORATED INTO THE NEXT FETP LEVY. DOING SO WILL HELP SECURE SAVING LONG TERM FUNDING FOR THIS CRITICAL SERVICE. THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION OF THIS REQUEST AND CONTINUED COMMITMENT TO EARLY LEARNING IN OUR COMMUNITY. >> THANK YOU. NEXT WE'LL HAVE RED REDD, FOLLOWING RED REDD, ALBERTO ALVAREZ AND ELDON TA. PLEASE PRESS STAR 6 TO UNMUTE YOURSELF. THANK YOU. >> HELLO AND GOOD AFTERNOON, SEATTLE VOTERS. SB120978 ISN'T JUST BAD POLICY. IT'S A TRUMP-STYLE CORRUPTION, DISMANTLING OVERSIGHT, GUTTING ETHICS AND REIS RIGHTING THE RULES TO PROTECT POWER. THIS IS POLITICAL INSIDER TRAINING. IF A CORPORATION DID THIS, THE FEC WOULD BE AT THEIR DOOR, BUT WHEN POLITICIANS RIG THE SYSTEM FOR THEMSELVES, THEY CALL IT REFORM. WHO DOES THIS ACTUALLY HELP? NOT VOTERS DROWNING IN UNAFFORDABLE HOUSING, NOT WORKERS STRUGGLING TO MAKE ENDS MEET, JUST THE PEOPLE IN THIS ROOM, INSULATING THEMSELVES FROM CONSEQUENCES. IF YOU HAVE NOTHING TO HIDE, YOU SHOULDN'T FEAR ACCOUNTABILITY. PUSHING THIS BILL PROVES YOU DO. LET'S BE CLEAR. HISTORY WILL REMEMBER THIS VOTE. WILL YOU BE THE COUNCIL THAT STOOD FOR INTEGRITY OR THE ONE THAT LEGALIZED CORRUPTION? BILL CB 120978, KILL IT. IF YOU DON'T. THE PUBLIC WILL HOLD YOU ACCOUNTABLE AT THE BALLOT BOX, IN THE COURTS AND ON THE STREETS. THE CHOICE IS YOURS. [ CROWD CHANTING ] >> NEXT WE HAVE ALBERTO ALVAREZ. CAN YOU PLEASE PRESS STAR 6 TO UNMUTE YOURSELF. THANK YOU. [ CROWD CHANTING ] >> COUNCILMEMBER CATHY MOORE, YOU ARE NOT PROUD OF THIS BILL BECAUSE YOU HAVE NOT MENTIONED IT AT ALL IN ANY OF YOUR NEWSLETTERS. ROLLING BACK RULES OF ETHICS TO ALLOW FOR MORE CORRUPTION WOULD UNDERMINE WHAT LITTLE TRUST WE HAVE IN THIS COUNCIL. SELF-FUELING, SELF-INTEREST, AND SELF-RIGHTEOUSNESS WILL INFLICT SEVERE DAMAGE TO THE PROTECTIONS OF PUBLIC THAT WE ALL DEPEND ON. HARM AND CHAOS BY WEALTHY POLITICIANS IS NOT HYPOTHETICAL. IT IS A FACT. NO ONE ON THIS COUNCIL IS IMMUNE TO CORRUPTION. THIS LEGISLATION GOES FAR BEYOND ALLOWING A SMALL GROUP OF LANDLORDS TO LINE THEIR POCKETS. GOD ONLY KNOWS WHAT THE FUTURE CITY COUNCILS WOULD DO IF GIVEN FREE REIN TO ENRICH THEMSELVES. LEGALIZED CORRUPTION IS NOT SOMETHING THE PUBLIC HAS EVER VOTED FOR. COUNCILMEMBER CATHY MOORE, TAKE DOWN YOUR BILL. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. [ CROWD CHANTING ] >> NEXT CAN WE GET ELDON TA. CAN YOU PRESS STAR 6 TO UNMUTE YOURSELF. [ CROWD CHANTING ] >> STOP. >> HEY, ELDON, DO YOU MIND PRESSING STAR 6? >> YES. MY NAME IS ELDON, COO AT WELCOME PARK. >> WE CANNOT HEAR PEOPLE. >> WHO NEEDS TO BE THROWN OUT? SENATOR NELSON. >>. >> THEY ARE DISRUPTING BEHAVIOR AND DELAYING THE ORDERLY PROGRESS OF THIS MEETING ONLY TAKING TIME AWAY FROM SUBSEQUENT SPEAKERS. GO AHEAD. >> CAN YOU PLEASE PRESS STAR 6 TO UNMUTE YOURSELF. >> CAN YOU HEAR ME NOW? >> YES. >> MY NAME IS ELDON TAM, COO OF FRIENDS OF PARK. I'M CALLING TO SUPPORT THE DOWNTOWN DIGITAL KIOSK PROPOSALS. THE DIGITAL KIOSKS WILL BRING A MULTIPLE OF BENEFITS TO DOWNTOWN, INCREASE PUBLIC SAFETY, INCREASE PUBLIC AMENITIES, INCLUDING FREE WI-FI, SUPPORT LOCAL BUSINESSES WITH A DIRECTORY WITH A CENTER IN EACH LOCATION, SUPPORT THE ACTIVE DOWNTOWN WITH THE ARTS AND CULTURE COMMUNITY WITH SPACE RESERVED ON THESE PLATFORMS FOR THE CITY AND NONPROFIT TO PROMOTE THE WONDERFUL DOWNTOWN ACTIVITIES. THEY'RE ALSO SELF-FUNDING WITH NO CITY RESOURCES TO MAINTAIN OR OPERATE THEM. I THINK THESE ARE AN ESSENTIAL PART OF THE CONTINUED POSITIVE PERMITS IN DOWNTOWN AND I STRONGLY URGE APPROVAL OF THIS PROPOSAL. THANK YOU. NEXT IS JOSIE EBULHAR, A SOCIAL WORKER AND MEMBER OF LOCAL 889 AND MEMBER OF WORKERS STRIKE BACK. I HAVE SEEN FIRSTHAND HOW THESE PROTECTIONS HAVE SAVED CHILDREN FROM LIVING ON THE STREET AND KEPT FAMILIES TOGETHER. IT'S SO SHAMEFUL THESE SO-CALLED PROGRESSIVES ARE OBVIOUSLY SUPPORTING THIS LEGISLATION FOR YOUR OWN INTERESTS. ALMOST, IF NOT ALL OF THE COUNCILMEMBERS HAVE RECEIVED DOLLARS FROM CORPORATE PACS. THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF REALTORS HAVE GIVEN ALMOST $150,000 TO COUNCILMEMBERS HOLLINGSWORTH, AND RIVERA. MANY OF YOU WERE ELECTED WITH THE SUPPORT OF LABOR, BUT TO CALL YOURSELVES PRO LABOR WHILE TO ENTERTAIN THIS LEGISLATION IS A LIE AND SHOULD NEVER SEE A MINUTE IN THIS COUNCIL CHAMBER AGAIN. >> THANK YOU. >> PLEASE PROCEED. JUST GO AHEAD. >> NUMBERS 11 TO 20 FOR PUBLIC COMMENT. >> YOU'RE ENGAGING IN DISORDERLY CONDUCT WHICH INCLUDES ACCORDING TO COUNCIL RULE 11D1B OUTBURST FROM MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC NOT RECOGNIZED BY THE PRESIDING OFFICER FOR PUBLIC COMMENT AND DELAYING THE ORDERLY CONDUCT OR PROGRESS OF A PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD. >> CAN WE GET NUMBERS 11 TO 20 FOR PUBLIC COMMENTERS, PLEASE. COME ON DOWN, PLEASE. THANK YOU. >> HELLO. MY NAME IS CONNOR NASH. I'M A RENTER IN DISTRICT 3 AND I AM AGAINST CHANGES TO THE ETHICS CODES. IT SHOWS THAT YOU ALL ARE JUST CORRUPT BY CHANGING THESE ETHICS CODES AND FIGHTING AGAINST RENTERS' RIGHTS AND ALL OTHER CONFLICTS OF INTEREST THAT YOU ALL HAVE. THE CITY DOES NOT TRUST OUR CITY COUNCIL AND THIS IS MORE PROOF THAT WHY WE SHOULD NOT TRUST ANY OF YOU EXCEPT FOR A SELECT FEW OF OUR COUNCILMEMBERS ON HERE. YOU ARE NO BETTER THAN THE FASCIST TRUMP ADMINISTRATION WHO IS FLOUTING ETHICS RULES IN ORDER TO ENRICH THEMSELVES. YOU'RE NO BETTER THAN NANCY PELOSI AND MARJORIE TAYLOR GREENE WHO FLOUT ETHICS RULES TO ENRICH THEMSELVES THROUGH STOCKS. YOU ARE ALL TERRIBLE COUNCILMEMBERS AND ALL OF YOU SHOULD BE THROWN OUT FOR YOUR TERRIBLE POLICIES THAT YOU DO. YOU ALL ACTIVELY IGNORE CONSTITUENTS AND TRY TO ENRICH THEMSELVES AND YOU ALL NEED TO BE THROWN OUT AND FINALLY, I WILL USE MY LAST 15 MINUTES TO SAY WHEN RENTERS' RIGHTS ARE UNDER ATTACK, WHAT DO WE DO? WHEN RENTERS' RIGHTS ARE UNDER ATTACK, WHAT DO WE DO? WHEN RENTERS' RIGHTS ARE UNDER ATTACK, WHAT DO WE DO? [ CROWD CHANTING ]. >> WHEN RENTERS' RIGHTS ARE UNDER ATTACK, WHAT DO WE DO? [ CROWD CHANTING ]. >> NUMBER 12, COME ON DOWN, PLEASE. THANK YOU. >> MY NAME IS ELLEN SOLLIN, A 35 YEAR RESIDENT OF SEATTLE. I'M HERE TO OPPOSE THE DIGITAL KIOSKS. YOUR ORDINANCE HAS A NUMBER OF FATAL FLAWS YOU SHOULD BE MADE AWARE OF. ONE, THERE'S NO PRECONTACT RESTRICTIONS ON ADVERTISING CONTENT OR GUIDELINES WHICH MEANS THE ADS WILL BE ALCOHOL, SODA, POTENTIALLY MARIJUANA AND BEER. THESE VIOLATE THE KINDS OF THINGS WE'RE TRYING TO DO IN OUR PUBLIC REALM. SECOND, THERE'S NO PROHIBITION ON VIDEO. THESE USED TO BE STILL IMAGES. THESE KIOSKS NOW HAVE THE CAPACITY FOR MOVING IMAGES, THROWS ALL OF YOUR DRIVER DISTRACTION STUFF OUT THE WINDOW. THERE'S NO REQUIREMENT FOR THEM TO PAY FOR ELECTRICITY. THERE'S HUGE POTENTIAL FOR LITIGATION. THERE ARE NO PROVISIONS FOR THE TERMINATION PRIOR TO THE CONCLUSION OF THE PERMIT FOR ANY REASON, NO ENFORCEMENT MECHANISM FOR MAINTENANCE, NO PROVISIONS FOR DSA AND IKE TO PROVIDE FINANCIAL REPORTING AND THE NEXT STEP IS LARGE ADVERTISING SCREENS ON BUILDINGS. >> THANK YOU. >> I HAVE MY LETTER TO THE EDITOR PUBLISHED BY THE SEATTLE TIMES AND COPIES OF THE REPORT. >> THANK YOU. WE'LL GIVE IT TO COMMITTEE MEMBERS. >> NUMBER 13, COME ON DOWN. >> HI, I'M PAULA REESE. I'VE BEEN A BUSINESS OWNER HERE FOR 45 YEARS. I'VE HAD TO DEAL WITH IKE FOR 15 YEARS IN OTHER CITIES. PLEASE VOTE THEM DOWN. THEY'RE SIMPLY A TOE HOLD. YOU NEED TO UNDERSTAND WHO YOU'RE GETTING INTO A RELATIONSHIP WITH. THEY DO LARGE DIGITAL BUILDING FRONTS AND ALSO STRUCTURES TEN STORIES TALL IN MIAMI THAT'S EXTREMELY CONTENTIOUS. LIKE L.A., WE CAN SAY NO UP FRONT BECAUSE WE KNOW WE'RE GOING TO GET LITIGATED AGAINST AT GREAT EXPENSE BY ALL THE LARGE MEDIA COMPANIES FROM AROUND THE WORLD AND THEY RIGHTFULLY SHOULD BECAUSE THEY SPENT SEVEN YEARS WITH THE CITY OF SEATTLE PRECOVID LOOKING AT THE SAME DEAL, WHICH WAS A WAY BETTER DEAL, AND THE PEOPLE SAID NO JUST AS THEY DID IN THE SEATTLE TIMES ARTICLE. OVER 2,300 PEOPLE OPPOSED THIS -- THANK YOU. I'LL LEAVE VISUALS. >> PLEASE DO. THANK YOU. NEXT NUMBER 14. COME ON DOWN, PLEASE. WHENEVER YOU'RE READY. >> HELLO. I'M HERE TO SUPPORT OUR ETHICS CODE AND IMPLORE YOU ALL TO NOT CHANGE, TINKER WITH, WATER DOWN OR REWRITE THE ETHICS CODE TO BENEFIT THOSE ON THE COUNCIL WHO WILL BENEFIT BECAUSE THEY'RE LANDLORDS. OUR ETHICS CODES HAVE BEEN IN PLACE 40 YEARS AND HOLD UP TO HIGH STANDARDS LIKE CITIES LIKE PORTLAND AND LOS ANGELES. ETHICS CODE HELP TRUST THE VOTES MADE BY THE CITY COUNCIL AND TO PREVENT CORRUPTION AND IN CLOSING, I WANT TO SAY THERE'S UNBRIDLED CORRUPTION SPEWING FROM THE WHITE HOUSE LIKE A POISON AND WE DON'T WANT IT HERE IN OUR CITY. I WANT YOU ALL TO PROTECT OUR ETHICS CODES, NO TO CORRUPTION. IT'S SIMPLE. I WANT YOU ALL TO DO THE RIGHT THING AND I WANT TO SAY PERSONALLY I'M A RETIRED EARLY CHILDHOOD EDUCATION TEACHER. I HAVE NEVER BEEN ABLE TO OWN A HOUSE IN THIS CITY AND I WILL ALWAYS BE A RENTER AND I WANT YOU TO KNOW THERE'S A LOT OF HARD WORKING PEOPLE WHO CAN'T AFFORD THE RENT BECAUSE THE RENTS ARE TOO DAMN HIGH! >> THANK YOU. WHENEVER YOU'RE READY. [ CROWD CHANTING ] >> WHENEVER YOU'RE READY. [ CROWD CHANTING ] >> MY NAME IS DEE POWERS AND I AM A RENTER IN DISTRICT 3. I OBJECT TO ANY CHANGES IN THE CITY'S ETHICS CODE. SEATTLE'S ETHICS RULES HAVE STOOD FOR 45 YEARS AS A MEASURE AGAINST CORRUPTION. TO DISMANTLE THEM NOW WHILE OUR COUNTRY IS REELING FROM THE CORRUPTION, CHAOS, AND AUTHORITARIANISM OF DONALD TRUMP IS NOT JUST IRRESPONSIBLE, IT IS A BETRAYAL OF THE PUBLIC TRUST. THIS SIGNALS THAT THIS COUNCIL MAY BE MORE INTERESTED IN CONSOLIDATING POWER THAN IN SERVING THE PEOPLE WITH INTEGRITY. EVEN IF YOU BELIEVE YOU CAN VOTE IMPARTIALLY, THAT'S BESIDE THE POINT. TRUMP ALSO CLAIMED TO BE ABOVE ETHICAL SCRUTINY WHILE STACKING HIS ADMINISTRATION WITH LOYALISTS AND PROFITING FROM PUBLIC OFFICE. THIS PROPOSAL OPENS THE DOOR TO THE SAME KIND OF SELF-SERVING BEHAVIOR. YOU ARE NOT THE ONLY PEOPLE TO HAVE EVER SERVED ON THIS COUNCIL AND YOU WILL NOT BE THE LAST. GUTTING MANDATORY MOVES AS ONE OF THE LASTS MEANINGFUL PROTECTIONS AGAINST CORRUPTION. WITHOUT IT THERE IS NO REAL WAY TO PREVENT PUBLIC OFFICIALS FROM ABUSING THEIR POSITIONS FOR PERSONAL GAIN. DO NOT CHANGE THE ETHICS CODE! >> THANK YOU. [ CROWD CHANTING ] WHEN RENTERS RIGHTS ARE UNDER ATTACK, WHAT DO WE DO? FIGHT BACK. >> WHENEVER YOU'RE READY. NUMBER 16. >> HELLO. MY NAME IS JEFF PAUL. I AM A RENTER IN DISTRICT 3 AND A PUBLIC SCHOOL EMPLOYEE IN DISTRICT 7. I'M HERE TO OPPOSE THE ETHICS CODE CHANGE. THE AS AN EMPLOYEE WITH SEATTLE PUBLIC SCHOOLS, I'M SUBJECT TO ETHICS CODE I HAVE TO FOLLOW. I'M NOT ALLOWED TO ACCEPT ANY GIFTS FROM PARENTS ABOVE A CERTAIN AMOUNT AND FOR A VERY SIMPLE REASON. WE DON'T THINK OUR PUBLIC SERVANTS SHOULD BE PROFITING FROM THEIR POSITION, MAKES A LOT OF SENSE, KEEPS US FROM BEING CORRUPT HOW WE DEAL WITH DIFFERENT FAMILIES. I THINK IT'S QUITE SHOCKING YOU ALL WANT TO HAVE LOWER ETHICAL STANDARDS THAN PUBLIC SCHOOLTEACHERS AND IT'S AN ABSOLUTE SHAME THAT YOU'RE NOT ONLY DOING THIS ON ITS FACE, BUT THE REASONS WHY ARE PRETTY UNCONSCIONABLE. ONE OF THE TENANT PROTECTIONS THAT SAYS LOOKING TO BE REPEALED BECAUSE OF THIS IS EVICTION PROTECTIONS FOR SCHOOL-AGED FAMILIES AND SCHOOL-AGED CHILDREN AND PUBLIC TEACHERS. I KNOW FAMILIES WHO BENEFITED FROM THIS. I'VE ALSO SEEN FAMILIES BEFORE THIS WAS PUT IN PLACE GET EVICTED AND WATCH KIDS GO FROM MAKING As TO FAILING OUT OF THEIR CLASSES BECAUSE THEY WENT FROM HAVING NO HOUSING. SHAME ON YOU AND THIS SHOULD BE VOTED DOWN. >> THANK YOU. [ CROWD CHANTING ] WHEN RENTERS' RIGHTS ARE UNDER ATTACK, WHAT DO WE DO? STAND UP FIGHT BACK. >> YOU'RE DELAYING THE ORDERLY CONDUCT OR PROGRESS OF THE PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD. >> WHENEVER YOU'RE READY, NUMBER 17. >> GABRIEL JONES TO TALK ABOUT ETHICS. I WANT TO SHARE A FUN FACT I LEARNED THIS WEEK WITH THE AUDIENCE BECAUSE THE MAJORITY OF THE COUNCIL ALREADY TUNED ME OUT WHEN THEY SAW I WAS SPEAKING. DID YOU KNOW THIS COUNCIL MAKES 65.32 AN HOUR. RAISE YOUR HAND IF YOU DO? WOW, WHAT A SURPRISE. YET THEY SEEK TO MAKE MORE MONEY BY THROWING PEOPLE ON THE STREET WHILE THEY'RE IN SCHOOL AND CONTINUE THE CYCLE OF POVERTY. SARA NELSON WILL NOT LISTEN. THEY'VE SHOWN TIME AND TIME AGAIN WHEN WE TRY TO DO THINGS THE RIGHT WAY. WHATEVER WE DO, SARA NELSON WILL TEAR THEM DOWN TO ENRICH HERSELF. WE AREN'T SCARED BECAUSE WE WILL VOTE YOU OUT. ANY OF YOU WHO VOTE FOR THIS, WE WILL VOTE YOU OUT. THIS IS VERY, VERY OBVIOUS. WE WILL FIGHT FOR OUR COMMUNITIES AND PEOPLE AND AT THE END OF THE DAY IF IT'S NOT CLEAR BEFORE, WE'LL SAY IT AGAIN. WHEN RENTERS' RIGHTS ARE UNDER ATTACK, WHAT DO WE DO? STAND UP FIGHT BACK. WHEN RENTERS' RIGHTS ARE UNDER ATTACK, WHAT DO WE DO? [ CROWD CHANTING ] STAND UP FIGHT BACK. >> THANK YOU. ALEX, PLEASE SIT DOWN. >> ENGAGING IN BEHAVIOR OUT OF ORDER IN THIS MEETING. >> NUMBER 18, 19 AND 20, COME ON DOWN, PLEASE. >> GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS ALEX FRANCIS, RENTER IN DISTRICT 4. I'M HERE TO URGE YOU TO VOTE NO ON CHANGING OUR CITY'S ETHICS CODES THAT STOOD FOR 45 YEARS. WEAKENING THEM NOW ERODES PUBLIC TRUST IN OUR LOCAL LEADERSHIP AND MAKES US QUESTION WHOSE INTEREST THIS COUNCIL TRULY SERVES. ALTERING THESE RULES COULD OPEN THE DOOR TO THE VERY SELF-SERVING BEHAVIOR WE'VE SEEN NATIONWIDE. WE CAN'T BE SURE WHO WILL SERVE IN THE FUTURE AND REMOVING MANDATORY RECUSAL TAKES AWAY ONE OF OUR STRONGEST SHIELDS AGAINST CONFLICTS OF INTERESTS LEFT WITH ETHICAL BREACHES INSTEAD OF STOPPING THEM BEFORE THEY HAPPEN. IT'S DEEPLY CONCERNING SEATTLE ETHICS HAS NOT YET COMPLETED ITS REVIEW, OFFERED A FORMAL STANCE OR VOTED TO THESE PROPOSED CHANGES. PROCEEDING WITHOUT SHATTERS PUBLIC CONFIDENCE AND SUGGESTS THIS COUNCIL IS EVADING INDEPENDENT SCRUTINY. DISCLOSURE ALONE IS NOT TRUE ACCOUNTABILITY. IT'S IMPOSSIBLE TO TRULY SERVE AND BE ACCOUNTABLE TO OTHERS IF YOU DETERMINE WHEN THE RULES APPLY TO YOURSELF. >> THANK YOU. [ CROWD CHANTING ]. >> IT'S DISRUPTING AND DELAYING THE ORDERLY PROGRESS OF THIS MEETING. GO AHEAD. >> MY NAME IS KATE RUBEN. I'M THE CO-EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF SEATTLE AND VOTER AND RENTER IN DISTRICT 2. I'M HERE TO URGE YOU TO REJECT THE PROPOSED CHANGE TO SEATTLE'S ETHICS CODE TO ALLOW ELECTED OFFICIALS TO VOTE WHEN THEY HAVE A CONFLICT OF INTEREST. CHANGING THE 45-YEAR-OLD RULES MIDTERM REGARDLESS OF YOUR INTENTION IS A DIRECT VIOLATION OF PUBLIC TRUST, ESPECIALLY NOW WHEN WE'RE FACING UNPRECEDENTED INSTABILITY AND CORRUPTION AT A FEDERAL LEVEL. WE DON'T KNOW WHO WILL BE IN YOUR SEATS IN THE FUTURE. THIS WOULD REMOVE THE ONLY MEANINGFUL SAFEGUARD THAT WOULD PREVENT SELF-DEALING. WITHOUT REQUIREMENTS TO STEP BACK FROM CONFLICTS, CORRUPTION BECOMES A CLEANUP JOB INSTEAD OF SOMETHING WE PREVENT. ELECTED OFFICIALS SHOULD BE HELD TO HIGHER ETHICAL STANDARDS THAN THE OTHER CITY EMPLOYEES, NOT WEAKER ONES. PLEASE VOTE NO ON THIS BILL. I ALSO URGE YOU TO VOTE NO ON CLOGGING UP OUR SIDEWALKS WITH UGLY KIOSKS. THANK YOU. [ CROWD CHANTING ]. >> QUIET IN THE HOUSE. >> NUMBER 20. GO AHEAD. >> HI. I'M CHAIR OF THE 34th DISTRICT DEMOCRATS. SEATTLE'S CURRENT CODE OF ETHICS IS CLEAR. PUBLIC OFFICIALS MUST REMAIN INDEPENDENT, IMPARTIAL, AND ACT IN SERVICE OF THE PUBLIC GOOD. SEATTLE'S DEMOCRATIC PARTY IS STANDING LOUDLY, PROUDLY, AND UNANIMOUSLY AGAINST THE PROPOSED ROLLBACKS. THIS ISN'T A DIFFICULT ETHICAL QUESTION. IT'S SIMPLY A QUESTION OF WHY YOU'RE HERE. CITY COUNCIL NEEDS TO RETAIN ITS REQUIREMENTS TO RECUSE, BUT YOU WON'T BECAUSE YOU'RE HERE FOR POWER, NOT PEOPLE, CORRUPTION, NOT COMMUNITY. DEMOCRACY DEPENDS ON TRUST. TRUST DEPENDS ON CLEAR, ENFORCEABLE AND ENFORCED ETHICAL STANDARDS. WE'RE LIVING IN A TIME WHEN CYNICISM ABOUT GOVERNMENT IS ALREADY DANGEROUSLY HIGH. PEOPLE ARE DESPERATE FOR LEADERS WHO ACT WITH INTEGRITY AND SUPPORT FOR THIS BILL DEMONSTRATES THESE LEADERS ARE IN SHORT SUPPLY AT CITY HALL. WE NEED MORE TRANSPARENCY, NOT LESS, MORE ACCOUNTABILITY, NOT LOOPHOLES AND PUBLIC SERVICE, NOT SELF-SERVICE. THANK YOU. [ CROWD CHANTING ] >> DELAYING THE CONTINUATION OF OUR PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD. >> COUNCIL PRESIDENT, WOULD YOU LIKE ME TO RESUME IN-PERSON OR GO BACK TO THE REMAINING THREE VIRTUAL? >> HOW MANY MORE PEOPLE ARE IN LINE FOR IN PERSON IN THIS BATCH? >> THE LAST PERSON ENDED 11 AND 22. >> OKAY. LET'S GO AHEAD WITH THE LAST PERSON HERE AND THEN WE WILL PROCEED TO THE REMOTE. >> OKAY. >> HI, COUNCIL. THANK YOU FOR HAVING US TODAY. MY NAME'S CHRIS MAKAI, DIRECTOR OF THE WEST SEATTLE JUNCTION BIA HERE TO TESTIFY IN SUPPORT OF THE IKE KIOSKS. I'M PRETTY EXCITED ABOUT THEM. I KNOW YOU'VE HEARD A LOT ABOUT THEIR AMAZING CAPABILITIES, WAY FINDING, SEARCHING, ALLOWING OUR LOCAL PEOPLE WALKING DOWN THE STREET TO DISCOVER NEW SHOPS AND FINDING OUT ABOUT TRANSPORTATION OPTIONS, BUT WHAT I'M REALLY EXCITED ABOUT IS THE ABILITY TO COMMUNICATE TO MY COMMUNITY DIRECTLY. WE HAVE OVER 40 EVENTS A YEAR IN THE WEST SEATTLE JUNCTION AND TO BE ABLE TO COMMUNICATE ABOUT THOSE ALONE WOULD REALLY ACTIVATE OUR AREA BY BRINGING PEOPLE INTO IT. IT WOULD BENEFIT THE LOCAL BUSINESSES. I'M IN SUPPORT OF THESE. I'M EXCITED ABOUT THEM. I HOPE YOU ARE AS WELL. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. WE'LL GO FROM 21 TO 30 AFTER WE FINISH REMOTE PUBLIC COMMENT. >> I'M GOING TO TRANSITION TO THE REMAINING FOUR IN REMOTE PUBLIC COMMENTERS. ROBERT MARVER, PLEASE PRESS STAR 6 TO UNMUTE YOURSELF. THANK YOU. >> HI. MY NAME IS ROBERT MARVER. THIS IS MY FIRST TIME CALLING TO A CITY COUNCIL MEETING. I'M SPEAKING AGAINST COUNCIL BILL 120978. I THINK IT'S RIDICULOUS THAT THE COUNCIL IS TRYING TO REPEAL THE RECUSAL REPEAT REQUIREMENT THAT HAS BEEN IN PLACE FOR 45 YEARS. THE RECUSAL REQUIREMENT HAS ONLY BEEN USED NINE TIMES IN THE LAST 25 YEARS FOR CITY COUNCIL. WHEN I HEAR ARGUMENTS THAT SAY THIS CHANGE WILL INCREASE DEMOCRATIC PARTICIPATION, WHAT I HEAR ARE LIES BEING SPREAD BY PEOPLE ON THIS COUNCIL. IF I COULD SPEAK TO SARA NELSON, YOU'VE ALREADY LOST ENDORSEMENT FOR THE DISTRICT DEMOCRATS AND IF YOU VOTE YES, YOU WILL LOSE YOUR NUMBER. THANK YOU. [ CROWD CHANTING ] WHO DO THE LANDLORDS LOVE? SARA NELSON. >> NEXT WE'VE GOT JEANNIE CHUN. STAR 6 TO UNMUTE YOURSELF. >> MY NAME IS JEANNIE CHUN AND I'M THE CO-FOUNDER AND EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF SEATTLE RESTAURANTS UNITED. I WANT TO THANK THE COMMITTEE FOR THE TIME TO HEAR FROM CONCERNED CITIZENS. I'M HERE TO URGE YOU TO VOTE NO ON THE ETHICS CODE RESOLUTION BEFORE YOU. THIS RESOLUTION TO CHANGE THE ETHICS CODE IS A BLATANT ATTEMPT TO ALLOW CORRUPTION FROM COUNCILMEMBERS THAT ARE CURRENTLY LANDLORDS AND LAWYERS TO PERSONALLY BENEFIT FROM THEIR OWN VOTE. THE WORKERS OF SMALL RESTAURANTS DESERVE TO LIVE NEAR WHERE THEY WORK. THEY DESERVE TO HAVE STABLE HOUSING TO SURVIVE AND THRIVE IN THEIR COMMUNITIES. THEY DESERVE THE PEACE OF MIND KNOWING THEY WILL NOT BE EVICTED AT A MOMENT'S NOTICE. I HOPE THE REST OF THE COMMITTEE SEES THE ATTEMPTS BY COUNCILMEMBER MOORE AND PRESIDENT NELSON TO CHANGE THE ETHICS CODE WILL NOT ERODE THE TRUST OF THE ENTIRE COUNCIL, BUT THE TRUST OF CITY EMPLOYEES ON THE GROUND THAT WORK TO SERVE OUR CONSTITUENTS ON A DAILY BASIS. WE NEED A CITY COUNCIL THAT WORKS FOR WORKING PEOPLE, NOT PROTECT LANDLORDS, THAT KEEPS COMMUNITIES SAFE BY NOT ALLOWING EVICTIONS DURING THE WINTER MONTHS. I HOPE THE COUNCIL CAN SEE IT WITHIN THEMSELVES TO SEE THE SLIMLY VEILED -- >> THANK YOU, JEANNIE. [ CROWD CHANTING ]. >> THANK YOU, DAVID, PLEASE PRESS STAR 6 TO UNMUTE YOURSELF. >> TODAY SEATTLE CITY HALL IS A SACRILEGE TO THE DEMOCRAT PRINCIPLES WHERE GREEDY, UNTRUSTWORTHY, BAD FAITH REPRESENTATIVES ARE TRYING TO CHANGE THE ETHICS RULES WORKING WITH THE ETHICS COMMISSION ADVISING HOW TO MANIPULATE THE RULES TO APPEASE COUNCIL'S BEHIND THE SCENES LOBBYING AND INTIMIDATION. COUNCIL IS CONSPIRING TO UNDERMINE ETHICS TO GET AWAY WITH OPPRESSING THE WORKING CLASS, BACKSTABBING THE WORKERS AND SELLING OUT A MULTITUDE OF GENERATIONS BY LANDLORD TENANTS, RESTRICTIONS ON THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND SELF-GREEDY PERSONAL INVESTMENT. THIS COUNCIL'S AMENDMENTS ARE DOING THEIR BIDDING ATTEMPTING TO CIRCUMVENT THE INTEGRITY OF RULES, INTRODUCING LEGISLATION TO CHANGE THE CONFLICT OF INTEREST INTERPRETATION. THERE IS UNFORGIVABLE. MAY YOU BE PROTESTED AND CIVIL DISOBEDIENTLY INTERRUPTED THROUGHOUT THE REST OF YOUR POLITICAL CAREER NO MATTER WHERE YOU GO. ANYONE WHO VOTES FOR THIS SHOULD RESIGN AND ANY BUSINESS A PART OF THIS SHOULD BE BOYCOTTED OR PROTESTED. WE'RE BETTER OFF WITHOUT YOUR MISSED LEADERSHIP. >> AND THE LAST REMOTE SPEAKER, CAN YOU PLEASE PRESS STAR 6. [ CROWD CHANTING ]. >> HEY, GO AHEAD. >> THANK YOU. [ CROWD CHANTING ] WHO NEEDS TO BE THROWN OUT? >> WHENEVER YOU'RE READY, PLEASE PRESS STAR 6 TO UNMUTE YOURSELF. >> HELLO. MY NAME IS ADRIAN. I'M IN DISTRICT 2. I'M CALLING TO URGE YOU ALL TO VOTE NO ON THE PROPOSED ETHICS CHANGES. RECUSALS AREN'T A NUISANCE. THEY'RE A SAFEGUARD. REMOVING THIS IS A DISPROTECTION AND INVITES CORRUPTION AND SELF-DEALING. SHAME ON YOU, CATHY MOORE, FOR BEING A FRONT PERSON FOR DEEP POCKETS AND NOT FOR WORKING CLASS PEOPLE. [ CROWD CHANTING ]. >> COUNCIL PRESIDENT, THAT CONCLUDES -- [ CROWD CHANTING ]. >> I CAN HEAR YOU. >> NUMBER 21 TO 30, WANT TO ALL COME DOWN, PLEASE. IF YOU CAN PLEASE STATE YOUR NUMBER AS WELL. >> 21. MEMBERS OF COUNCIL, MY NAME IS KARL NELSON, A 16 YEAR SEATTLE RENTER DISTRICT 4, SMALL BUSINESS OWNER AND MEMBER OF THE CEDAR CROSSING TENANTS ASSOCIATION HERE TODAY AGAIN TO EXPRESS MY DISAPPROVAL FOR THE PROPOSED CHANGES TO THE CITY ETHICS CODE. THE CODE HAS SERVED THE CITY WELL FOR 40 YEARS AND HELPED CREATE TRUST OF THE ELECTORATE. IT'S AT A TIME WITH CORRUPTION ON A NATIONAL LEVEL AND WILL ONLY SERVE TO DAMAGE THAT TRUST AND OPEN THE DOOR TO RAMPANT STRIPPING AWAY WORKER AND TENANT PROTECTIONS. IN CONCLUSION, SEATTLE VOTERS ARE NOT STUPID AND ALTHOUGH WE MAKE MISTAKES, WE RARELY MAKE THEM TWICE. I URGE YOU TO WITHDRAW THE PROPOSED ETHICS CHANGES. [ CROWD CHANTING ] WHO NEEDS TO BE THROWN OUT? RENTERS' RIGHTS ARE UNDER ATTACK. WHAT DO WE DO? >> GO AHEAD WHENEVER YOU'RE READY. MY APOLOGIES. >> HELLO. MY NAME IS ACACIA POTSMAN AND I'M A MEMBER OF DISTRICT 4. COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA, YOU HAVE SAID YOU ARE WORRIED THE LIMITATIONS OF THE ETHICS CODE MIGHT LIMIT YOUR ABILITY TO PROPERLY REPRESENT YOUR CONSTITUENT. WELL, I AM YOUR CONSTITUENT. IF YOU'RE WORRIED ABOUT THIS MYSTERIOUS CONTINGENT OF YOUR CONSTITUENTS WHOSE VOICES ARE NOT REPRESENTED, WHY HAS EVERY FELLOW RESIDENT I'VE HEARD BEEN OPPOSED TO THIS FLAGRANT ROLLBACK OF VERY COMMON SENSE ETHICS RULE? WHY HAS EVERY NEIGHBOR I'VE SPOKEN TO BEEN APPALLED FOR YOUR SUPPORT FOR WHAT AMOUNTS TO LEGALIZED CORRUPTION? IF YOU'RE TRULY REPRESENTING THE WILL OF THESE UNSEEN CONSTITUENTS AND NOT JUST THE $57,000 YOU'VE RECEIVED IN PAC DONATIONS FROM THE CORPORATE REAL ESTATE LOBBY? WHERE ARE THEY? I ENCOURAGE YOU TO LISTEN TO THE COUNTLESS VOICES OF YOUR CONSTITUENTS WHO HAVE BEEN BRAVE ENOUGH TO SHOW THEIR CASES AND TO SPEAK UP. VOTE NO ON THE ROLLBACK OF THE ETHICS RULE. >> THANK YOU. [ CROWD CHANTING ] >> AGAIN, YOUR FAILURE TO COMPLY IS DIRECTLY AFFECTING THE PROGRESS OF THIS MEETING. >> MY NAME IS CHARLIE LA FAM, THE COMMUNICATIONS DIRECTOR OF LABOR WHICH REPRESENTS 250,000 WORKING PEOPLE ACROSS SEATTLE AND KING COUNTY. THE LABOR COUNCIL IS VEHEMENTLY PROPOSED TO THE ROLLBACK OF SEATTLE'S ETHICS RULES. TRUSTING GOVERNMENT IS AT HISTORIC LOWS. IT'S TRUE FROM WASHINGTON, D.C. DOWN TO LOCAL GOVERNMENTS ACROSS THE COUNTRY. INSTEAD OF RESTORING CONFIDENCE, THIS PROPOSAL DOES THE OPPOSITE, ALLOWING ELECTED OFFICIALS TO VOTE ON POLICIES THEY STAND TO PERSONALLY PROFIT FROM. I GET IT, THAT THESE TYPES OF LAWS CAN SLOW DOWN THE ACT OF GOVERNING. THEY CAN BE FRUSTRATING, BUT THEY ARE ESSENTIAL TO A HEALTHY DEMOCRACY. THEY CREATE CLEAR GUARDRAILS AGAINST CONFLICTS OF INTEREST. THEY ENSURE LAWS SERVE THE PEOPLE THEY'RE INTENDED TO SERVE. SEATTLE CITY COUNCIL'S WORKED FOR STRONG ETHICS LAWS FOR DECADES AND CHANGING THEM NOW FOR POLITICAL CONVENIENCE IS A BETRAYAL OF PUBLIC TRUST. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. [ CROWD CHANTING ] >> WHENEVER YOU'RE READY, COME ON DOWN. >> HELLO. MY NAME IS KATIE AND I JUST WANTED TO MENTION LIKE EVERYONE HAS ALREADY SAID SUCH GOOD STUFF, ABOUT THE BUT I JUST WANT TO SAY THE ONLY REASON I WAS HERE WAS BECAUSE I WAS LAID OFF LAST WEEK, BUT MOST CONSTITUENTS CAN'T MAKE IT TO A 2:00 P.M. MEETING ON A THURSDAY. I THINK IT'S LOW KEY DIABOLICAL HOLDING AN ETHICS MEETING AT 2 P.M. ON A THURSDAY. THE ONLY REASON I KNEW THIS WAS EVEN HAPPENING WAS BECAUSE MISS ALEXIS -- SORRY COUNCILMEMBER RINCK SENT OUT AN EMAIL. AT A TIME WHEN PEOPLE ARE HAVING TO DISENGAGE FROM POLITICS FOR THEIR MENTAL HEALTH AND I FEEL CHOOSING TO DO SOMETHING LIKE THIS WITH THE ETHICS CODE WHEN PEOPLE ARE LESS ENGAGED IS TAKING ADVANTAGE WHEN PEOPLE AREN'T PAYING ATTENTION. I GOT LAID OFF, SO I AM PAYING ATTENTION NOW AND I HOPE OTHER PEOPLE ARE PAYING ATTENTION AND I JUST DON'T SUPPORT THIS AND I THINK IT'S TERRIBLE. THANK YOU FOR LISTENING. >> THANK YOU. [ CROWD CHANTING ] WHEN RENTERS' RIGHTS ARE UNDER ATTACK, WHAT DO WE DO? STAND UP FIGHT BACK. >> WHENEVER YOU'RE READY. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. MY NAME IS SETON GRASS, CEO AND FOUNDER OF SURF INCUBATOR. WE'VE BEEN HELPING TECHNOLOGY STARTUPS DOWNTOWN HERE IN THE WELLS FARGO BUILDING FOR 16 YEARS. I SEE THE KIOSKS AS AN INTERESTING ADDITION, BUT I ALSO SEE A LIMITATION ONLY HAVING 80 LOCATIONS. IT DOESN'T ADDRESS THE NEEDS OF SOMEBODY HAVING A POCKET SOLUTION. I'VE BEEN WORKING THE LAST FOUR MONTHS ON A MOBILE APP THAT'S A WEB-BASED APP SO IT CAN WORK ON ANY DEVICE AND IT WILL FIND ALL THE INFORMATION THAT'S ALREADY BEING LISTED IN THE KIOSKS AS PROPOSED. ALSO, I'VE HEARD -- READ THROUGH THE DOCUMENTS ABOUT THE VARIOUS VIEWS OPPOSING THE APPLICATION AND IT OFTEN REFERENCES A MOBILE APP. WELL, I HAVE ONE. IF YOU'D LIKE TO LOOK AT IT, I'D BE VERY DELIGHTED IT SHOW IT TO YOU. IT'S EASY, FAST AND WE CAN MAKE IT FREE. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >> THANK YOU. NUMBER 27 THROUGH 30, COME ON DOWN, PLEASE. >> HI. MY NAME IS CAROLINE SAYER AND I'M FROM FREMONT DISTRICT 6. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. I'M HERE TO OPPOSE ANY CHANGES TO THE ETHICS CODES. WHEN TRUST IN GOVERNMENT IS SO LOW, THIS BODY HAS AN OPPORTUNITY TO LEAD BY EXAMPLE AND REJECT PERSONAL GAIN OVER PUBLIC SERVICE. I'M RELYING ON YOU TO PROTECT US ALL, TO COMMIT YOURSELF TO PUBLIC SERVICE AND STRONG ETHICAL STANDARDS. THE CURRENT 45-YEAR-OLD CODE WORKS AND KEEPS OUR ELECTED OFFICIALS ACCOUNTABLE. TO CHANGE THE CODE IS ONE WAY OF BETRAYING OUR TRUST AND POTENTIALLY HARMS THE PEOPLE OF SEATTLE FOR ALL THE WRONG REASONS. PLEASE REJECT CHANGES TO THE CODE AND MAINTAIN STRONG STANDARDS. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. [ CROWD CHANTING ] >> WHENEVER YOU'RE READY. >> MY NAME IS NATALIE. I'M THE ORGANIZER FOR FAIRVILLE, WASHINGTON, A NONPROFIT WORKING ON DEMOCRACY REFORM IN WASHINGTON AND I'M ALSO HERE AGAIN AS A SEATTLE RESIDENT TO EXPRESS MY OPPOSITION TO THE NEW PROPOSAL CONCERNING THE SEATTLE ETHICS CODE. DEMOCRACY IS ABOUT HAVING OUR VOICES HEARD AND SO FAR I HAVE YET TO HEAR A SINGLE VOICE IN FAVOR OF THIS PROPOSAL AND I KNOW HUNDREDS OF PEOPLE HAVE EMAILED THE COUNCIL IN OPPOSITION. SEATTLE SHOULD BE CONTINUING ITS LEADERSHIP IN A JUST DEMOCRACY, NOT ROLLING BACK PROTECTION ESPECIALLY DURING TIMES LIKE THIS. IT HARMS TRANSPARENCY AND DEMOCRACY AND ERODES PUBLIC TRUST. THESE ETHICAL STANDARDS ARE ALREADY WORKING AND HAVE BEEN WORKING FOR DECADES. SO PLEASE PUT DEMOCRACY INTO PRACTICE. HEAR THE VOICES OF YOUR CONSTITUENTS AND MAINTAIN THE SAFEGUARDS THAT ARE ALREADY IN PLACE AND HAVE ALREADY BEEN WORKING FOR SEATTLE VOTERS. PLEASE WITHDRAW THIS UNNECESSARY PROPOSAL. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. >> THANK YOU. >> WE HAVE FOUR MINUTES LEFT OF OUR PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD WHICH WILL END AT 3:07. SO WHEN YOU GET TO 3:07, WE WILL END PUBLIC COMMENT. [ CROWD CHANTING ] >> WHENEVER YOU'RE READY. >> GOOD AFTERNOON, COUNCILMEMBERS. MY NAME IS ALEX OLSON, RENTER IN DISTRICT 4 AND MEMBER OF WORKERS STRIKE BACK. I'M HERE AGAIN TO SPEAK IN THE STRONGEST POSSIBLE TERMS AGAINST THIS ATTEMPT TO ROLL BACK THE ETHICS CODE AND ATTACK RENTERS' RIGHTS IN SEATTLE. IT IS THE MOST MARGINALIZED PEOPLE WHO WILL SUFFER MOST AND CAN WE TRUST COUNCILMEMBERS HOLLINGSWORTH, KETTLE, AND RIVERA WHO HAVE COLLECTIVELY RECEIVED OVER $150,000 FROM THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF REALTORS TO SUPPORT THE WORKING CLASS OF THIS CITY? AND CAN WE TRUST ANYONE WHO HAS TO REPEAL THEIR OWN ETHICS CODE IN ORDER TO CARRY OUT THEIR AGENDA? I DON'T THINK SO. WE NEED TO SEE THESE CORRUPT POLITICIANS FOR WHAT THEY ARE AND REJECT THIS CRASS AND SHAMELESS ATTEMPT TO ENRICH THEMSELVES AT THE COST OF SEATTLE'S MOST VULNERABLE COMMUNITIES. WE CANNOT LET THE LANDLORDS WRITE OUR LAWS AND THIS ATTACK WILL NOT BE FORGOTTEN WHEN YOU'RE UP FOR REELECTION. I URGE YOU TO STAY AFTER PUBLIC COMMENT FOR A RALLY WITH WORKERS STRIKE BACK AND I URGE YOU TO COME BACK AND KEEP COMING BACK UNTIL THIS ATTACK IS DEFEATED. HANDS OFF RENTERS' RIGHTS. HANDS OFF THE ETHICS CODE. >> THANK YOU. >> WHEN RENTERS' RIGHTS ARE UNDER ATTACK, WHAT DO WE DO? >> STAND UP FIGHT BACK! >> THANK YOU. >>. >> 30, LYLELY SHOREY, A MEMBER OF DISTRICT SHORE AND A MEMBER OF WORKERS FIGHT BACK. I SPOKE IN SUPPORT OF RENTERS AVENUE RIGHTS TUESDAY. I WANT TO FOCUS ON THE ABSOLUTE ABSURDITY OF THE SITUATION. WHAT WE ARE DISCUSSING IS THE REPEALING OF PART OF AN ETHICS CODE. YOU WOULD THINK FROM THAT STATEMENT ALONE IT WOULD BE KNOWN WHAT CITY COUNCILMEMBERS ARE TRYING TO CARRY OUT IS UNETHICAL BY THEIR STANDARDS AND A BLATANT ATTACK ON RENTERS, BUT IF WE'RE HONEST, IT'S NO SURPRISE WHY MEMBERS OF THIS CITY COUNCIL ARE TRYING TO ATTACK RENTERS RIGHTS. MULTIPLE MEMBERS ARE BOUGHT AND PAID FOR BY LANDLORDS OR LANDLORDS THEMSELVES, COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH, MOORE, KETTLE, RIVERA AND SAKA WHO IS NOT HERE. OUR CITY COUNCIL DEMOCRATS ARE CORPORATE CHILLS THAT CARE MORE ABOUT LINING THEIR POCKETS THAN PROTECTING THEIR MOST VULNERABLE CONSTITUENTS. WE WON'T STOP COMING BACK HERE AND YOU CAN REST ASSURED THIS BETRAYAL WON'T BE FORGOTTEN COME ELECTION TIME. WHEN RENTERS' RIGHTS ARE UNDER ATTACK, WHAT DO WE DO? [ CROWD CHANTING ] STAND UP FIGHT BACK! >> WHAT DO WE DO? [ CROWD CHANTING ] STAND UP FIGHT BACK. >> THANK YOU. >> WE HAVE TIME FOR ONE MORE PUBLIC COMMENTER. >> HI, EVERYONE. MY NAME IS SET. I LIVE IN CAPITOL HILL. I WANT TO THANK COUNCILMEMBER MERCEDES RINCK FOR HOLDING THE LINE. FOR THE REST OF YOU, I'M WONDERING WHERE YOUR HUMANITY IS. WE'RE ALL SEATTLITES. WE ARE WATCHING PEOPLE DIE IN OUR STREETS EVERY DAY AND REPEALING AN EVICTION MORATORIUMS IN THE DEAD OF WINTER OR FOR FAMILIES IS LITERALLY CONTRIBUTING TO DEATH IN OUR STREETS. I REALLY HOPE YOU CAN FIND YOUR HUMANITY AND YOUR OWN ETHICS. I'M ROOTING FOR YOU. YEAH. THAT'S ALL I HAVE TO SAY. THANKS. >> THANK YOU. >> IT IS NOW 3:07. WE HAVE REACHED THE END OF OUR PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD. IT IS NOW 3:07. IN ORDER TO GET ON WITH THE REST OF OUR AGENDA. I APOLOGIZE TO THOSE OF YOU WHO DID NOT -- I KNOW YOU CANNOT HEAR ME. YOU CAN NOW BE QUIET. UNFORTUNATELY, THE CHANTING BETWEEN SPEAKERS HAS PREVENTED US FROM HEARING AS MANY PEOPLE THAT SIGNED UP. I APOLOGIZE TO THOSE OF YOU WHO DID NOT GET A CHANCE YET TO SPEAK AND I ASK THAT YOU PLEASE SUBMIT YOUR WRITTEN COMMENTS TO THE BOX IN THE FRONT. [ CROWD CHANTING ] LET US SPEAK! LET US SPEAK! >> YOU ARE VIOLATING THE RULES OF PUBLIC COMMENT AND ORDER CANNOT BE RESTORED. WE WILL NOW TAKE A 15 MINUTE -- [ CROWD CHANTING ] LET US SPEAK! LET US SPEAK! >> I CAN'T HEAR YOU. >> WE CANNOT HEAR. [ CROWD CHANTING ] LET US SPEAK! >> WHO ARE CONTINUING PREVENTING US FROM CONTINUING WITH OUR -- I ALREADY GAVE AN HOUR AND YOU PROCEEDED TO TAKE TIME IN BETWEEN SPEAKERS. WE WILL NOW MOVE ON TO OUR ITEMS OF BUSINESS. I SAID WE WOULD GO UNTIL 3:07. WE'RE NOW PAST THAT TIME. WILL THE CLERK PLEASE READ ITEM 1 INTO THE AGENDA. >> NUMBER 1, RESOLUTION 32170, RESOLUTION GRANTING CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL TO THE DOWNTOWN SEATTLE ASSOCIATION TO INSTALL, MAINTAIN, AND OPERATE -- [ CROWD CHANTING ]. >> THE INDIVIDUALS ARE ENGAGING IN BEHAVIOR OUT OF ORDER AND THIS MEETING CANNOT PROCEED UNTIL ORDER IS RESTORED. ORDER WILL NOT BE RESTORED. WE HAVE NO CHOICE BUT TO GO ON. ORDER HAS NOT BEEN RESTORED AND PURSUANT TO THE OPEN PUBLIC MEETINGS ACT RCW4230, THE COUNCIL WILL RECESS UNTIL THIS MEETING CAN CONTINUE REMOTELY. MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC MAY CONTINUE TO OBSERVE THIS MEETING IN CHAMBERS. WE ARE NOW TAKING A RECESS TO RESUME. >> COUNCIL PRESIDENT. [ CROWD CHANTING ] >> COUNCIL PRESIDENT. [ CROWD CHANTING ] >> COUNCIL PRESIDENT. [ CROWD CHANTING ] >> PRESIDENT. COUNCIL PRESIDENT. [ CROWD CHANTING ] LET US SPEAK! LET US SPEAK! >> TIME CONSTRAINTS. WE WILL TAKE A 15 MINUTE RECESS AND CONTINUE THIS MEETING REMOTELY. THIS IS NOW 3:11. >> COUNCILMEMBER SOLOMON? >> HERE. >> COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH? >> PRESENT. >> COUNCILMEMBER KETTLE? >> HERE. >> THANK YOU. CHAIR NELSON? >> PRESENT. >> FIVE PRESENT. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. OKAY. WOULD YOU PLEASE READ ITEM 1 INTO THE RECORD. >> YES. AGENDA ITEM NUMBER ONE, RESOLUTION 32170, A RESOLUTION GRANTING CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL TO THE DOWNTOWN SETTLE ASSOCIATION TO INSTALL, MAINTAIN, AND OPERATE INTERACTIVE MEDIA KIOSKS IN PUBLIC PLACES LOCATED IN THE METROPOLITAN IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT AND IN PARTICIPATING BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT AREAS. FOR BRIEFING DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE VOTE. >> ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. SO, COLLEAGUES, FIRST, IS IT POSSIBLE TO TAKE THE PRESENTATION OFF THE MAIN SCREEN? THANK YOU VERY MUCH. COLLEAGUES, THIS IS OUR SECOND DISCUSSION OF THIS LEGISLATION. AGAIN, THIS RESOLUTION GRANTS CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL OF THE DOWNTOWN SEATTLE ASSOCIATION TO INSTALL, MAINTAIN, AND OPERATE DIGITAL KIOSKS IN THE RIGHT-OF-WAY WITHIN THE METROPOLITAN IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT. WE HAD A PRESENTATION AND DISCUSSION AT OUR MAY 8th MEETING AND IT'S UP FOR POSSIBLE VOTE TODAY. AS I NOTED BEFORE, I HAVE BEEN WORKING IN STRONG SUPPORT OF THIS INITIATIVE SINCE BASICALLY TAKING OFFICE FOR MANY REASONS, PRIMARILY BECAUSE THEY ELEVATE AND PROVIDE THE OPPORTUNITY FOR PEOPLE TO KNOW THE LOCAL SMALL BUSINESSES THAT ARE AROUND PEOPLE THAT ARE LIVING, WORKING, AND VISITING DOWNTOWN. THERE'S A LONG LIST OF PUBLIC BENEFITS AND ALSO BECAUSE THIS WILL GENERATE FUNDS FROM OUR BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT AREAS WHO PROVIDE ESSENTIAL SERVICES THAT MAKE DOWNTOWN AND OTHER PARTS OF OUR CITY GREAT, ESPECIALLY THE NEIGHBORHOODS IN WHICH THERE IS A VIA AND BIA AND PEOPLE ARE PAYING INTO A POT OF MONEY FOR TRASH PICKUP, ET CETERA. WE RECEIVED A LETTER TODAY FROM ABOUT 23 SIGNATORIES REPRESENTING VARIOUS ENTITIES AND ASPECT OF DOWNTOWN, INCLUDING THE DOWNTOWN SEATTLE ASSOCIATION, FRIENDS OF THE WATERFRONT PARK SEATTLE, SEATTLE KRAKEN, YWCA, THE ART MUSEUM, ET CETERA AND THE LIST GOES ON. IT SAYS, "WE URGE YOUR APPROVAL OF THE PROPOSED LEGISLATION TO ADVANCE THE IKE DIGITAL KIOSK PROGRAM IN SEATTLE BECAUSE IT REFLECTS YEARS OF COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT, RIGOROUS TECHNICAL REVIEW AND A CLEAR PUBLIC/PRIVATE PARTNERSHIPS THAT DELIVERS BROAD PUBLIC BENEFIT AT NO COST TO THE CITY OF SEATTLE." INSTEAD OF ME LISTING THE PUBLIC BENEFITS, I'LL PROVIDE THE LIST OF THINGS THEY IDENTIFIED, REALTIME WAY FINDING AND INFORMATION IN 100 LANGUAGES, BROADCAST PUBLIC SAFETY ALERTS AND EMERGENCY MESSAGING CONNECTED TO FEMA'S SYSTEM, PROMOTE LOCAL BUSINESSES, CULTURAL EVENTS AND PUBLIC RESOURCES, INCLUDES FEATURES FOR ADA ACCESSIBILITY AND EMERGENCY CALL BUTTONS AND GENERATES SIGNIFICANT REINVESTMENT IN DOWNTOWN AND OTHER NEIGHBORHOOD BUSINESS DISTRICTS. SO THAT IS WHY I AM EXCITED TO HOPEFULLY WRAP UP THIS PIECE OF LEGISLATION TODAY BEFORE WE CAN MOVE ON TO THE ACTUAL COUNCIL BILL THAT ACCOMPANIES THE RESOLUTION. SO WITH THAT WILL THE PRESENTERS PLEASE INTRODUCE THEMSELVES. >> MY NAME IS AND I'M A SENIOR POLICY ADVISER. >> HELLO. I'M ALYSE NELSON, THE DIVISION DIRECTOR. >> HELLO. MY NAME IS AMY GRAY AND I'M WITH SEATTLE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION. >> COUNCILMEMBERS CALVIN CHOW, COUNCIL CENTRAL STAFF. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. WE DID HAVE A BEAUTIFUL SLIDE PRESENTATION LAST TIME AND A DISCUSSION. I THINK WHAT WOULD BE HELPFUL HERE, WOULD YOU HAVE SDOT AND OUR CENTRAL STAFF WHO PRODUCED A MEMO WE RECEIVED BEFORE THE MAY 8th MEETING. CALVIN, WOULD YOU MIND SUMMARIZING THE MAIN COMPONENTS OF THAT RESOLUTION, PLEASE, AND THEN WE'LL HAVE QUESTIONS AND I WILL MOVE THE LEGISLATION. GO AHEAD. >> AT YOUR REQUEST, MY SUMMARY OF THE PROPOSAL BEFORE YOU, THIS IS THE RESOLUTION, THE FIRST PART OF THE TWO-STEP PROCESS FOR COUNCIL'S APPROVAL OF TERM PERMITS. THIS TERM PERMIT IS A LITTLE DIFFERENT FROM MOST IN THAT IT IS A PROGRAMMATIC PERMIT. SO MOST OF OUR TERM PERMITS FOCUS ON AN INDIVIDUAL LOCATION. THIS ONE IS FOR A NUMBER OF KIOSKS THROUGHOUT DOWNTOWN AND IN BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT AREAS. MY MEMO WHICH IS DATED MAY 5th SUMMARIZES THE PROPOSAL WHICH I THINK WE DISCUSSED IN QUITE SOME EXTENT. IT HIGHLIGHTS THE ANTICIPATED PUBLIC BENEFITS, FREE PUBLIC WI-FI, DISPLAY PUBLIC CONTENT, TRANSLATION OF DISPLAYED CONTENT, ACCESSIBILITY FEATURES, CALL BUTTON FEATURES, AND FINANCIAL SUPPORT WITH THE CTSA'S MISSION. IT ALSO IDENTIFIES THE ANTICIPATED PUBLIC BENEFIT MITIGATIONS WHICH INCLUDE A DECLUTTERING STRATEGY FOR THE BLOCK FACES WHERE THE KIOSKS ARE LOCATED AS WELL AS A PUBLIC REALM IMPROVEMENT STRATEGY FOR THOSE SAME BLOCK FACES AS WELL AS REGULAR TRASH AND DEBRIS REMOVAL AT THOSE LOCATIONS. I'D NOTE THAT THE DIRECTOR'S REPORT DOES HIGHLIGHT A FEW ISSUES THAT ARE RELATED FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION AS YOU CONSIDER THIS PROPOSAL. ONE IS THAT OFF-PREMISES ADVERTISING IS PROHIBITED BY THE STREET USE ORDINANCE AND SIGN CODE. THIS LEGISLATION WOULD PROVIDE AUTHORIZATION SUPERSEDING THOSE RESTRICTIONS. IT WOULD ALSO AS DISCUSSED IN THE LAST MEETING, THERE WAS DISCUSSION AROUND THE SURVEILLANCE AND PRIVACY PORTIONS OF THIS PROGRAM. WHILE IKE DOES OFFER SECURE VIDEO FOR PUBLIC SAFETY CALLS IN THEIR OFFERING, THAT IS NOT A PROPOSAL FOR THE KIOSKS THAT ARE IN THIS PROPOSAL FOR SEATTLE. IN ADDITION, THE DIRECTOR'S REPORT HIGHLIGHTS A NUMBER OF STAKEHOLDER FEEDBACK, POSITIVE AND NEGATIVE, AND IT IDENTIFIES THE SEATTLE DESIGN COMMISSION'S RECOMMENDATIONS THAT VOTED 5-4 AGAINST RECOMMENDING THE PROPOSAL AND PROVIDED A NUMBER OF FEEDBACK ON CURRENT CONDITIONS AND PUBLIC BENEFITS THAT THE COUNCIL COULD CONSIDER AS THIS PROPOSAL COMES BEFORE YOU AND THEN LASTLY, I'LL JUST SAY THAT THE DRAFT ORDINANCE THAT'S ATTACHED TO THE AGENDA IS WAITING FOR COUNCIL'S INTRODUCTION REFERRAL. THAT'S THE SECOND PART OF THE TERM PERMIT PROCESS. IT ESTABLISHES THE LEGAL REQUIREMENTS FOR THE TERM PERMIT AND IN ADDITION, THE PROPOSED LEGISLATION WOULD AUTHORIZE THE MAYOR TO SIGN AN MOU WITH DSA THAT GOVERNS THE KIOSK PROGRAMS, BUSINESS PROGRAMS, THE REVENUE SHARE AND OPERATING EXPECTATIONS FOR THE PROGRAM. WITH THAT I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I'M GOING TO MOVE THE LEGISLATION BECAUSE IF I DON'T DO IT NOW, I'LL FORGET LATER. I'LL MOVE IT AND OPEN IT UP FOR QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS. I MOVE THAT THE COMMITTEE RECOMMEND ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION 32170. IS THERE A SECOND? >> SECOND. >> SECOND. >> THANK YOU. IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 32170. NOW I WILL OPEN IT UP TO QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS. COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH, IT'S MY IMPRESSION -- GO AHEAD. I SEE YOUR HAND UP. >> THANK YOU, COUNCIL PRESIDENT. JUST A HEADS UP, COLLEAGUES, I'M GOING TO BE WITHDRAWING MY AMENDMENT. I NEED TO TODAY FOR POTENTIAL BRINGING IT BACK TO FULL COUNCIL ON FURTHER REVIEW OF THE LANGUAGE, MY INTENT IS BASED OFF ENSURING ALL NEIGHBORHOODS CAN RECEIVE SOME TYPE OF BENEFIT, NOT JUST THE NEIGHBORHOODS THAT HAVE BIA EARMARKED TO RECEIVE REVENUE. I BELIEVE THAT NEIGHBORHOOD DISTRICTS SHOULD BENEFIT BECAUSE WE ARE ALL ONE CITY AND SO I WILL CONTINUE TO WORK WITH CENTRAL STAFF TO MAKE SURE THAT THE LANGUAGE IS TIGHT, BUT I JUST WANTED TO STATE MY INTENTIONS ON BRINGING THIS BACK TO FULL COUNCIL, BUT I WILL BE WITHDRAWING THIS TODAY. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR THAT. I APPRECIATE AND JUST WANTING TO MAKE CLEAR THAT IS PART OF THE SECOND PHASE OF THE INSTALLATION OF THESE -- THE BENEFITS WILL ACCRUE TO NEIGHBORHOOD BUSINESS DISTRICTS OR BIAs ACROSS THE CITY IN THE SECOND PHASE OF INSTALLATION OF THIS LEGISLATION OR THIS PROGRAM AND I COMPLETELY UNDERSTAND YOUR REASONS FOR WANTING TO SPREAD THE LOVE A LITTLE BIT EVEN IF THERE IS NOT AN OFFICIAL BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT AREA. ARE THERE OTHER COUNCILMEMBERS ON THE COMMITTEE THAT HAVE QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? OKAY. COUNCILMEMBER RINCK. >> CHECKING THIS MICROPHONE, OKAY. THANK YOU FOR RECOGNIZING ME, CHAIR. I UNDERSTAND I'M JOINING THIS CONVERSATION TODAY PRIMARILY RELATED TO ETHICS, BUT I WANTED TO ENGAGE A LITTLE BIT ON THE LEGISLATION RELATED TO THE KIOSKS SINCE I'M HERE. THIS IS CENTRAL STAFF. MY WORKING UNDERSTANDINGFUL JUST THE SEQUENCING OF THIS IS PRIMARILY THAT THE APPROVED RESOLUTION IS INTENDED TO INFORM THE SUBSEQUENT ORDINANCE AND IF THAT IS THE CASE, IS THERE A REASON WE'RE BRINGING THESE TWO TOGETHER IN TANDEM A PART OF THE SAME COMMITTEE AGENDA FOR TODAY? >> I THINK I WOULD SAY AS A PROPOSAL, THIS TERM PERMIT IS LARGELY THE SAME LEVEL OF ATTENTION AT THE FRONT END BECAUSE IT IS PROGRAMMATIC, BECAUSE THE PERMITS WILL -- EXCUSE ME, THE KIOSKS WILL REQUIRE FURTHER PERMITS TO BE IMPLEMENTED. SO ISSUES LIKE SETTING REQUIREMENTS AND THE LIKE WILL COME INTO IT. IT IS TRUE THE DRAFT PRESENTED TO YOU OF THE ORDINANCE WAS PRODUCED BEFORE THE COUNCIL HAS TAKEN FINAL ACTION ON THE RESOLUTION. SO THE FOLKS WHO HAVE DRAFTED THAT ORDINANCE ARE ON THIS CALL, CAN MAYBE SPEAK TO WHAT THEY'VE HEARD AND HOW THEY'VE TRIED TO ACCOMMODATE IT. OTHER THAN THAT, IT IS AT THE COUNCIL'S DISCRETION TO MAKE MODIFICATIONS TO THE RESOLUTION OR THE ORDINANCE. >> DOES ANYBODY FROM SDOT CARE TO RESPOND? >> I THINK THAT WHAT CALVIN SAID IS REALLY A GOOD SUMMARY THAT THE PROGRAMMATIC TERM FOR IT IS IT REALLY UNIQUE AND WHILE OTHER TERM PERMITS WE SEE AND BRING TO YOU, THERE ARE SIGNIFICANT STRUCTURES THAT TAKE A LONG TIME TO BUILD. SO THERE'S A CONNECTIVITY BETWEEN THE PARTS OF THE PROCESS FOR INSTALLATION AND WHEN WE COME TO SEE COUNCIL. USUALLY WITH A SIGNIFICANT STRUCTURE IT WOULD ALREADY BE AN APPLICATION AND GOING THROUGH SDOT REVIEW FOR TECHNICAL CONSIDERATION AND IT WOULD BE A LOT MORE DESIGN AND THEN WE'RE COMING BACK WITH THE ORDINANCE WHEN IT'S MORE CLOSE TO COMPLETE DESIGN LIKE 90%. SO THIS IS JUST A REALLY UNIQUE PROPOSAL WHERE IT'S SOMETHING WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THERE'S NO INSTALLATION PERMITS AND WOULDN'T BE UNTIL THIS RESOLUTION PHASE, BUT THERE'S ALSO WE NEED TO GET TO THE ORDINANCE TO ALLOW PERMITS TO BE GIVEN FOR INSTALLATION REVIEW AND SITE ANALYSIS. >> UNDERSTOOD. THAT CONCLUDES MY ONLY QUESTION FOR TODAY AND SHOULD THIS COME BEFORE FULL COUNCIL, I IMAGINE I'LL HAVE SOME FOLLOWUPS, BUT THANK YOU FOR ALLOWING ME TO PARTICIPATE TODAY, CHAIR. >> NO PROBLEM. REGARDING THE ISSUE ABOUT THE SIGN CODE, IT IS TRUE THAT IS SOMETHING THAT HAS BEEN NOTED. I DO NOTE THAT ARTICLE V, SECTION 114 OF THE CITY CHARTER DOES AUTHORIZE THE COUNCIL TO APPROVE USES IN THE RIGHT-OF-WAY THAT WOULD OTHERWISE NOT CONFORM TO THE SIGN CODE AS LONG AS THERE ARE -- BECAUSE OF THE PUBLIC BENEFITS THAT ARE ASSOCIATED WITH THE USE. SO THAT IS SOMETHING THAT I JUST WANTED TO GET ON THE RECORD. COUNCILMEMBER KETTLE. >> THANK YOU, COUNCIL PRESIDENT. I JUST WANTED TO ECHO THAT POINT REALLY QUICK THAT I UNDERSTAND THIS IS A UNIQUE APPLICATION AND FOR ME ONE CENTERED ON PUBLIC SAFETY FIRST WITH THE DSA MID AND EVEN PHASE 2 WITH THE BIAs WHICH SERVE A VERY IMPORTANT BUSINESS FUNCTION. I UNDERSTAND GOING TO COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH'S COMMENT EARLIER, NOT EVERY CITY OR DISTRICT HAS BIAs. THAT'S SOMETHING WE SHOULD LOOK AT IN TERMS OF ENSURING VARIOUS AREAS OF THE CITY ARE BENEFITED FROM, NOT JUST CERTAIN AREAS. SO THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. I DO BELIEVE THE FACT THAT THE BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT AREAS ARE ACTUAL CITY ENTITIES IS WHY THEY WERE CHOSEN, BUT I'M SURE THERE CAN BE SOMETHING WORKED OUT OR UNDERSTOOD LATER THAT CAN BE WORKED INTO THE ACTUAL TERMS FOR THE SITING PROCESS AS WE GO FORWARD. ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS ABOUT THIS? WELL, I WILL SIMPLY SAY THAT I'M NOT EVEN GOING TO MENTION THE FACT THERE ARE GOING TO BE HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE IN THIS TOWN THAT ARE HERE FOR SOME BIG GAMES COMING FORWARD. THIS IS SOMETHING THAT I BELIEVE WILL -- THE META BENEFIT I SEE IS ON EVERY SINGLE BLOCK FACE, AS WAS ALLUDED TO IN THE LETTER WE RECEIVED EARLIER TODAY, THERE WILL BE IMPROVEMENTS TO EVERY BLOCK FACE WHERE THESE ARE SITED. WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HANGING PLANTS OR THE CLEANUP OF CLUTTER AND DEBRIS ALREADY ON THE SIDEWALK. SO I SEE THIS AS A CATALYST FOR PEDESTRIAN IMPROVEMENT, FOR STREET SITE IMPROVEMENTS, BUT ESPECIALLY FOR PEDESTRIAN AND PEOPLE WHO REQUIRE SIDEWALKS TO GET AROUND IN THEIR DAY-TO-DAY LIVES. SO THAT IS AN ADDED BENEFIT THAT IT IS NOT REALLY BROUGHT OUT THAT MUCH IN SOME OF THE LITERATURE ABOUT THIS, BUT I THINK WHEN YOU THINK ABOUT THE NUMBER OF THESE WILL BE INSTALLED DOWNTOWN AND HOW MANY BLOCKS WILL HAVE THAT IMPROVEMENT, THAT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE VENDOR, THAT DOES ADD AN ADDED LAYER OF INTENTIONAL IMPROVEMENT WITHOUT COST TO THE CITY. ALL RIGHT. PEOPLE HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO TRY IT OUT WHEN IT WAS IN THE BASEMENT -- NOT THE BASEMENT, THE FIRST FLOOR OF CITY HALL ON THE 7th OR 8th OF LAST MONTH. HOPEFULLY YOU GOT A CHANCE TO EXPERIENCE THE MANY APPLICATIONS OF THE KIOSK WHEN IT WAS HERE ON SITE. WITH THAT I WILL ASK ONE MORE TIME IF THERE ARE ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS BEFORE WE PROCEED TO A VOTE. YES. GO AHEAD. >> COUNCILMEMBERS, I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY ONE THING, THAT THIS IS JUST THE TERM PERMIT AUTHORIZATION. SO IN TERMS OF THE USE, THE BENEFITS, THOSE TYPES OF ISSUES, THE SPECIFIC ISSUE THAT COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH WAS ALLUDING TO WAS REVENUES THAT WOULD COME FROM THE SEPARATE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY AND DSA THAT'S OUTSIDE OF THE PERMIT. I WANTED TO MAKE A DISTINCTION BETWEEN WHAT IS AUTHORIZED IN THE PERMIT AND WHAT IS A SEPARATE MOU. >> THIS IS APPROVING THE CONCEPTUAL DESIGN AND THE MAIN ACTORS AT PLAY HERE. ALL RIGHT. I AM NOT SEEING ANY OTHER COMMENTS. I WILL ALSO NOTE THIS HAS BEEN A PRIORITY FOR MAYOR HARRELL AS PART OF HIS DOWNTOWN ACTIVATION PLAN BECAUSE, WELL, IT WILL ACTIVATE AND TO ME YES, WE CAN GET SOME OF THIS INFORMATION FROM OUR PHONES, BUT LOOKING UP AND GATHERING AROUND OR HAVING A PLACE TO GO FOR THIS KIND OF INFORMATION PRESENTED IN A VISUALLY APPEALING WAY IS A WAY TO SORT OF -- IT FORCES LOOKING UP, GATHERING, AND BEING PART OF THE REST OF DOWNTOWN. SO THAT IS WHY I ESPECIALLY LIKE THE FACT THAT THESE ARE GOING TO BE PLACED STRATEGICALLY IN AREAS WHERE IT WILL ENCOURAGE GATHERING GATHERING. IN ANY CASE, IF THERE ARE NO OTHER QUESTIONS, PLEASE, CLERK, CALL THE ROLL CALL ON THE VOTE. >> COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA? >> AYE. >> COUNCILMEMBER SOLOMON? >> AYE. >> COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH? >> YES. >> COUNCILMEMBER KETTLE? >> AYE. >> CHAIR NELSON? >> AYE. >> FIVE IN FAVOR, NONE OPPOSED. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I APPRECIATE THAT. THANK YOU ALL. WILL THE CLERK PLEASE READ ITEM 2 INTO OUR RECORD. LET ME SAY THIS. THE MOTION CARRIES AND THE RECOMMENDATION THAT THE RESOLUTION BE ADOPTED WILL BE SENT TO THE JUNE 3rd CITY COUNCIL MEETING. PARDON ME ON THAT. CAN YOU PLEASE READ ITEM 3 INTO THE RECORD. >> ITEM 2 YOU MEAN, COUNCIL PRESIDENT? >>. >> YES. >> AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 2, DRAFT DIGITAL KIOSK FOR PROGRAM AND PRODUCTION. >> WE HAVE SOME OF THE SAME PRESENTERS. I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S ANYBODY THAT HAS NOT YET SPOKEN PRESENTING, BUT DUE TO HOW THE TIMING WENT OF THE LEGISLATION, WHEN THE LEGISLATION WAS TRANSMITTED TO THE COUNCIL, WE WILL BE HEARING A PRESENTATION ON THE DRAFT ORDINANCE RELATING TO DIGITAL KIOSK PROGRAMMATIC TERM PERMIT AND WE HAVE THE SAME PRESENTERS AT THE TABLE AND WE'RE ALSO JOINED BY REPRESENTATIVES OF IKE. DSA WAS HERE. I'M NOT SURE IF HE IS STILL HERE IN THE AUDIENCE IN CASE COUNCILMEMBERS HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR FOLKS THAT AREN'T PRESENTING THE PRESENTATION TODAY. LET'S SEE. CAM, DO YOU HAVE ANY TO ADD BEFORE WE MOVE TO THE ACTUAL PRESENTATION? >> NO. I THINK WE SHOULD TURN THIS OVER TO SDOT. THANK YOU. >> OKAY. PLEASE GO AHEAD, SDOT, WITH YOUR PRESENTATION. >> SURE. I'D LIKE TO SAY A FEW INTRODUCTORY REMARKS AND THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR HAVING ME. TO RECAP, THE KIOSK PROGRAM IS A PART OF THE MAYOR'S DOWNTOWN ACTIVATION PLAN TO BRING VIBRANCY AND TECHNOLOGY DOWNTOWN IN PARTICULAR IN PREPARATION FOR FIFA SOCCER COMING TO THE CITY IN 2026 AND UTILIZING OUR DOWNTOWN SEATTLE ASSOCIATION PARTNERED ALONG WITH DIFFERENT PARTS OF THE CITY. THE MAYOR'S OFFICE JUST WANTED TO ACKNOWLEDGE THE YEARS OF LEGWORK THAT HAS BEEN DONE BY DSA AND, OF COURSE, THE PARTNER. THIS HAS BEEN A COMPREHENSIVE PROCESS, INCLUDING COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT, DESIGN COMMISSION ENGAGEMENT, AND A THOROUGH CE QA ANALYSIS. WE APPRECIATE THE COMMENTS WE'VE RECEIVED FROM ALL STAKEHOLDERS, INCLUDING COUNCILMEMBERS. NOW I'LL TURN IT TO SDOT TO GIVE THE PRESENTATION. >> IS IT ALL RIGHT IF I SHARE THE SCREEN NOW? >> YES. >> IT WILL TAKE ME A MINUTE. THERE WAS SOMEBODY HELPING OUT BEFORE. I THINK I CAN DO IT, THOUGH. ALL RIGHT. THINK I DID IT. >> YEA! >> YEA. ALYSE NELSON WITH SDOT. I'M ON SLIDE 12 OF OUR SLIDE DECK THAT IS WITH THE AGENDA, FAST FORWARDING TO TALK ABOUT THE ORDINANCE. THE BOXES ON THE SCREEN ARE KIND OF KEY ELEMENTS WE ADDRESS AND AMY AND I WILL BE DISCUSSING SEVERAL OF THESE TODAY, BUT NOT IN A HUGE AMOUNT. WE'RE HAPPY TO GET INTO ANYTHING YOU HAVE AS FAR AS QUESTIONS. SO AGAIN, I'LL START ON A HIGH LEVEL. AMY WILL DIG IN A LITTLE BIT MORE DETAIL AND THEN WE'LL SEE WHERE WE'RE AT. THE TERM PERMIT ESTABLISHES TERMS AND CONDITIONS FOR THE COMMITTEE WHICH WILL BE THE DOWNTOWN SEATTLE ASSOCIATION. THERE ARE MANY PROTECTIONS FOR THE CITY, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO PROTECTION OF EXISTING UTILITIES, REQUIREMENTS FOR THE COMMITTEE AND VENDOR TO REMOVE AND RESTORE KIOSKS WHERE WE REQUIRE, REQUIREMENTS TO KEEP THE KIOSKS IN GOOD WORKING ORDER AND BONDING AND INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS. WE ALSO HAVE WORKED TO ESTABLISH SOME SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS ON WHERE KIOSKS COULD BE LOCATED WITHIN THE CITY, INCLUDING PROHIBITIONS TO MAKE SURE THEY'RE IN LOCATIONS ADJACENT TO APPROPRIATE LAND USES AND SITING REQUIREMENTS DETERMINED SPECIFICALLY FOR THIS USE DURING OUR SDOT REVIEW AND OUR SEPA ANALYSIS. WE HAVE DETAILED ANNUAL RECORDING REPEATS TO HELP US UNDERSTAND HOW THE PROGRAM IS WORKING WITH THE DSA AND IKE. WE WORK WITH I.T. ON COLLECTION AND RETENTION AND HAVE WORKED ON A MITIGATION THAT IS A REQUIREMENT OF THE PERMIT AND WILL WORK CLOSELY WITH THE DSA AND VENDOR IKE TO DEVELOP THAT FURTHER DURING OUR KIOSK INSTALLATION PHASE. NEXT I TURN IT TO AMY. SHE'LL GIVE US A FEW MORE DETAILS ON THE TERM PERMIT. >> THANK YOU, ALYSE. THE TERM PERMIT ORDINANCE GOES INTO SENSITIVE DETAIL ON CONDITIONS OF THE PERMIT. IT SETS THE TERM AND THE THE FIRST PHASE WOULD BE 16 1/2 YEARS. THE FIRST PHASE WOULD REQUIRE CITY APPROVAL TO MOVE FORWARD. IT'S UP TO THE CITY TO DECIDE AT THAT POINT IN THE FUTURE HOW TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS. IT PROHIBITS CERTAIN LOCATIONS LIKE HISTORIC PRESERVATION IN SPECIAL DISTRICTS, THE WATER LINE AND SHORELINE DISTRICTS. IT INCLUDES STANDARDS TO PREVENT DRIVER DISTRACTION, CLEARANCES FOR TRUCK LOADING ZONES, ET CETERA. THERE IS LANGUAGE IN THE ORDINANCE THAT PROTECTS STREET TREES AND NO STREET TREE WILL BE REMOVED TO LOCATE A KIOSK. DETAILS THE EXTENSIVE MAINTENANCE OBLIGATIONS FOR DSA AND THE VENDOR AND THERE ARE MAXIMUM OPERATION STANDARDS TO ADDRESS THINGS LIKE LIGHT AND THE BRIGHTNESS LEVEL FROM KIOSKS. THEY MUST BE COMPLEMENTARY TO THE SEAMLESS SEATTLE SIGNS IN COLOR, NAME, ET CETERA AND THERE SHALL BE NO FLASHING OR STROBES. ALYSE MENTIONED THE INDEMNIFICATION INSURANCE AND BOND REQUIREMENTS. THESE ARE IN THE ORDINANCE TO PROTECT THE CITY IN THE EVENT OF CATASTROPHE OR LAWSUIT, ET CETERA. THE INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS ARE DETERMINED BY THE CITY'S RISK MANAGER. THE BOND COVERS THE COST IF THE CITY NEEDS TO REMOVE THE KIOSKS. IT'S TO ALLOW TO ADJUST THE BOND AND INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS IF WE DETERMINE THE AMOUNTS ARE INSUFFICIENT TO PROTECT THE CITY. AS ALYSE MENTIONED, THERE'S AN ANNUAL RECORDING REQUIREMENT, DESCRIPTION OF REPAIRS MADE DURING THE PREVIOUS YEAR AND SUMMARY OF ALL COMPLAINTS, HOW THEY WERE RESOLVED AND THE TIME FRAME TO ADDRESS THE COMPLAINT AND A REQUIREMENT TO PROVIDE THE STATUS OF ALL PUBLIC BENEFITS INSTALLED. THERE'S NOTIFICATION AND OUTREACH REQUIREMENTS THAT APPLIES FOR THE INDIVIDUAL INSTALLATION PERMITS AND THERE'S PUBLIC BENEFIT REQUIREMENTS, INCLUDING REMOVING BROKEN OR UNUSABLE BENCHES AND OTHER STREET FURNITURE AND AMENDING THESE TO THE STREETSCAPES SUCH AS HANGING BASKETS, MURALS, ART, ET CETERA AND IMPORTANTLY AS ALYSE NOTED, IT PROHIBITS DSA OR IKE FROM COLLECTING ANY PERSONALLY IDENTIFIABLE INFORMATION FROM SOMEONE WALKING BY. ALL THESE CONDITIONS ARE IN THE REQUIREMENTS. OUR RECOMMENDATION IS THAT CITY COUNCIL APPROVE THE KIOSK TERM PERMIT AND IF APPROVED, START INSTALLING THE KIOSKS RIGHT AWAY AFTER GETTING INSTALLATION PERMITS AND THIS SLIDE SHOWS THE NEXT STEPS AS NOTED FOR EARLIER BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT NELSON. THE FULL COUNCIL WILL HAVE THE RESOLUTION JUNE 3rd. WE WOULD LIKE TO COME BACK TO THE JULY 12th COUNCIL COMMITTEE TO OUR BRIEFING AND POTENTIAL VOTE AND IF THAT MOVES FORWARD, I WOULD ANTICIPATE GOING FULL COUNCIL WITH THE ORDINANCE ON JUNE 24th. I'LL TURN IT BACK TO ALYSE. >> THAT IS BEAUTIFUL. THAT IS OUR FORMAL PRESENTATION. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. WE HOPE THIS PRESENTATION HAS BEEN USEFUL, THERE'S SOME INFORMATION ON THE ORDINANCE AND WE'RE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU MAY HAVE. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR THIS PRESENTATION. THANK YOU FOR DELIVERING IT IN AN EXPEDITIOUS MANNER. ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS FROM COUNCILMEMBERS OR, CALVIN, DO YOU WANT TO ADD ANY THOUGHTS OR COMMENTS? >> JUST A REMINDER THE PROPOSED LEGISLATION WILL ALSO GIVE THE MAYOR AUTHORITY TO SIGN THE MOU, WHICH IS ATTACHED AS ATTACHMENT 1 TO THE DRAFT. IF YOU'RE LOOKING FOR DETAILS THAT GO BEYOND THE TERM PERMIT, THEY WOULD BE THERE. >> GOT IT. COUNCILMEMBER QUESTIONS? WELL, I HAVE A QUESTION. COULD YOU PLEASE SPEAK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE SURVEILLANCE CAPABILITY OF THESE KIOSKS. >> YEAH. I CAN ANSWER THAT AND IF WE HAVE MORE SPECIFICS, WE CAN TURN IT OVER TO THE OTHER FOLKS HERE. THIS WAS REVIEWED BY THE CITY I.T.s TEAM THAT HELPS THE EXPERTS FOR ALL THINGS PRIVACY. THERE'S NO DATA COLLECTION ALLOWED BY THE TERM PERMIT ORDINANCE ITSELF. THERE IS A SPECIFIC SECTION IN THE TERM PERMIT. WE CAN LOOK IT UP IN CASE YOU WANT US TO TAKE A LOOK AT IT. IKE WORKS ALL OVER THE UNITED STATES. SO THERE ARE DIFFERENT WAYS THIS TECHNOLOGY OPERATES IN DIFFERENT CITIES, BUT FOR SEATTLE THERE WILL BE NO COLLECTION OF DATA, NO RETENTION OF DATA, NO PHOTOGRAPHY OR VIDEO OF FOLKS. THE ONLY EXCEPTION IS THE SELFIE CAM THAT IS SOMETHING SOMEBODY HAS TO SIGN UP AND ACCEPT THAT. SO THEY HAVE TO KIND OF ACCEPT THAT AND SAY I WANT TO TAKE MY SELFIE WITH THE KIOSK. THAT'S THE ONLY USE. IT'S BEEN REVIEWED BY I.T. I THINK THE TERM PERMIT ORDINANCE IS SECTION 25. HEAL HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY FOLLOW-UP QUESTIONS OR TURN IT OVER TO OTHER FOLKS. >> I ADVANCING THE AUDIENCE MEMBERS HERE, COUNCILMEMBERS. I'M NOT SEEING ANY HANDS RAISED FROM MY COLLEAGUES. CAN YOU PLEASE EXPLAIN IF THESE ARE VANDALIZED, SPRAY PAINT, ET CETERA, WHO IS RESPONSIBLE FOR REMOVING THAT? >> THE COMMITTEE WILL BE THE DOWNTOWN SEATTLE ASSOCIATION. ULTIMATELY THEY'RE RESPONSIBLE AND THEY'LL WORK CLOSELY WITH THEIR VENDOR, IKE SMART CITY, TO HANDLE ANY DAMAGE AND THE TERM PERMIT HAS SPECIFICS ON THE EXPECTATION THEY MAINTAIN IN GOOD WORKING ORDER AT ALL TIMES. >> GOT IT. THANK YOU. QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM COLLEAGUES? OKAY. WELL, THANK YOU VERY, VERY MUCH. WE DO HAVE THE DRAFT. THE LEGISLATION WAS TRANSMITTED. SO WE DO HAVE IT BEFORE US. WE'LL BE ABLE TO DEVELOP PERHAPS SOME MORE. I THINK CAL WILL BE WORKING ON A MEMO ONCE HE'S ABLE TO GO THROUGH THE PRECISE LEGISLATION NOW THAT IT'S BEEN TRANSMITTED AND I JUST HAVE TO SAY THAT I HAVE HEARD -- I RESPECT SOME OF THE CONCERNS THAT I'VE BEEN RECEIVING BY EMAIL, ET CETERA. I WILL ALSO ABOUT THE AESTHETICS OR THE FACT WE'RE PUTTING AN OBJECT IN THE RIGHT-OF-WAY. I WILL JUST NOTE SEATTLE IS A CITY OF INNOVATION AND WE ARE A CITY OF TECHNOLOGY AND IN THIS CASE WE ARE INVITING TECHNOLOGY TO PROVIDE A WHOLE SERIES OF PUBLIC BENEFITS THAT DON'T JUST BENEFIT PEOPLE THAT LIVE AND WORK HERE, BUT ALSO THE MANY VISITORS THAT WILL BE COMING TO TOWN IN THE NOT TOO DISTANT FUTURE AND ALL PRESENTED IN MANY, MANY LANGUAGES SO THAT IT DOES OVERCOME LANGUAGE BARRIERS AND THE MEMBERS OF THE DISABILITY COMMUNITY HAVE EXPRESSED SUPPORT FOR SOME OF THE ACCESSIBILITY FEATURES THAT ARE ALSO CONTAINED WITHIN THE KIOSKS THEMSELVES. SO I LOOK FORWARD TO DIGGING INTO THE ACTUAL LEGISLATION AND CONTINUING OUR DISCUSSION AT THE NEXT MEETING. SO THANK YOU VERY, VERY MUCH FOR THIS PRESENTATION AND WITHOUT FURTHER ADIEU, WE WILL MOVE ON TO THE NEXT ITEM ON OUR AGENDA. THANK YOU VERY, VERY MUCH FOR BEING HERE AND DESPITE THE DISTURBANCE EARLIER, THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR HANGING WITH AND WE'LL SEE YOU NEXT TIME. THANKS. >> THANK YOU. >> OKAY. WILL THE CLERK PLEASE READ ITEM 3 INTO THE RECORD. >> AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 3, AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO THE CODE OF ETHICS, DEFINING ELECTED OFFICIAL, REQUIRING ELECTED OFFICIALS TO DISCLOSE ANY FINANCIAL INTEREST OR CONFLICT OF INTEREST PRIOR TO PARTICIPATING IN LEGISLATIVE MATTERS AND AMENDING SECTION 4.16.030 AND 4.16.070 OF THE SEATTLE MUNICIPAL CODE FOR BRIEFING DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE VOTE. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. SO, COLLEAGUES, THIS IS OUR SECOND DISCUSSION OF COUNCILMEMBER MOORE'S LEGISLATION WHICH IS BEING DELIBERATED IN THIS COMMITTEE BECAUSE THE CHAIR OF GOVERNANCE -- WELL, THE GOVERNANCE COMMITTEE OVERSEES THE SEATTLE OFFICE OF ETHICS AND ELECTIONS. THAT'S WHY IT'S BEFORE US TODAY. WE HAVE SEVERAL AMENDMENTS. I'VE ASKED DIRECTOR BARNETT TO BE HERE AGAIN TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS PEOPLE MIGHT HAVE AS THESE AMENDMENTS ARE DISCUSSED AND FOR THE RECORD, WILL OUR PRESENTERS INTRODUCE THEMSELVES AND I WILL PROCEED WITH SORT OF THE RUN OF SHOW OF HOW WE'LL GET THROUGH THE AMENDMENTS. SO PLEASE GO AHEAD. >> BEN NOBLE, CENTRAL STAFF DIRECTOR. >> WILLIAM BARNETT, DIRECTOR SEATTLE ETHICS COMMISSION. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. SO LET'S SEE, BEFORE WE PLACE THE BILL BEFORE US AND CONSIDER AMENDMENTS, AS CHAIR I'M PROPOSING THE FOLLOWING PROCESS. ALL RIGHT. SO AFTER THE BILL HAS BEEN MOVED AND PLACED BEFORE THE COMMITTEE, COUNCILMEMBER MOORE AS SPONSOR WILL ADDRESS THE BILL AND THEN COUNCILMEMBERS WILL MOVE THEIR AMENDMENTS AT THE APPROPRIATE TIME. AFTER RECEIVING A SECOND, CENTRAL STAFF WILL PROVIDE AN OVERVIEW OF THAT AMENDMENT AND AFTER CENTRAL STAFF'S OVERVIEW THE SPONSOR WILL ADDRESS THE RATIONALE FOR THE AMENDMENT AND THEN FINALLY, THE SPONSOR AFTER THE SPONSOR OF THE AMENDMENT SAYS THEIR PIECE WE'LL OPEN IT UP FOR DISCUSSION BEFORE VOTING. THESE STEPS WILL BE REPEATED FOR EACH OF THE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS AND THE ORDER OF AMENDMENTS WILL BE CONSIDERED IN NUMERICAL ORDER. PLEASE NOTE WE DO NOT HAVE AN AMENDMENT NUMBER 4. SO UNLESS THERE ARE ANY QUESTIONS ON THE PROCESS, I'M NOT SEEING ANY HANDS UP, ALL RIGHT. SO I MOVE THAT -- >> COUNCIL PRESIDENT, SORRY, I SEE THAT COUNCILMEMBER MOORE, YOU LOOK LIKE YOU HAD YOUR HAND UP. >> YEAH. THANK YOU, COUNCIL PRESIDENT. I JUST NEED ONE MINUTE. MY SCRIPT IS NOT CORRECT ON THIS. IF YOU COULD GIVE ME ONE SECOND. >> SURE. >> COUNCIL PRESIDENT, I'M SORRY, I CAN'T FIGURE OUT WHERE MY HAND IS TO RAISE HERE. MAY I -- HERE WE GO. >> DO YOU HAVE -- OKAY, GO AHEAD, COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA. >> WHILE COUNCILMEMBER MOORE IS WORKING ON HER REMARKS, I DID HAVE SOME QUESTIONS OVERALL ABOUT THE LEGISLATION AND SINCE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR BARNETT AND DIRECTOR NOBLE ARE HERE I WONDERED IF THIS WAS THE APPROPRIATE TIME TO ASK THE QUESTION OR TO, I GUESS, MAKE COMMENTS ABOUT THE -- >> LET ME MOVE THE LEGISLATION AND THEN IT'S FINE IF YOU ASK QUESTIONS. IS THAT OKAY WITH YOU? >> YES. >> OKAY. I MOVE THAT THE COMMITTEE RECOMMEND PASSAGE OF COUNCIL BILL 120978. IS THERE A SECOND? >> SECOND. >> OKAY. IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED TO RECOMMEND PASSAGE OF COUNCIL BILL 120978 AND I WOULD LIKE TO PROVIDE FOR COUNCILMEMBER MOORE TO INTRODUCE THE -- TO SAY HER PIECE ABOUT THE LEGISLATION AND THEN GO AHEAD AND OPEN IT UP FOR QUESTIONS BEFORE WE GET INTO THE MEAT OF THE AMENDMENTS. I THINK THAT'S MORE ORDERLY. IS THAT ALL RIGHT WITH YOU, COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA? >> OF COURSE. THANK YOU, COUNCIL PRESIDENT. >> ALL RIGHT. IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED TO RECOMMEND PASSAGE OF THE BILL. COUNCILMEMBER MOORE AS SPONSOR OF THE BILL, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED IN ORDER TO ADDRESS IT BEFORE WE PROCEED TO GENERAL QUESTIONS AND THEN AMENDMENTS. GO AHEAD, PLEASE. >> OKAY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU FOR YOUR INDULGENCE THERE. I DID WANT TO FIRST SAY THANK YOU TO COUNCIL PRESIDENT FOR ALLOWING ME TO JOIN THE COMMITTEE AGAIN TODAY FOR FURTHER DISCUSSION IN ADDRESSING MY AMENDMENT AND ADDITION A AMENDMENTS. I DID WANT TO OPEN WITH SOME CONTEXT FOR THIS LEGISLATION. AGAIN, FOR SOME BACKGROUND ON THE DRAFTING, IN NOVEMBER OUR LEGAL COUNSEL FORWARDED TO ALL COUNCILMEMBERS, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR BARNETT, IN WHICH HE OUTLINED THINKING ON A POSSIBLE UPDATE TO THE SEATTLE CODE OF ETHICS. CERTAINLY AS A LAWYER AND FORMER JUDGE WHO WAS AND IS RESPONSIBLE FOR ADHERING TO PROPER RECUSAL AND DISCLOSURE PROTOCOL, I TOOK SPECIAL INTEREST IN THIS IDEA. I, TOO, HAVE SHARED -- HAD MANY OF THE SAME CONCERNS WE'VE HEARD FROM SOME OF THE PUBLIC COMMENTERS THROUGHOUT THIS PROCESS. CERTAINLY I THINK AT FIRST MENTION OF REMOVAL OF A RECUSAL PROVISION WOULD CERTAINLY RAISE SOME BELLS FOR ME AND OTHERS. SO I ASKED OUR LEGAL COUNSEL TO LOOK AT OTHER MODELS FOR HOW OTHER JURISDICTIONS HANDLE THIS AND CAME ULTIMATELY TO THE SAME CONCLUSION AS DIRECTOR BARNETT, THAT SEATTLE IS SOMEWHAT OF AN OUTLIER IN HOW OUR ETHICS CODE IS CURRENTLY WRITTEN. SO I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO REMEMBER THAT WHEN WE HEARD AT THE LAST COMMITTEE MEETING FROM BOTH DIRECTOR BARNETT AND ALSO THE CHAIR OF THE ETHICS AND ELECTIONS COMMISSION AND AS THEY STATED, THERE IS NO GOLD STANDARD HOW TO DO ETHICS AND THAT THERE ARE DIFFERENT MODELS AND WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE DIFFERENT MODELS THROUGHOUT THE STATES, YOU'LL SEE THERE ARE A VARIETY OF MODELS AND THEY OUTLINE SOME OF THOSE MODELS AS WELL. REALLY ULTIMATELY IT BECOMES A POLICY DECISION. I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO ADDRESS SOME OF THE ISSUES OR POTENTIAL CONCERNS RAISED EARLIER IN COMMENTS TODAY. MANY PEOPLE HAVE SAID WHY ARE WE CHANGING SOMETHING AFTER 45 YEARS OF WORKING SO WELL? I THINK WAYNE CAN SPEAK TO THIS AS WELL, DIRECTOR BARNETT. THIS ACTUALLY HAS NOT WORKED SO BEAUTIFULLY FOR 45 YEARS AND, IN FACT, THERE HAVE BEEN SIGNIFICANT CHANGES MADE TO THE ETHICS CODE OVER THE PAST 45 YEARS WHICH ARE NOW THE REASON THAT WE HAVE THE CODE WRITTEN AS IS WHY WE HAD TO CREATE AN EXEMPTION FOR PEOPLE TO VOTE ON TAXES AND LEVIES AND EXEMPTION FOR A SUBSTANTIAL SEGMENT OF THE POPULATION. I SAY THIS BECAUSE THIS IS A WORK IN PROGRESS. IT IS SOMETHING I THINK WE NEED TO KEEP IN MIND. NOTHING IS CAST IN STONE. ADDITIONAL, THE OTHER THING IS THE CONCERN SOMEHOW THIS WILL OPEN THE FLOODGATES TO CORRUPTION. I WANT TO BE VERY CLEAR I CERTAINLY DO NOT BELIEVE THAT, NOR DO I BELIEVE THE DIRECTOR OF THE ETHICS AND ELECTIONS DEPARTMENT OR THE CHAIR OF THE ETHICS AND ELECTIONS COMMISSION BELIEVE THAT. IT'S IMPORTANT TO REMEMBER ALL OF OUR BEHAVIORS ARE ALSO STILL GOVERNED BY THE STATE CODE OF ETHICS AND THERE ARE OUTLINED IN COUNCIL LAUREN HENRY'S MEMOS, THERE ARE FOUR PROHIBITED ACTS UNDER THE STATE STATUTE. ADDITIONALLY, REGARDLESS WHAT WE DO HERE TODAY, THERE ARE ADDITIONAL LOCAL PROHIBITIONS ON THE ACCEPTANCE OF THINGS OF VALUE, IMPROPER USE OF AN OFFICIAL POSITION AND IMPORTANTLY, HAVING AN INTEREST IN A CITY CONTRACT. THAT'S OFTEN WHERE WE SEE CORRUPTION IF THERE'S GOING TO BE CORRUPTION AND THIS AMENDMENT THAT I'M BRINGING FORTH AT THE BEHEST OF THE DIRECTOR OF ETHICS AND ELECTIONS HAS NO EFFECT ON THAT PARTICULAR PROVISION, NOR DOES IT HAVE ANY EFFECT ON THE PROVISION PROHIBITING US FROM PARTICIPATING IN QUASIJUDICIAL MATTERS IF WE HAVE AN INTEREST IN THAT. SO REALLY WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO LOOK AT HERE IS A WAY TO BASICALLY MAKE SOME ADJUSTMENT TO THE ETHICS LAW TO ALLOW IT TO WORK BETTER. IT HAS NOT BEEN WORKING WELL AND WE ARE ATTEMPTING TO MACKEY SURE THAT IT DOES NOT WIND UP BECOMING A POLITICIZED PROCESS THAT WOULD, IN FACT, DISENFRANCHISE VOICES THAT ARE NOT ALWAYS HEARD, NOT ALWAYS POPULAR AND I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO RECOGNIZE THAT THERE ARE MANY OTHER STATES THAT IT APPROACH THIS IN A WAY THAT PROVIDES MORE GUIDANCE AND ALSO A BROADER -- IT'S NOT QUITE SO RIGID. SO THE OTHER THING I WANTED TO NOTE IS I HAD THOUGHT ABOUT BRINGING AN AMENDMENT BECAUSE OF THE SENSE OF PEOPLE FEELING PERHAPS MOVING STRAIGHT TO DISCLOSURE IS TOO BIG OF STEP AND WE OUGHT TO KEEP OUR RECUSAL PROVISION, BUT BASED ON THE AMENDMENTS THAT COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH IS BRINGING, WE DID NOT FEEL THE NEED TO DO. SO THAT'S WHY I'M ONLY BRINGING FORTH MY ONE PARTICULAR AMENDMENT AT THIS TIME. THANK YOU, CHAIR. >> BEFORE PROCEEDING TO COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS, I ASKED YOU, COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA, TO HOLD OFF UNTIL COUNCILMEMBER MOORE COULD SPEAK. SO PLEASE GO AHEAD. >> THANK YOU, COUNCIL PRESIDENT, AND THANK YOU, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR BARNETT, FOR BEING HERE. I JUST WANT TO SAY I HAD THE OPPORTUNITY, DIRECTOR BARNETT, THAT YOU AND I SPOKE EARLIER IN THE WEEK. I ORIGINALLY REACHED OUT TO YOU AT THE ONSET OF THE REVIEW OF THIS LEGISLATION BECAUSE I WAS TRYING TO BETTER UNDERSTAND THE CONTEXT BEHIND YOUR RECOMMENDATION. I WANT TO THANK YOU FOR EXPLAINING THE RECOMMENDATION ACTUALLY PRECEDED THIS CURRENT COUNCIL AND THAT WAS ACTUALLY -- I THINK IT'S AN IMPORTANT POINT BECAUSE THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF DISCUSSION ABOUT THIS CURRENT COUNCIL BRINGING THIS ONE. IN FACT, YOUR RECOMMENDATION CAME UP BEFORE THIS CURRENT COUNCIL AND IT'S REALLY IN PART RELATED TO THE ADVENT OF THIS NEW YORK COUNCIL DISTRICT MODEL. I THINK THAT HAD SOMETHING TO DO WITH IT AND YOU CAN CONFIRM AND -- >> YES. >> YUP. -- AND WHAT SEEMS TO BE MORE LEGISLATION -- EXCUSE ME. AND WHAT SEEMS TO BE LEGISLATION, YOU KNOW, REQUIRING DISCLOSURE TO ADDRESS THIS REQUIRING OF DISCLOSURE AND QUESTIONS ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT TO RECUSE HAD COME UP AND HOW AND WHAT INSTANCES AND AGAIN, ALL THIS STEMMING FROM THE PRIOR COUNCIL AND I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT MY COLLEAGUES ALSO HAD THE BENEFIT OF OUR CONVERSATION AND THEN ALSO TO MAKE SURE THAT I UNDERSTOOD PROPERLY WHAT YOU WERE COMMUNICATING TO ME. >> OKAY. >> SO IS THAT CORRECT, ALL OF WHAT I LAID OUT? >> YES. I BELIEVE IT IS. I MEAN IT DOES COME DOWN TO THE INTERPLAY BETWEEN THE DEMOCRATIC PROCESS AND THE ETHICS CODE. THAT'S REALLY WHY WE'RE ALL HERE, BECAUSE WHAT'S HAPPENED OF LATE IS THE ETHICS CODE IS BEING EMPLOYED SOMETIMES TO ATTEMPT TO FRUSTRATE A COUNCIL MAJORITY. IF FIVE OF YOU ARE ALIGNING ONE WAY ON A VOTE, I'M HEARING FROM PEOPLE WHO ARE TRYING TO PICK OFF ONE OR TWO OF YOU TO FRUSTRATE THAT DEMOCRATIC PROCESS. THAT'S WHERE MY CONCERNS ARISE FROM, YES. >> THANK YOU. THIS STEMMING FROM THE LAST COUNCIL, NOT JUST THIS COUNCIL, AND I SAY THAT BECAUSE I DID SOME RESEARCH AND IT LOOKS LIKE YOU BROUGHT A SIMILAR PIECE OF LEGISLATION IN 2018 AND BASICALLY THAT PIECE OF LEGISLATION YOU BROUGHT OR TRIED TO IN 2018, THAT RECOMMENDATION, IS BASICALLY WHAT STANDS WITH US TODAY. >> ACTUALLY THAT'S NOT TRUE. WE WEREN'T BEHIND THAT IN 2018. I THINK THAT TOOK PLACE WITHOUT OUR OFFICE'S INVOLVEMENT. THAT WAS AT A TIME WHERE I BELIEVE WE HAD THE LANDLORD TENANT STUFF AND COUNCILMEMBER O'BRIEN, TELLING HIM AS A LANDLORD HE SHOULDN'T BE VOTING. SO YES, THAT WAS SOMETHING THAT CAME UP THEN. >> I THOUGHT THAT IT CAME UP AS A RECOMMENDATION FROM YOU. AT LEAST THAT'S WHAT I FOUND ONLINE AT THE TIME. >> ALL RIGHT. >> SO THAT'S WHERE I -- >> I'M NOT SURE IT WAS. >> IF IT WASN'T FROM YOU, THAT'S WHAT I READ. >> OKAY. >> YOU CAN CLARIFY IF YOU'RE SAYING IT CAME FROM SOMEONE ELSE OR -- >> YES. THAT IS NOT FROM US. WE DIDN'T RECOMMEND MOVING TO A DISCLOSURE MODEL THEN. I'VE BEEN IN THIS LINE OF WORK FOR 20 YEARS AT THE CITY AND BEFORE THAT FOR FIVE YEARS AT THE STATE ETHICS COMMISSION IN MASSACHUSETTS. TO ME, I FOUND THE DISCLOSURE THAT WE HAVE THERE BETTER IN TERMS OF KIND OF REINFORCING THE DEMOCRATIC PROCESS, MAKING SURE THAT DEMOCRACY WORKS AND WE ELECT PEOPLE AND YOU DO WHAT YOU'RE ELECTED TO DO AND THEN YOU GO TO THE VOTERS AGAIN AND THEY TURN YOU OUT OR THEY KEEP YOU IN OFFICE. I REALLY THINK THE ROLE OF THE ETHICS CODE IN KIND OF FRUSTRATING THE DEMOCRATIC PROCESS IS A CONCERN TO ME. >> WHICH IS WHY YOU BROUGHT THE RECOMMENDATION? >> YES. >> COLLEAGUES, I JUST WANT TO SAY I'VE WORKED AT THE CITY A NUMBER OF YEARS AND I WANT TO DISCLOSE I KNOW WAYNE. I'VE KNOWN WAYNE FOR A LONG TIME. I'VE HAD THE PLEASURE OF WORKING WITH WAYNE. AS PART OF MY WORK FOR THE CITY, I REACHED OUT TO WAYNE ON MANY OCCASIONS AND YOU CAN CONFIRM THAT, WAYNE. >> YES. >> I ALWAYS WANT TO BE ON THE SIDE OF TRANSPARENCY AND ACCOUNTABILITY AND ETHICS. THE REASON I REACHED OUT TO YOU IS BECAUSE I CARED ABOUT THIS RECOMMENDATION THAT YOU MADE AND I TRUST YOUR RECOMMENDATION. IT'S IMPORTANT TO ME THIS RECOMMENDATION CAME FROM YOU AND ALSO IT'S IMPORTANT TO ME THAT WE ARE REALLY LISTENING TO THE RECOMMENDATION THAT YOU ARE MAKING IN PARTICULAR BECAUSE YOU ARE THE PERSON THAT THE CITY DESIGNATED WITH LOOKING AT THE ETHICS AND MAKING DECISIONS ABOUT THESE THINGS, WHICH IS WHY I'VE ALWAYS COME TO YOU. SO ALL THAT TO SAY I BELIEVE, YOU KNOW, THAT THIS RECOMMENDATION CAME FROM YOU AFTER WHAT I THINK TO BE A THOUGHTFUL CONSIDERATION ON YOUR PART, EVEN IF THAT ONE IN 2018 WASN'T YOU. IT HAS COME UP. >> YES. >> AND THAT YOUR RECOMMENDATION NOW, THIS IS COMING FROM YOUR RECOMMENDATION BASED ON YOUR EXPERIENCES YOU'VE BEEN HERE AND ALL THAT YOU'VE DONE EVEN BEFORE WE CAME HERE BECAUSE AS WE TALKED ABOUT, THIS CAME UP FOR YOU EVEN BEFORE THIS COUNCIL. >> YES. >> GREAT. THANK YOU, COLLEAGUES. THANK YOU, WAYNE, FOR BEING HERE AND CLARIFYING FOR US. IT I RELY ON YOU AND VALUE YOUR OPINION THE MOST ON THIS. IT WAS IMPORTANT TO ME WE HEARD DIRECTLY FROM YOU THE REASON WHY THIS RECOMMENDATION WAS COMING AND THIS WAS SOMETHING IN YOUR OPINION AS YOU -- QUOTING YOU FROM THE OTHER DAY, YOU THINK THIS IS A GOOD IDEA. >> YES, I DO THINK IT'S A GOOD IDEA. >> THANK YOU, WAYNE. THANK YOU, COUNCIL PRESIDENT. I WANTED TO MAKE SURE YOU ALL HAD THE BENEFIT OF OUR CONVERSATION BECAUSE I THINK IT WAS AN IMPORTANT ONE AND ALSO TO SAY AND HIGHLIGHT THE TREMENDOUS WORK WAYNE DOES EVERY DAY ON BEHALF OF THE RESIDENTS OF THE CITY AND MAKING SURE THAT HE'S KEEPING ELECTED OFFICIALS AND CITY EMPLOYEES BECAUSE IN MY WORK IT WAS REALLY RELATED TO CITY AND THE WORK THE DEPARTMENTS ARE DOING AND THE MAYOR'S OFFICE. YOU KEEP US IN LINE WITH WHAT IS THE ETHICS RULES AND VALUES AND IT'S SOMETHING I HIGHLY VALUE AS A PERSON WHO HAS A LAW DEGREE. IT'S SOMETHING THAT IS REALLY VALUABLE TO ME AND SOMETHING THAT I HOLD AS MY GOLD -- YOU KNOW, ETHICS IS SOMETHING THAT IS THE MOST IMPORTANT TO ME BECAUSE AS MY DAD SAID, HE DIDN'T HAVE ANYTHING IN HIS LIFE. HE HAD HIS WORD AND YOU ONLY HAVE YOUR WORD. THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE BORN WITH. THAT'S WHAT YOU DIE WITH. SO THAT IS HOLDING MYSELF ACCOUNTABLE AND ETHICAL IS THE MOST IMPORTANT TO ME ABOVE ALL ELSE. THANK YOU, COUNCIL PRESIDENT, FOR INDULGING ME ON THOSE COMMENTS AND THANK YOU, WAYNE, FOR MAKING THOSE CLARIFICATIONS THAT WERE IMPORTANT TO ME. THANK YOU. >> WHILE WE'RE ON THAT TOPIC I DO HAVE FURTHER CLARIFICATION, IF I MAY. DIRECTOR BARNETT, WHATEVER HAPPENED TO THAT LEGISLATION? WAS THAT COUNCILMEMBER O'BRIEN'S LEGISLATION AND THEN DID IT GO TO A FULL VOTE? >> I DON'T BELIEVE IT WAS COUNCILMEMBER O'BRIEN'S LEGISLATION. BEN, YOU MAY RECALL HOW THAT CAME UP IN 2018. I THOUGHT IT MIGHT HAVE BEEN COUNCIL PRESIDENT AT THE TIME HARRELL WHO BROUGHT IT FORWARD, BUT I'M NOT SURE. >> I BELIEVE COUNCILMEMBER HARRELL BROUGHT IT FORWARD PERHAPS ON BEHALF OF ANOTHER COUNCILMEMBER. THERE WAS AN ISSUE RELATED TO WATERFRONT AND A REQUIREMENT IN THE QUESTION WHETHER OR NOT THAT WAS REALLY FULFILLING THE OVERALL GOALS OF THE ETHICS LEGISLATION OR NOT. >> OKAY. >> COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS? >> THANK YOU, COUNCIL PRESIDENT. JUST TO CLARIFY, I KNOW IT'S BEEN A LITTLE HARD TO TRACK WHERE THIS COMMITTEE'S MEETING. ARE THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS AND SEATTLE CAMERAS ON RIGHT NOW? >> I DON'T KNOW. I'M SITTING RIGHT HERE. I'M NOT SURE. >> OKAY. WELL, I'LL ASK MY QUESTIONS AND IF THE SEATTLE CAMERA CHANNELS ARE ON, I'LL GO BACK OUT TO CHAMBERS. YES. THIS LEGISLATION HAS BEEN BEFORE US BEFORE IN 2016 AND 2018. BOTH THOSE COUNCILS RIGHTLY DECIDED NOT TO LOWER THE ETHICAL STANDARDS EVEN AFTER WE ESTABLISHED OUR COUNCIL DISTRICTS. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR BARNETT, I BELIEVE I'VE HEARD YOU MAKE THE ARGUMENT THAT THE ETHICS CHANGE MAY BE BENEFICIAL BECAUSE OF CONCERN WITH OUR DISTRICT DID COUNCIL SYSTEM. FOR EXAMPLE, IF A DISTRICT DID COUNCILMEMBER HAS A FINANCIAL CONFLICT OF INTEREST AND HAS TO RECUSE THEMSELF, THE THOUGHT IS PEOPLE IN THE COUNCIL DISTRICT HAVE LOST REPRESENTATION. IS THIS AN ACCURATE PORTRAYAL? >> YES, THAT IS ACCURATE. >> OKAY. FIRST, WE MAY BE ELECTED BY DISTRICT. I WANT TO BE VERY CLEAR. WE EACH REPRESENT THE ENTIRE CITY. YOU'VE ALL HEARD ME SAY I'M ELECTED BY THE PEOPLE OF THE NEIGHBORHOODS AND I REPRESENT THE ENTIRE CITY OF SEATTLE. WHEN I DO MY JOB, I DO IT ON BEHALF OF THE ENTIRE CITY AND I KNOW I'M TAKING ACTIONS IN SUPPORT OF ALL SEATTLITES WHILE I'M ON THIS COUNCIL. SECOND, I WANT TO CLEAR UP AND DIG INTO WHAT I PERCEIVE TO BE A MISCONCEPTION. IF A DISTRICT COUNCILMEMBER HAS A FINANCIAL CONFLICT OF INTEREST, THE RESIDENTS IN THAT DISTINCT ARE STILL, IN FACT, REPRESENTED IN VOTES. THEY ARE REPRESENTED BY TWO CITYWIDE COUNCILMEMBERS. I THINK THAT GETS LOST SOMETIMES. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, A DISTRICT COUNCILMEMBER RECUSES THEMSELVES, ARE THEY STILL, IN FACT, REPRESENTED BY THE CITY-WIDE COUNCILMEMBERS? >> THEY ARE. I WOULD SAY THERE'S A SLIGHT DIFFERENCE THERE. THEY DON'T HAVE THE PERSON WHO THEY HAVE ELECTED TO REPRESENT THEIR DISTRICT'S VIEWS. >> HAD THEY NOT ELECTED THEM? >> THEY HAVE, BUT THEY'RE NOT THE DISTRICT. THEY'RE NOT THE PERSON -- YOU AND BALLARD, YOU OWE BALLARD YOUR DUTIES AND I THINK IN THE WAY COUNCILMEMBER NELSON AND COUNCILMEMBER RINCK, I'M SURE THEY GET CALLS FROM EVERYWHERE, BUT I DON'T THINK THEY'RE PAYING AS MUCH ATTENTION TO PEOPLE CALL FROM BALLARD AS YOU ARE. >> THAT'S WHERE I DISAGREE. I DISAGREE WE STRONGLY. >> OKAY. >> LET ME SHARE WHY. WHEN WE ARE WORKING IN BALLARD, I'M WORKING ON BEHALF OF THE ENTIRE CITY. I'M USING IT AS A PILOT. I USE THE EXAMPLE OF COMMUNITY SAFETY AMBASSADORS. WE HAVE COMMUNITY SAFETY AMBASSADORS AND A COMMUNITY SAFETY COORDINATOR IN BALLARD AND THAT PROGRAM I HAVE WORKED TO SCALE TO THE CHINATOWN INTERNATIONAL DISTRICT AND UP NEXT CAPITOL HILL IN WORKING WITH THE COUNCILMEMBERS FROM THOSE AREAS. SO WE'VE JUST SEEN THE COMMUNITY SAFETY AMBASSADORS DEPLOYED IN CHINATOWN INTERNATIONAL DISTRICT AND COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH ALSO HAS A COMMUNITY SAFETY COORDINATOR IN CAPITOL HILL WHICH IS THE PRESTEP TO THE SAFETY AMBASSADORS. >>> I STRONGLY DISAGREE BECAUSE IF I'M JUST GOING TO LOOK AFTER MY OWN DISTRICT, I'M NOT SERVING ALL SEATTLITES. THAT'S WHERE I HAVE STRONG DISAGREEMENT I NEED TO BE JUST AS CONCERNED ABOUT THE GOOD AND BAD THINGS HAPPENING IN THE CHINATOWN INTERNATIONAL DISTRICT AS I AM FOR MY OWN DISTRICT. >> PARDON ME. YOU MISSED MY INSTRUCTIONS WHEN I OPENED THE MEETING. I DID SAY IF COUNCILMEMBERS HAVE FOLLOW UP OR ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS OR QUESTIONS FOR OUR PRESENTERS, I ASK YOU RAISE YOUR HAND TO BE RECOGNIZED TO CONTINUE TO SPEAK INSTEAD OF ENGAGING IN A BACK AND FORTH AND THAT IS ESPECIALLY IMPORTANT AND I DID ALSO SAY I WOULD CALL ON COMMITTEE MEMBERS TO SPEAK FIRST. WE ARE UNDER A TIME CONSTRAINT AND HAVE FIVE OR SIX AMENDMENTS TO GET THROUGH. I WOULD LIKE YOU TO FINISH YOUR POINT AND I WILL GO ON TO THE NEXT HAND RAISED. >> CITY RESIDENCE ARE REPRESENTED BY THE MAYOR WHO HAS THE ABILITY TO VETO OR SIGN ANY LEGISLATION. I'M ALSO NOT SURE IN 2013 WHEN SEATTLE VOTERS DECIDED TO CREATE COUNCIL DISTRICTS THAT THEY INTENDED FOR US TO LOWER OUR ETHICAL STANDARDS BECAUSE OF IT. WHEN MAYOR HARRELL WAS ON COUNCIL IN 2018, I'LL QUOTE FROM HIM. THIS IS HIS QUOTE FROM 2018 SAYING, "I'M LOOKING AT THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT WITH OUR CURRENT EXECUTIVE. LORD KNOWS WHAT FINANCIAL INTERESTS HE HAS AFFECTED BY THE EXECUTIVE DECISIONS HE'S MAKING BECAUSE THERE'S VERY LITTLE DISCLOSURE FROM THAT PERSON. I LOOK HOW THE STATE LEGISLATURE CERTAIN I THINK ARE TAKEN SOME HITS, PROPERLY SO, BECAUSE OF THEIR EXEMPTIONS ON THE OPMA AND I LOOK AT WHAT WE ARE TRYING TO CREATE AS A CITY AS A MODEL OF TRANSPARENCY SAYING THERE'S A MODEL OF NO FINANCIAL GAIN AND WE'RE HERE TO SERVE THE PUBLIC EVEN THOUGH WE ARE BY DISTRICT. WHAT TRUMPS THAT IS IN WE STAND TO GAIN FINANCIALLY, WE SHOULD RECUSE OURSELVES. I KNOW THERE WAS SOME CONVERSATION ABOUT WHETHER MAYOR HARRELL SPONSORED OR WAS SUPPORTING THIS LEGISLATION A COUPLE MINUTES AGO. HIS STATEMENT CLEARLY WAS WE SHOULD NOT VOTE IF WE STAND TO GAIN FINANCIALLY. THANK YOU. >> NOTED. COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA, DID YOU HAVE YOUR HAND UP? COUNCILMEMBER RINCK? >> I WILL PASS. YOU CAN COME BACK TO ME. >> REMEMBER, PEOPLE, WE HAVE A LOT OF AMENDMENTS TO GET THROUGH AND COUNCILMEMBER HAS TO LEAVE, HAS A HARD STOP. PLEASE GO AHEAD, COUNCILMEMBER RINCK. >> SORRY. THIS IS THE CLERK TO CONFIRM CHAMBERS ARE ON AND SEATTLE CHANNEL IS ALSO ON. >> HELLO FROM COUNCIL CHAMBERS. I WANTED TO TAKE A MOMENT TO RESPOND TO WHAT DIRECTOR BARNETT HAS STATED SPEAKING AS ONE OF THE CITY-WIDE COUNCILMEMBERS. I REPRESENT THE ENTIRE CITY. WE ARE ENGAGED DEEPLY IN CONSTITUENT MATTERS ACROSS EVERY DISTRICT. I WAS IN MAGNOLIA LAST NIGHT LISTENING TO PUBLIC COMMENT ALONGSIDE COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS RELATED TO THE FORT LOTTEN PROJECT. WHETHER IT'S TURNING STREET LIGHTS BACK ON IN DISTRICT 1 IN WEST SEATTLE OR DOING NEIGHBORHOOD WALKS IN MADRONA, WE SHOW UP EVERYWHERE. WE SERVE EVERYBODY. THE NOTION OUR CITY-WIDE COUNCILMEMBERS' VOTES OR PERSPECTIVES ARE NOT POTENTIALLY AS VALUABLE OR OUR ROLES ARE IN SOME WAY LIKE MEANINGFULLY DIFFERENT WHEN IT COMES DOWN TO OUR VOTES, I HAVE TO REFUTURE THAT NOTION AND NEEDED TO STATE THAT FOR THE RECORD. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA. >> I KNOW FOLKS HAVE A LOT OF OPINIONS ABOUT THIS. I DON'T THINK ANYONE IS SAYING THE AT-LARGE MEMBERS ARE NOT VALUABLE AND I DON'T THINK ANYONE IS SAYING COUNCILMEMBERS DON'T ALL RESPECT THE INTEREST OF THE ENTIRE CITY, BUT WHAT FOLKS ARE SAYING ARE THOSE OF US THAT ARE DISTRICT SPECIFIC ARE IN OUR DISTRICTS DAY IN AND DAY OUT AND WE DO OWE A DUTY TO OUR CONSTITUENTS IN THE DISTRICT THAT THEY ARE RELYING ON US ON A DAILY BASIS IN A DIFFERENT WAY. I WILL SAY OFTENTIMES CONSTITUENTS WILL REACH OUT TO ME, NEVER HAVING REACHED OUT TO THE AT-LARGE MEMBERS. THAT MAKES SENSE BECAUSE THEY FEEL VERY STRONGLY THAT I'M RESPONSIBLE. THEY VOTED FOR ME AND I DIRECTLY ANSWER TO THEM. I DON'T THINK IN THIS CONVERSATION IT'S HELPFUL TO DISPARAGE ONE OR THE OTHER, BUT IT IS A FACT AS A DISTRICT SPECIFIC CONSTITUENTS DO LOOK AT US. I DON'T WANT TO DISPARAGE DIRECTOR BARNETT'S COMMENTS BECAUSE I DIDN'T THINK HIS COMMENTS MEANT THAT SOMEHOW THE DISTRICT-WIDES DON'T COUNT AS MUCH AND I DO THINK THERE IS A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN DISTRICT SPECIFIC AND AT-LARGE AND STILL, YOU KNOW, REALLY WANTED TO SAY THAT BECAUSE I DON'T WANT TO DISPARAGE ONE OR THE OTHER, ABOUT THE I DON'T WANT TO DISPARAGE DIRECTOR BARNETT WHO WORKS DAY IN, DAY OUT TO MAKE SURE OUR ETHICS RULES ARE FOLLOWED AND I THINK HE DOES AN EXCELLENT JOB AND HAS FOR MANY, MANY YEARS. >> THAT PARTICULAR ISSUE ABOUT DISTRICT REPRESENTATION HAD TO DO WITH A VERY DISTRICT SPECIFIC PIECE OF LEGISLATION WHICH WAS THE ASSESSMENT FOR WATERFRONT PROPERTY OWNERS FOR THE WATERFRONT PARK AND I BELIEVE THE ISSUE THERE WAS THAT THE COUNCILMEMBER OWNED PROPERTY IN THE VERY NEIGHBORHOOD IMPACTED BY THE NEIGHBORHOOD. THERE WAS HIGH INTEREST IN THE LEGISLATION BY HER CONSTITUENTS AND THEN WAS NOT ABLE TO VOTE EITHER WAY. COUNCILMEMBER KETTLE. >> THANK YOU, COUNCIL PRESIDENT. I GOT THE SENSE WE'RE ABOUT TO GO TO AMENDMENTS. >> YES. >> I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SOME GENERAL COMMENTS AHEAD OF TIME, BASICALLY THREE PARTS. FIRST PART IS UNDERSTANDING THE CURRENT SITUATION. I RECOGNIZE THIS DIFFICULT CIRCUMSTANCES THAT WE'RE IN RIGHT NOW AS NOTED IN THE PREVIOUS DISCUSSION, THERE'S THE QUESTION OF REPRESENTATION, THE WHOLE DISTRICT VERSUS CITY-WIDE PIECE. ALSO ETHICS, PART OF THE BASELINE AND FOUNDATION OF DEMOCRACY, SO IT'S VERY IMPORTANT. I RECOGNIZE THAT. THAT ADDS TO THE DIFFICULT CIRCUMSTANCES AND THERE CAN BE SOME COMPLEX POLICY DECISIONS. I DID SIT DOWN WITH OUR COUNSEL AND SEPARATELY WITH EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE COMMISSION AND THE COMMISSION CHAIR ITSELF. IT'S ALSO DIFFICULT BECAUSE THERE'S A LOT OF SWIRLING AND CONTRADICTORY NARRATIVES AND MESSAGING AND THE LIKE. WONDERFUL THOSE IS THIS IDEA WE'RE ENRICHING OURSELVES, BASICALLY DO OUR SERVICE ON THE COUNCIL, AND CONTRARY TO ASSERTIONS SPEAKING FOR MYSELF, BY THE WAY, NOT ON BEHALF OF THE COUNCIL, JUST FOR MYSELF, MY NET WORTH IS LARGELY DEPENDENT WHAT THE KING COUNTY ASSESSOR THINKS MY PROPERTY'S WORTH OR WHAT'S HAPPENED WITH AN INFLATED STOCK MARKET, ALTHOUGH I LIKE TO SAY I LIKE TO THINK I HAVE A GOOD FINANCIAL PLAN, BUT THOSE NUMBERS AND THOSE CIRCUMSTANCES ARE REALLY RELATED TO THAT. I SEE THE CHALLENGE WE'RE FACING IS PRIMARILY CENTERED ON THOSE IN REAL ESTATE, OBVIOUSLY THE LANDLORD QUESTION, BUT ALSO SMALL BUSINESS AND THERE'S DIFFERENT PIECES THAT GO TO THAT. WE SHOULD BE HAVING GRACE IN THIS AND CIVILITY BECAUSE WE DO HAVE SMALL BUSINESS OWNERS ON THE COUNCIL AND LANDLORDS AS WELL AND RELATED TO REAL ESTATE. IT'S A LITTLE BIT IRONIC GIVEN THE NEW STATE LAW RELATED TO RENT INCREASES AND THE LIKE. REGARDING THESE SWIRLING MESSAGES IN MESSAGING, ONE OF THE PIECES MISSING IS THE FINANCIAL STATE OF THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROVIDERS GIVEN THE RECENT LANDLORD/TENANT LAWS AND THAT'S NOT BEING DISCUSSED AT ALL. THAT'S OF CONCERN. IT GOES TO THIS IDEA OF THESE CONTRADICTORY MESSAGING AND THE LIKE. JUST FOR THE RECORD, I WAS A TENANT UNTIL I WAS 47 YEARS OLD. I GUESS I WAS A LANDLORD FOR A DECADE AND NEARLY A HALF IN WESTERN NEW YORK AND THAT ENDED YEARS AGO, SEVEN OR EIGHT YEARS AGO. REGARDING ETHICS, IT'S EXTREMELY IMPORTANT FOR OUR DEMOCRATIC EXPERIMENT ESPECIALLY IN THE FACE OF CONSTANT THREATS TO DEMOCRACY. I UNDERSTAND WHAT'S HAPPENING IN D.C. I DON'T LIKE WHAT'S TYING HERE IN SEATTLE TO THE OTHER WASHINGTON. I'M MINDFUL OF IT AND I UNDERSTAND THE POINT. I LIKE BEING CENTERED ON US. I'M ALSO MINDFUL OF THE PRINCIPLE OF PASSING AN ETHIC LAW ON OURSELVES. THAT'S AN IMPORTANT CONSIDERATION I THINK WE SHOULD BE WALKING THROUGH. I'M THINKING OF THE FACT OF OUR PAY, THE FACT WE CANNOT GIVE OURSELVES A PAY RAISE. MY PAY, OUR PAY, IS THE SAME TODAY AS IT WAS IN JANUARY 2024 AT LEAST FOR THOSE ELECTED, CAME IN OFFICE JANUARY, '24, AS IT WOULD BE IN DECEMBER 2027. THAT'S A CONSIDERATION. THAT'S A PRINCIPLE THAT WE HAVE HERE IN TERMS OF PASSING LEGISLATION THAT'S DIRECTLY RELATED TO OURSELVES. ETHICS AGAIN IN SOME WAYS IS DIFFICULT, BUT ALSO SOMEWHAT SIMPLE, TOO. THIS CAME OUT IN DISCUSSIONS WITH COUNCIL AND THOSE REPRESENTATIVES I MENTIONED EARLIER. AS I UNDERSTAND IT, WE HAVE ABOUT THREE MAIN OPTIONS OF ONE IS MAINTAINING THE BRIGHT LINE KIND OF APPROACH, KIND OF WHAT WE HAVE NOW, THE ADJUDICATED PIECE AND THE DISCLOSURE WHICH THIS BILL KIND OF GOES TO. I THINK IN A LOT OF WAYS THESE CAN PASS THE FAST TEST IN DIFFERENT PARTS OF THE STATE AND COUNTRY, BUT DOES IT PASS THE TEST HERE IN SEATTLE? ULTIMATELY FOR ME IT'S IMPORTANT, TOO, THAT IT'S NOT WHAT, BUT HOW AND WHEN. CLEARLY, THE WHY IN THIS IS CLEAR BECAUSE OF THE FOUNDATIONAL TENETS OF DEMOCRACY RELY ON ETHICS. FOR ME IT'S NOT SO MUCH THE WHAT IN TERMS OF THE LEGISLATION, BUT HOW AND WHEN. SO THE PROCESS I WOULD BE UP FRONT AND FRANK HAS BEEN A LITTLE BIT FRUSTRATING FOR ME. I WOULD LIKE TO BE ABLE TO DISCUSS THIS ISSUE WITH OUR COLLEAGUES AND MY COLLEAGUES IN CP AND THE IDEA OF A BLUE RIBBON PANEL THAT INCLUDED THE SEATTLE ETHICS AND ELECTION COMMISSION'S EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, THE COMMISSIONERS, NOT ALL NECESSARILY, MAKE ACADEMICS FROM U-DUB EVANS SCHOOL, MAYBE JESUIT UNIVERSITY, FORMER COUNCILMEMBERS. YOU MENTIONED ONE EARLIER, COUNCIL PRESIDENT, WHO HAVE THIS EXPERIENCE OF BOTH SERVING CITY-WIDE AND DISTRICT AND BEING SMART OF THAT. I THINK THERE'S SWIRLING NARRATIVES, QUESTIONS REGARDING OURS VERSUS OTHER PARTS OF THE STATE IN TERMS OF LIKE SO WHAT IS HAPPENING TRULY AT KING COUNTY ITSELF OR THE VARIOUS JURISDICTIONS IN KING COUNTY AND THE STATE AND HAVING THIS ALL LAID OUT? I'M CONCERNED WE WOULD BENEFIT FROM -- THE CONCERN IS ESSENTIALLY AN INSIDE OUT APPROACH VERSUS AN OUTSIDE IN. I LIKE THE IDEA OF HAVING A PANEL WALK THROUGH THESE THINGS IN A VERY TRANSPARENT WAY WITH ALL THE VARIOUS PIECES BEING DISCUSSED AGAIN IN THAT VERY TRANSPARENT WAY HERE IN ' 25 AND WITH THE ELECTIONS IN NOVEMBER BASICALLY HAVE THE COUNCIL TAKE IT UP IN 2026. THAT'S UP FRONT THE WAY MY COUNCIL WOULD HAVE BEEN IF I WAS ASKED ABOUT THIS PARTICULARLY EARLY ON IN TERMS OF WAY AHEAD ON THE APPROACH. WE ARE WHERE WE ARE. SO ANOTHER APPROACH AND I DID HAVE A DRAFT AMENDMENT 7 I WAS THINK OF DOING AS A WALK-ON. I THINK I MAY HOLD BECAUSE THERE ARE A NUMBER OF AMENDMENTS AND I WOULD LIKE TO TALK TO COUNCIL ABOUT THOSE AMENDMENTS, TOO, TO ESSENTIALLY CREATE AN EFFECTIVE DATE OF JANUARY 2028 GOING TO THE POINTS I MADE IN MY REMARKS. AGAIN, I RECOGNIZE THE DESIRE. I RECOGNIZE THE IMPORTANT CONSIDERATIONS AND DECISION POINTS AND POLICY POINTS, BUT FOR ME I JUST WANTED TO BE UP FRONT. THIS IS HOW I LOOK AT THIS TOPIC AND I SAY THIS WITH ALL RESPECT TO EVERYONE INVOLVED TO INCLUDE MY COLLEAGUE, COUNCILMEMBER MOORE, COUNCIL PRESIDENT, BUT ALL MY COLLEAGUES REGARDING THIS TOPIC. SO, COUNCIL PRESIDENT, I APPRECIATE THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK ON THIS TOPIC AHEAD OF THE STARTING OF THE AMENDMENTS. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. I SEE ONE MORE HAND AND WE DO HAVE TO GET TO THE AMENDMENTS. GO AHEAD, COUNCILMEMBER SOLOMON. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH, COUNCIL PRESIDENT. I'M GOING TO KEEP MY REMARKS BRIEF BECAUSE WE DO HAVE AMENDMENTS TO BE VOTED ON AND I DON'T WANT TO DELAY THAT. SO A COUPLE QUICK QUESTIONS, EXAMPLES. SO GETTING TO THE ISSUE OF SAY LANDLORD/TENANT STUFF, I'M A LANDLORD. I HAVE A DUPLEX. I LIVE IN ONE HALF AND RENT OUT THE OTHER SIDE. IF THERE'S SOMETHING THAT COMES BEFORE COUNCIL THAT HAS TO DO WITH LANDLORD/TENANT LAW THAT AFFECTS EVERY LANDLORD, NOT JUST ME, WOULD I HAVE TO RECUSE? THAT'S DIRECTED AT YOU, DIRECTOR BARNETT? >> IS THE PROPERTY IN SEATTLE? >> YES. >> YOU LIKELY WOULD. IF YOU HAVE A FINANCIAL INTEREST IN IT, YOU WOULD STILL HAVE TO RECUSE YOURSELF, YES. >> SAY I'M A RENTER IN SEATTLE AND THERE'S A LANDLORD/TENANT BILL THAT COMES BEFORE US. AS A RENTER, WOULD I HAVE TO RECUSE? >> NO. JUST BECAUSE THE NUMBER OF RENTERS IS SO MUCH HIGHER IN THE CITY THAN THE NUMBER OF LANDLORDS. RENTERS QUALIFY FOR THAT SUBSTANTIAL SEGMENT EXCEPTION. >> OKAY. AND THAT'S WHAT I WAS TRYING TO GET AT BECAUSE AGAIN IF SOMETHING IS AFFECTING THIS ONE DUPLEX OWNER, BUT IT'S AFFECTING ALL DUPLEX OWNERS, ME AS THE GUY LIVING IN ONE HALF OF A DUPLEX IS NOT GOING TO BENEFIT MORE THAN ANYBODY ELSE WHO IS RENTING OUT A DUPLEX. >> RIGHT. YEAH. I THINK THE PROBLEM IS THAT THERE ARE SO FEW LANDLORDS IN THE CITY. I THINK THERE WERE ROUGHLY 3% OF THE CITY WERE LANDLORDS MAYBE TEN YEARS AGO. I CAN'T IMAGINE IT'S MOVED MUCH. THAT'S WHY YOU WOULD STILL HAVE TO RECUSE YOURSELF. >> OKAY. GOT IT. ANOTHER EXAMPLE, I OWN A COMIC BOOKSTORE AND THERE'S LEGISLATION BEFORE US THAT'S GOING TO IMPACT ME, GOLDEN AGE COLLECTIBLES, XANADU, THE WHOLE BIT IN. THAT CASE WOULD I HAVE TO RECUSE BECAUSE I'M ALSO OWNING A COMIC BOOKSTORE? >> YES. I WOULD GIVE YOU THAT ADVICE TENTATIVELY NOW. I'D NEED TO KNOW A LOT MORE ABOUT THE BUSINESS AND ALL THAT, BUT YES, I BELIEVE YOU WOULD HAVE TO RECUSE YOURSELF. >> SO WHAT I'M TRYING TO GET TO IS THIS. HAVE YOU HAD A CHANCE TO READ ALL THE AMENDMENTS? >> YES, I HAVE. >> IN YOUR OPINION AS THE GUY WHO WE TURN TO, IS WHAT'S BEING PROPOSED VIA THE AMENDMENTS STRENGTHEN OUR ETHICS CODE OR DOES IT WEAKEN IT AS A LOT OF THE COMMENTARY THAT WE HEARD? THAT'S WHAT FOLKS ARE CONCERNED ABOUT, THAT WE'RE WEAKENING ETHICS STANDARDS, THAT WE'RE BASICALLY OPENING THE DOOR FOR CORRUPTION AND I JUST WANT TO GET A CLEAR SENSE. DOES THIS HELP US? DOES IT HURT US? AS YOU LOOK THROUGH THOSE AMENDMENTS, WHAT'S YOUR TAKE? >> I'M NOT SURE I CAN GIVE YOU AN ETHICS TAKE. TO ME I THINK IT MIGHT HELP FROM THE DEMOCRATIC PROCESS. YOU'RE ALL ELECTED TO MAKE THESE DECISIONS AND TO ME THE ETHICS CODE SHOULD REALLY BE TREADING CAREFULLY ANYTIME IT'S TELLING AN ELECTED OFFICIAL THEY CAN'T VOTE ON A MATTER. >> OKAY. GOT YOU. AGAIN, WHAT I'M LOOKING AT IS NOT EITHER DISCLOSURE OR RECUSAL. I'M LOOKING AT BOTH BECAUSE I THINK BOTH WOULD LEAD TO TRANSPARENCY WHICH WOULD LEAD TO TRUST AND VERY SPECIFIC GUIDELINES AS TO WHEN THE COUNCILMEMBER NEEDS TO RECUSE AND I THINK THAT'S VERY CLEAR FROM YOUR GUIDANCE WHEN THAT WOULD HAVE TO BE. IS THERE A SPECIFIC INTEREST THAT BENEFITS ME VERSUS ANYONE ELSE IN THE CITY THAT YEAH, OBVIOUS. AGAIN, WE HAVE THESE AMENDMENTS. WE'RE SHORT ON TIME. THANK YOU FOR INDULGING ME, MADAM PRESIDENT. LET'S GET THESE AMENDMENTS AND GET GOING. >> GREAT. >> AMENDMENT 1. >> OKAY. GO AHEAD. COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA, WOULD YOU LIKE TO ADDRESS THIS AMENDMENT BEFORE RECOGNIZING COUNCILMEMBER MOORE AS THE AUTHOR? >> YES, THANK YOU. AT THIS TIME SINCE -- SORRY. THANK YOU, CHAIR. I MOVE TO AMEND COUNCIL BILL 120978 AS PRESENTED ON AMENDMENT 1. >> SECOND. IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED TO AMEND THE BILL AS PRESENTED ON AMENDMENT 1. COUNCIL CENTRAL STAFF, WILL YOU PLEASE WALK US THROUGH THE AMENDMENT AND THEN THE AUTHOR WILL BE ABLE TO SPEAK TO IT. >> . THIS AMENDMENT HAS TWO KEY COMPONENTS BOTH OF WHICH RELATE TO TRANSPARENCY AND I THINK COULD BE READ TRYING TO ENHANCE TRANSPARENCY AND IN SOME WAYS BETTER FULFILL THE INTENT OF THE ORIGINAL BILL. SUBSTANTIVE, BUT SPECIFICALLY FOCUSED ON TRANSPARENCY. THE FIRST ELEMENT HAS TO DO WITH NONLEGISLATIVE MATTERS AND THE DISCLOSURE REGARDING NONLEGISLATIVE MATTERS. THE WAY THE BILL BEFORE YOU IS DRAFTED, THERE HAD BEEN A REQUIREMENT THAT FOR NONLEGISLATIVE MATTERS WHERE THERE IS A CONFLICT THAT NOTIFICATION BY COUNCILMEMBERS BE PROVIDED TO BOTH THE DIRECTOR OF THE ETHICS COMMISSION AND TO THE CITY CLERK. REPORTING TO THE CITY CLERK WAS LOST IN THE CURRENT DRAFTING. THIS AMENDMENT WOULD RESTORE THAT. AGAIN, FOR NONLEGISLATIVE MATTERS ELECTED OFFICIALS WOULD BE REQUIRED TO DISCLOSE IF THERE WAS A CONFLICT OF INTEREST BOTH TO THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE ETHICS COMMISSION AND TO THE CITY CLERK, AGAIN, ENHANCED TRANSPARENCY. THE SECOND HAS TO DO WITH DISCLOSURE FOR LEGISLATIVE MATTERS FOR WHICH THERE IS A FINANCIAL INTEREST OR SOME OTHER CONFLICT OF INTEREST AND JUST CLARIFYING, AGAIN, AS WRITTEN THERE'S A REQUIREMENT FOR A COUNCILMEMBER TO PUBLICLY STATE THAT, THAT THEY HAVE THAT CONFLICT, BUT THAT COULD HAPPEN AT THE COMMITTEE LEVEL AND NOT ALL COUNCILMEMBERS WOULD NECESSARILY BE IN ATTENDANCE AND THEN WHEN THE MATTER MOVES TO THE FULL COUNCIL, THERE ISN'T SPECIFICALLY A REQUIREMENT IN THE CURRENT BILL THAT THAT DISCLOSURE ABOUT THAT CONFLICT BE REPEATED FOR THE FULL COUNCIL AND THIS AMENDMENT WOULD ADD THAT ADDITIONAL TRANSPARENCY AS WELL. AGAIN, IF YOU THINK ABOUT HOW THIS WOULD WORK, IF YOUR GOVERNOR WAS NOT A MEMBER OF THE COMMITTEE, THEY WOULD NOT HAVE A MEMBER TO DISCLOSE. IF YOU WERE A MEMBER, YOU WOULD DO IT FIRST AND DO IT AGAIN AT FULL COUNCIL. NOT CHANGING THE RULES WHEN DISCLOSURE OCCURS, BUT ENHANCING TRANSPARENCY BOTH FOR NONLEGISLATIVE MATTERS AND LEGISLATIVE MATTERS AS WELL. >> OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR THE EXPLANATION. COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA, WOULD YOU LIKE TO ADDRESS THIS AMENDMENT BEFORE RECOGNIZING COUNCILMEMBER MOORE AS THE AUTHOR OR YOU CAN HAND IT OVER. >> I'M BRINGING IT ON HER BEHALF SINCE SHE DOESN'T SIT ON THIS COMMITTEE. SO THIS IS ON BEHALF OF COUNCILMEMBER MOORE. COUNCILMEMBER MOORE. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I THINK DIRECTOR NOBLE HAS EXPLAINED THIS VERY CLEARLY AND WELL. IT'S REALLY JUST TO CLEAN UP A FEW THINGS THAT WERE NOT CLEAR OR LEFT THAT DROPPED TO ENSURE WE ARE HAVING MAXIMUM REQUIRED DISCLOSURE. THANK YOU. >> OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I'M NOT SEEING ANY HANDS RAISED. >> NO COMMENTS I'M SEEING. >> COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA? >> AYE. >> COUNCILMEMBER SOLOMON? >> AYE. >> COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH? >> YES. >> COUNCILMEMBER KETTLE? >> AYE. >> CHAIR NELSON? >> AYE. >> FIVE IN FAVOR, NONE OPPOSED. >> THE MOTION CARRIES AND AMENDMENT 1 IS ADOPTED. LET'S SEE. WILL THE CLERK PLEASE READ -- NOT THE CLERK. YEAH, GO AHEAD, . >> I MOVE TO AMEND COUNCIL BILL 120978 AS PRESENTED FOR AMENDMENT NUMBER 2 VERSION C. >> SECOND. >> IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED TO AMEND THE BILL AS PRESENTED ON AMENDMENT 2 VERSION C. COUNCIL CENTRAL STAFF, WILL YOU PLEASE WALK US THROUGH IT. >> ABSOLUTELY. IT'S PROBABLY THE MOST SUBSTANTIVE AMENDMENT BEFORE YOU TODAY. IT SEEKS TECHNICAL POINT, TOO. THERE WAS AN EARLIER VERSION B. THIS VERSION C IS IDENTICAL IN TERMS OF SUBSTANCE. THERE'S AN ADDITIONAL RECITAL TO PROVIDE FURTHER CLARITY FOR THE RATIONALE AND EXPLANATION HOW THIS WOULD WORK. I THINK I'M GOING TO READ THOSE RECITALS. WHAT THIS FUNDAMENTALLY DOES IS INTRODUCE A STANDARD FOR RECUSAL. THERE WOULD BE RECUSAL REQUIRED IN CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES, NOTABLY MORE LIMITED CIRCUMSTANCES THAN UNDER OUR CURRENT ETHICS CODE, BUT OBVIOUSLY SOMEWHAT MORE RESTRICTIVE THAN THE BILL BEFORE YOU NOW FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION. IN PARTICULAR, THE ISSUE THIS IS TRYING TO GET AT IS TRYING TO MEASURE OR CAPTURE THE DEPTH AND DEGREE OF THE POTENTIAL CONFLICT AND IN CASES WHERE THAT CONFLICT IS MOST DIRECT AND MOST SIGNIFICANT REQUIRING RECUSAL. I WOULD DESCRIBE THIS AS POTENTIALLY SORT OF A MIDDLE GROUND BETWEEN GETTING THE CURRENT CODE WHICH REQUIRES RECUSAL IF THERE'S ANY FINANCIAL INTEREST AND WHAT HAS BEEN PROPOSED WHICH WOULD CLEARLY REQUIRE DISCLOSURE IN ALL CASES BUT NOT REQUIRE RECUSAL IN MOST. SO LET ME READ SOME OF THE LANGUAGE SOME OF THE LANGUAGE OF BOTH RECITALS AND WHAT'S PROPOSED AND OFFER A COUPLE EXAMPLES I'VE BEEN WORKING ON WITH LAUREN AND I SHOULD ADD IN ALL THIS WORK LAUREN HENRY IS THE PRIMARY AUTHOR OF ALL OF THESE PIECES HERE. I'VE BEEN WORKING WITH HER VERY CLOSELY, TO GIVE CREDIT WHERE CREDIT IS DUE. READING THESE RECITALS, WHILE ELECTED OFFICIALS WILL BE ABLE TO DISCLOSE THEIR FINANCIAL INTEREST OR CONFLICT OF INTEREST ON LEGISLATIVE MATTERS, WHEN THE ELECTED OFFICIAL'S FINANCIAL INTEREST IS IMPACTED TO A GREATER OR LESSER EXTENT THAN THAT OF OTHER MEMBERS OF THE SAME PROFESSION, OCCUPATION, CLASSES, OR GROUPS THAT ARE AFFECTED. THE IDEA IS YOU WOULD LOOK FOR SITUATIONS WHERE THE ELECTED OFFICIALS' INTERESTS ARE NOT IN LINE WITH OTHER PEOPLE IN THE GROUP. TO USE ONE OF THE EXAMPLES FROM EARLIER, IF THERE WAS SOMETHING SPECIFIC ABOUT THE DUPLEX THAT WAS OWNED THAT MADE IT VERY SPECIFIC TO THAT INDIVIDUAL AND I WILL USE SOME OTHER EXAMPLES IN A MOMENT. READING THE SECOND RECITAL IS ALSO IMPORTANT WHEN REVIEWING ELECTED OFFICIALS' FINANCIAL INTEREST IN THEIR PARTICIPATION IN A LEGISLATIVE MATTER, THE ETHICS COMMISSION AND ITS EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR WILL DETERMINE -- AND THIS IS THE KEY LANGUAGE -- WHETHER THE REGULATED MATTER PRODUCES A UNIQUE GAIN OR LOSS SPECIFIC TO THE ELECTED OFFICIAL BUT NOT OTHER PERSONS OR OTHER ENTITIES REGULATED. THIS IS REQUIRING RECUSAL IN CASES WHERE THERE'S SOMETHING SPECIFIC TO THE FINANCIAL INTERESTS OF THE ELECTED OFFICIAL. THAT SAME LANGUAGE IS REPEATED IN THE CODE ITSELF. THE LAST PAGE OF THE AMENDMENT, THE ADDED LANGUAGE, HOWEVER, IF THE ELECTED OFFICIAL'S IS IMPACTED TO A GREATER EXTENT THAN OTHER MEMBERS OR GROUPS AFFECTED BY THE LEGISLATIVE MATTER, THEY WOULD BE REQUIRED TO RECUSE. TO OFFER UP SOME EXAMPLES AND SORT OF IN THE SPIRIT OF ONES COUNCILMEMBER SOLOMON DESCRIBED, IMAGINE A SITUATION WHERE ONE OR MORE COUNCILMEMBERS IS A SMALL BUSINESS OWNER AND THE CITY WILL REGULATE THE HOURS IN WHICH SMALL BUSINESSES CAN OPERATE, ENTIRELY THEORETICAL EXAMPLE. YOU CAN'T OPEN YOUR BUSINESS BEFORE 9:00 A.M. AND HAVE TO CLOSE IT BY 11:00 P.M. SOME SET EVERY STAKEHOLDERS LOBBY FOR FLORISTS SHOPS IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT TO BE OPEN AT 7:00 A.M. VERSUS 9:00 A.M. IT TURNS OUT ONE OR MORE COUNCILMEMBERS OWNS A FLORIST SHOP. IN THAT CASE THAT INTEREST MIGHT BE CLOSE ENOUGH TO THEIR OWN SITUATION TO ARGUE FOR RECUSAL. I WOULD ARGUE IN THIS CASE THAT WOULD BE AN EXAMPLE. THE ELECTIONS COMMISSION WOULD BE THE ULTIMATE ARBITER OF THOSE SITUATIONS, BUT IT'S AN EXAMPLE. ANOTHER ONE MIGHT BE -- A PROPERTY EXAMPLE -- TWO GIVEN COUNCILMEMBERS OWNED RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES, ONE OF THEM IN A HISTORIC NEIGHBORHOOD AND THERE'S LEGISLATION THAT WOULD IN SOME WAYS BENEFIT OR PENALIZE FROM A FINANCIAL PERSPECTIVE OWNING PROPERTY IN A HISTORIC DISTRICT. AGAIN, THAT IS A RELATIVELY NARROW SITUATION. THE COUNCILMEMBER MIGHT BE VERY SPECIFICALLY AFFECTED. OBVIOUSLY RATHER THAN ALL HOMEOWNERS, IT WOULD BE THOSE SPECIFIC TO THE PROPERTY IN A HISTORIC DISTRICT AND THAT WOULD IN THE SITUATION IN MY EXAMPLE I WOULD THINK THAT WOULD REQUIRE RECUSAL. AGAIN, THESE ALL NEED TO BE VERY FACT SPECIFIC AND ULTIMATELY COULD DEPEND ON THE INTERPRETATION OF THE ETHICS AND ELECTIONS COMMISSION. THERE'S ANOTHER AMENDMENT FROM COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH THAT PROVIDES POTENTIALLY A PATH TO COUNCILMEMBERS BEING ABLE TO SORT OUT THE SITUATIONS AND WHEN THIS LANGUAGE WOULD REQUIRE RECUSAL AND WHEN IT WOULD NOT. THAT'S MY SUMMARY. I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER QUESTIONS. >> ARE THERE ANY -- GO AHEAD. >> THANK YOU, COUNCIL PRESIDENT. THANK YOU, BEN. SO LET ME FIRST SET THE TABLE. I'M BRINGING FORTH A UNIVERSE OF AMENDMENTS TODAY FROM WATCHING MY EXPERIENCE OF THE ETHICS PROCESS AND TRYING TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO IMPROVE THOSE REGARDLESS HOW WE FEEL TODAY ABOUT THE ETHICS AND I THINK THERE'S ALWAYS ROOM FOR IMPROVEMENT. SO HERE IS MY BIG STAB AT IT AND TRYING TO BRING FORTH SOME AMENDMENTS THAT I THINK CAN POTENTIALLY MAKE IT BETTER. I KNOW WE'VE HEARD FROM THE PUBLIC ON HOW IMPORTANT PUBLIC TRUST AND TRANSPARENCY IS. WHETHER WE AGREE ON THE UNDERLYING BILL OR NOT, WE CAN ALL AGREE HOW WE CAN IMPROVE SOME OF THE CURRENT PROCESSES. SO CURRENTLY THE SEATTLE ETHICS COMMISSION USES THE EXCEPTION THAT YOUR INTEREST CAN BE SHARED WITH A SUBSTANTIAL SEGMENT OF THE GENERAL POPULATION IN SEATTLE, BUT MANY LEGISLATION TYPES DON'T ACTUALLY MEET THE STANDARD WHICH LEAVES A LOT OF AMBIGUOUS AND SUBJECTIVE SUBJECT FOR OUR ETHICS COMMISSION. MY INTENT WITH THIS AMENDMENT IS TO GIVE ETHICS A CLEAR, CONSISTENT, AND TRANSPARENT STANDARD TO MEASURE OUR CONFLICTS OF INTEREST AGAINST. THE NEWEST VERSION ALSO ADDS A RECITAL FROM COUNCILMEMBER MOORE'S INITIAL AMENDMENT IN A WHEREAS CLAUSE FOR SEEK TO DETERMINE THE CONFLICTS OF INTEREST. I ALSO WANT TO STATE WE SHOULD KEEP ALL THE DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENTS IN ADDITION TO THE STANDARDS FOR THIS RECUSAL AS WELL. I'M MORE THAN HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS AS WELL. >> ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS? I'M NOT SEEING ANY. COUNCILMEMBER MOORE. YOU'RE MUTED. >> THANK YOU. I'M SORRY. IT'S NOT A QUESTION. I WANTED TO PROVIDE SOME ADDITIONAL INFORMATION, IF I MAY, WHICH IS TO SAY THANK YOU VERY MUCH, COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH, FOR BRINGING THIS. I VERY MUCH CONSIDER IT TO BE VERY FRIENDLY AND I ALSO JUST WANTED TO POINT OUT THERE ARE, AS I MENTIONED IN MY OPENING REMARKS, A VARIETY OF APPROACHES. THIS LANGUAGE IS ACTUALLY UTILIZED IN A VARIETY OF OTHER JURISDICTIONS, SUCH AS MINNESOTA CONNECTICUT MONTANA OREGON MARYLAND PENNSYLVANIA UTAH, RHODE ISLAND, VERMONT, IOWA, GEORGIA, FLORIDA, AND ALABAMA ALASKA MASSACHUSETTS AND ARKANSAS USE SIMILAR STANDARDS. THERE ARE QUITE A LOT OF OTHER JURISDICTIONS THAT TRY TO STRADDLE THE MIDDLE BETWEEN NONE OR ALL. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. I WILL NOTE WASHINGTON STATE SAYS -- THE STATE LEGISLATION ETHICS CODE SAYS THE LEGISLATOR DOES NOT HAVE AN INTEREST WHICH IS IN CONFLICT WITH THE PROPER DISCHARGE OF LEGISLATIVE DUTY IF NO BENEFIT OR DETRIMENT ACCRUES TO THE LEGISLATOR AS THE MEMBER OF A BUSINESS, PROFESSION, OCCUPATION, ON OR GROUP TO A GREATER EXTENT THAN TO ANY OTHER MEMBER OF A BUSINESS, PROFESSION, OCCUPATION, OR GROUP. THAT SEEMS TO BE THE SPIRIT OF THAT. COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS, I SEE YOUR HAND UP, BUT UNLESS THERE ARE OTHER QUESTIONS, I'M CALLING FOR A VOTE BECAUSE WE'VE STILL GOT SEVERAL AMENDMENTS TO GET THROUGH. I AM GOING TO PROCEED WITH A VOTE UNLESS YOU HAVE A VERY SHORT QUESTION ABOUT THE SPECIFIC AMENDMENT. >> YES. >> GO AHEAD. >> THANK YOU. THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH, FOR YOUR SET OF AMENDMENTS AND, COUNCILMEMBER MOORE, THANK YOU FOR YOUR WORK ON THIS BILL EVEN THOUGH WE MAY NOT AGREE. I DO APPRECIATE YOU CALLING THE QUESTION. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR BARNETT, HAS THE ETHICS AND ELECTIONS COMMISSION HAD TIME TO REVIEW THESE AMENDMENTS? >> NOT TO MY KNOWLEDGE, NO. >> HOW IS IT THAT WE ARE -- >> THE INSTRUCTIONS AT THE BEGINNING OF THE -- I'VE SAID THE INSTRUCTIONS TWICE AND I'M NOT GOING TO REPEAT THEM. THERE IS NOT TO BE ENGAGED A BACK AND FORTH. YOU RAISE YOUR HAND TO ASK ANOTHER QUESTION. YOU WILL HAVE ONE VERY SHORT QUESTION AND THEN WE ARE PROCEEDING. >> THANK YOU. DIRECTOR BARNETT, HOW WOULD WE BE ABLE TO RECEIVE FEEDBACK FROM THE ETHICS AND ELECTIONS COMMISSION? I DO AGREE WE NEED A THIRD PARTY, WHETHER IT'S A BLUE RIBBON COMMISSION OR ETHICS AND ELECTIONS COMMISSION, TO PROVIDE US FEEDBACK. >> I BELIEVE I HAVE TO PUT THE QUESTION TO THEM AT THEIR NEXT MEETING SCHEDULED FOR JUNE. >> THANK YOU. >> COUNCILMEMBER MOORE. >> JUST TO BE VERY BRIEF, THIS IS HAD THE EXACT LANGUAGE I BROUGHT WHEN I DID MY FIRST DRAFT OF THIS BILL MANY MONTHS AGO AND THAT I BROUGHT TO THE ETHICS AND ELECTIONS COMMISSION FOR THEIR FEEDBACK AND IT WAS THE FEEDBACK ON THIS BILL THAT LED ME TO ULTIMATELY CONCLUDE FROM DIRECTOR BARNETT THAT TRYING TO PARSE ALL THESE VARIOUS CATEGORIES WAS GOING TO BE DIFFICULT, NOT IMPOSSIBLE, BUT DIFFICULT. SO I THINK THAT WE CAN SAY THE ETHICS AND ELECTIONS COMMISSION HAS HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO LOOK SPECIFICALLY AT THIS LANGUAGE AND WEIGH IN. THE QUESTIONS ARE HOW DO YOU DRAW THE GROUP? HOW DO YOU PARSE THE INTERESTS? I DO BELIEVE, DIRECTOR BARNETT, YOU SAID YOU'D HAD A CHANCE TO BRIEFLY LOOK AT THESE AMENDMENTS. >> I HAVE, BUT THE COMMISSION HADN'T. >> I MISUNDERSTOOD THE QUESTION. A LITTLE ADDITIONAL CONTEXT THERE. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. WILL THE CLERK PLEASE CALL THE ROLL ON THE ADOPTION OF AMENDMENT 2 VERSION C. >> COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA? >> AYE. >> COUNCILMEMBER SOLOMON? >> AYE. >> COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH? >> YES. >> COUNCILMEMBER KETTLES? >> AYE. >> CHAIR NELSON. >> AYE. >> FIVE IN FAVOR, NONE OPPOSED. >> THE MOTION CARRIES AND AMENDMENT 2 VERSION C IS ADOPTED. COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH, IT IS MY UNDERSTANDING ARE YOU PROCEEDING WITH -- >> YEAH. COLLEAGUES, I APOLOGIZE. FOR AMENDMENT 3 I'M GOING TO PULL IT AND I'LL SAY WHY. I WANTED TO MAKE CLEAR THAT MY INTENTIONS ON THIS AMENDMENT WAS TO ASK OUR ETHICS COMMISSION TO PUBLISH ONLY THE COMPLAINTS DEEMED NECESSARY TO INVESTIGATE, INCLUDING THE JUSTIFICATION FOR INVESTIGATION AND OUTCOMES. MY OFFICE HAS BEEN IN CONVERSATION WITH LEGAL COUNSEL, SO I'M GOING TO WITHDRAW THIS AMENDMENT AND BRING MORE A STRAIGHTFORWARD AMENDMENT. THIS WILL INCREASE THE TRANSPARENCY PROCESS WHERE IT WILL BE PUBLICLY POSTED IN TERMS OF WHEN THERE IS AN INVESTIGATION AND THERE IS DEEMED OUTCOMES WHERE THERE'S A CONFLICT, THAT THAT WILL BE POSTED TO A WEBSITE AND SHOWS THE REASONING BEHIND THE CONFLICT OF INTEREST. RIGHT NOW THAT DOES NOT HAPPEN AND I THINK THAT NEEDS TO BE A LITTLE BIT MORE TRANSPARENT, BUT I HAVE TO WORK ON THE LANGUAGE A LITTLE MORE. SO I'M GOING TO WITHDRAW THERE AMENDMENT FOR TODAY. I APOLOGIZE ABOUT THAT. I WILL WORK ON IT WITH LEGAL. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. OKAY. MOVING ON, COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED IN ORDER TO MOVE AMENDMENT 5. >> I MOVE TO AMEND NUMBER 5, COUNCIL BILL 120978 AS PRESENTED ON AMENDMENT 5. >> SECOND. >> IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED TO AMEND THE BILL AS PRESENTED ON AMENDMENT 5. COUNCIL CENTRAL STAFF, WILL YOU PLEASE WALK US THROUGH THAT AMENDMENT. >> YES. OF COURSE. AGAIN, THIS AMENDMENT IS DESIGNED TO ENCOURAGE ENGAGEMENT BETWEEN ELECTED OFFICIALS AND THE ETHICS COMMISSION AND DIRECTOR AND IN PARTICULAR, IT SETS AN EXPECTATION ON THE COMMISSION AND ITS DIRECTOR TO PROVIDE ADVISORY OPINIONS ON POTENTIAL ETHICAL ISSUES IN A TIMELY MANNER. THAT'S THE UNDERLYING GOAL HERE, AGAIN, JUST TO ACTUALLY READ THE LANGUAGE. ELECTED OFFICIALS ARE ENCOURAGED TO SEEK INFORMAL OPINIONS REGARDING THE APPLICATION OF THE RELEVANT LEGAL AND ETHICAL STANDARDS AND THIS IS IN SOME WAYS THE NEXT SENTENCE IS THE MOST IMPORTANT AND OPERATIVE, WHEN AN ELECTED OFFICIAL SEEKS AN INFORMAL WRITTEN OPINION OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE ETHICS COMMISSION, SUCH AN OPINION SHALL BE PROVIDED WITHIN FIVE BUSINESS DAYS OF THE REQUEST. IT'S CREATING A VERY SPECIFIC EXPECTATION ON THE ETHICS DIRECTOR TO RESPOND AND TO PROVIDE INFORMATION AND FEEDBACK TO THE ELECTED OFFICIAL SEEKING THAT INPUT. THAT IS ITS PURPOSE. IF THE COMMISSION MORE BROADLY WANTS TO ENGAGE, THERE'S OPPORTUNITIES FOR THAT AS WELL AND REFERENCE ALSO TO THE CITY ATTORNEY OFFICE BEING ABLE TO PROVIDE ASSISTANCE TO ELECTED OFFICIALS, NO SPECIFIC TIME REQUIREMENTS THERE, BUT AGAIN, THAT'S THE INTENT AND SPECIFICS THAT ARE CALLED OUT IN THE AMENDMENT. >> OKAY. COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH. >> THANK YOU, COUNCIL PRESIDENT. COLLEAGUES, IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT WHAT I'M TRYING TO DO WITH THIS IS MAKE SURE THAT WE CAN GET TIMELY RESPONSES FROM ETHICS COMMISSION WITHIN FIVE BUSINESS DAYS TO CONTINUE OUR BUSINESS JUST AS LIKE SOMETIMES I KNOW THEY MEET QUARTERLY, IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN. SO JUST TRYING TO GET A QUICKER RESPONSE FROM OUR ETHICS COMMISSION WHICH I THINK -- SO WE CAN CONTINUE TO HAVE PUBLIC TRUST AND PROVIDING ELECTED OFFICIALS THE SUPPORT OF OUR ETHICS COMMISSION AND CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE TO ENCOURAGE ETHICAL STANDARDS FOR LEGISLATIVE MATTERS BECAUSE WHAT WE DO OFTENTIMES MOVES VERY QUICKLY AND GETTING A TIMELY RESPONSE IS PARAMOUNT TO THE WORK THAT WE DO. >> COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA. >> YES. THANK YOU. I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY, SO IT'S NOT REQUIRING THE COMMISSION TO DO FIVE DAYS. WAYNE, DOES THE COMMISSION MEET MONTHLY? >> YEAH. THE FIRST WINDOW OF EVERY MONTH. >> BUT IF YOU'RE OUTSIDE THAT WINDOW, IT MAKES IT HARD BECAUSE YOU HAVE TO WAIT TILL THE FOLLOWING MONTH. >> RIGHT. ISN'T IT ON ME? I THINK IT'S ON THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE COMMISSION WHO HAS TO GIVE ADVICE IN FIVE DAYS. ISN'T THAT MY UNDERSTANDING, COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH? >> THAT'S THE CLARITY I'M SPEAKING BECAUSE MY EXPERIENCE WITH YOU IS YOU GIVE ME TIMELY INFORMATION, BUT TO BE ABLE TO GET SOMETHING BACK FROM THE COMMISSION ITSELF WHO MEETS MONTHLY, YOU MISS THAT WINDOW, YOU HAVE TO WAIT TILL THE FOLLOW MOG FOLLOWING MONTH. >> I DIDN'T MEAN TO SAY QUARTERLY. I MEANT MONTHLY. MY BAD. >> IT'S OKAY. I REALLY WANTED TO GET MORE TIMELY INFORMATION FROM THE COMMISSION. BEN, ARE YOU TRYING TO WEIGH IN HERE? SORRY. >> NO. I MOVED OVER THAT A LITTLE QUICKLY. FOR THIS LANGUAGE THE ELECTED OFFICIAL HAVING HEARD FROM WAYNE CAN ALSO REQUEST AN OPPORTUNITY TO SEEK GUIDANCE FROM THE COMMISSION ITSELF AND THERE'S A REFERENCE TO POTENTIALLY USING A SPECIAL MEETING TO DO THAT AND THAT THE SEC THEN WOULD HAVE FIVE DAYS AFTER THAT SPECIAL MEETING. THERE IS NOT LANGUAGE ABOUT THE PROCESS TO CALL A SPECIAL MEETING AND CANDIDLY, I DON'T KNOW HOW QUICKLY THAT COULD HAPPEN ON A REGULAR BASIS. THE DIRECTOR MIGHT. YOU MIGHT WANT THE COMMISSION'S INPUT. IT PUTS A FIVE-DAY WINDOW ON THEIR RESPONSE, BUT ORGANIZING A SPECIAL MEETING OR REGULAR MEETING WOULD BE PART OF THAT TIMELINE AND IT'S MORE DIFFICULT TO PREDICT. >> THAT'S VERY TRUE, BEN. I'M ALWAYS STRIVING TO BE VERY RESPONSIVE. I THINK I'VE ALWAYS AT LEAST TRIED TO BE VERY RESPONSIVE AND IF YOU WANT TO GET THE OPINION FROM THE FULL COMMISSION, I'M ALWAYS ECIAL ME GENERALLY ABLE TO DO, BUT YEAH. I COULDN'T PROMISE IT I'M GOING TO GUARANTEE YOU THE COMMISSION WILL BE ABLE FOR A SPECIAL MEETING WITHIN A WEEK, BUT MOST TIMES THEY ARE. >> THANK YOU, COUNCIL PRESIDENT. THANKS FOR THE CLARITY. >> ALSO I KNOW I'M NOT RUNNING THE MEETING, BUT I THINK COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS HAS HIS HAND UP. >> I SEE THAT. DO YOU HAVE A SHORT QUESTION ON THIS AMENDMENT, COUNCIL STRAUSS? >> YES. THANK YOU. I WILL SAY IT'S IMPORTANT FOR TO US RECEIVE FEEDBACK FROM OUR COMMISSION ABOUT THESE AMENDMENTS. WE LOSE NOTHING BY TAKING TIME TO GET THEIR FEEDBACK, BUT IF WE RUSH TO PASS A LAW LOWERING OUR OWN ETHICS STANDARDS WITHOUT INPUT FROM OUR ETHICS OVERSIGHT BODY, WE DO RISK PERMANENTLY UNDERMINING PEOPLE'S TRUST IN US AND OUR PROCESS. I THINK WE NEED TO TAKE MORE TIME WITH THESE AMENDMENTS AND UNDERLYING LEGISLATION SO WE'RE ABLE TO RECEIVE THEIR FEEDBACK. YOU SHARED THERE WOULD BE NO BACK AND FORTH, THAT WE NEEDED TO RAISE OUR HANDS AFTER EACH QUESTION. I HAVEN'T SEEN THAT HAPPENING WITH OTHER COUNCILMEMBERS. I JUST WANT TO SEE IF THAT'S A RULE THAT APPLIES TO EVERYONE. >> MY QUESTIONS EXACTLY. COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA, GO AHEAD. >> THANK YOU. I WANT TO FOR THE RECORD STATE COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS HAS SAID ON A NUMBER OF OCCASIONS NOW WE'RE LOWERING THE STANDARD AND I WANT THE RECORD TO REFLECT THAT WE ARE NOT LOWERING THE STANDARDS. THERE ARE STILL STANDARDS HERE FOR ETHICS. WE'RE MAKING SOME CLARIFYING AMENDMENTS AND I FEEL REALLY STRONGLY THAT NEEDED TO BE STATED BECAUSE I DON'T WANT IT LEFT ON THE TABLE THAT WE APPARENTLY ARE GOING TO AGREE TO DISAGREE ON THAT, COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS, BUT WE ARE NOT LOWERING THE STANDARD. THANK YOU, COUNCIL PRESIDENT. >> ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS ON THIS? WE ARE NOW AFTER 5:00 AND A COUNCILMEMBER HAS A VERY HARD STOP. I'M TRYING TO GET TO A VOTE ON THIS PIECE OF LEGISLATION. WILL THE CLERK PLEASE CALL THE ROLL ON THE ADOPTION OF AMENDMENT 5. >> COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA? >> AYE. >> COUNCILMEMBER SOLOMON? >> AYE. >> COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH? >> YES. >> COUNCILMEMBER KETTLE? >> AYE. >> CHAIR NELSON? >> AYE. >> FIVE IN FAVOR, NONE OPPOSED. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. OKAY. THE MOTION CARRIES AND AMENDMENT 5 IS ADOPTED. COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED IN ORDER TO MOVE AMENDMENT 6. >> I MOVE TO AMEND COUNCIL BILL 120978 AS PRESENTED ON AMENDMENT 6. >> SECOND. IT HAS BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED TO AMEND THE BILL AS PRESENTED ON AMENDMENT 6. COUNCIL CENTRAL STAFF, WILL YOU PLEASE WALK US THROUGH THE AMENDMENT. >> ABSOLUTELY. AS DESCRIBED IN THE EFFECTS STATEMENT, THIS AMENDMENT IS DESIGNED TO ENCOURAGE AND INVITE THE ETHICS AND ELECTIONS COMMISSION TO CONTINUE TO PROVIDE INPUT IN THIS SPACE, IF YOU WILL. IN PARTICULAR, IT CALLS ON THE SEC TO REPORT ANNUALLY TO THE CITY COUNCIL WHETHER IT HAS ANY RECOMMENDATIONS FOR NEW ETHICS POLICY CONSIDERATIONS AND IT AUTHORIZES AND ENCOURAGES TO REVIEW RECUSALS, ETHICS COMPLAINTS, REQUEST FOR ADVISORY OPINIONS AND THE LIKE. TO USE THE BODY OF KNOWLEDGE THEY POTENTIALLY WILL HAVE GATHERED OVER THE PREVIOUS YEAR AND MAYBE YEARS BEFORE THAT AND TO AFFIRMATIVELY MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL ABOUT POTENTIAL MODIFICATIONS TO THE ETHICS RULES AND LAWS. AGAIN, IT ENCOURAGES THAT AND AFFIRMATIVELY REQUIRES THE COMMISSION TO RESPOND TO COUNCIL ON AN ANNUAL BASIS. THAT RESPONSE IN A GIVEN YEAR COULD BE WE DON'T HAVE RECOMMENDATIONS, BUT EITHER WAY THE IDEA IS THERE WOULD BE AN AFFIRMATIVE CHECK-IN WHETHER OR NOT EVENTS IN THE PREVIOUS YEARS OR THEIR CUMULATIVE IMPACT OVER TIME SUGGEST THERE'S A NEED FOR SOME MODIFICATION IN THE VIEW OF THE ETHICS COMMISSION. >> OKAY. THANK YOU. COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH? THANK YOU, COUNCIL PRESIDENT. THIS IS REALLY A REQUEST OF OUR ETHICS REPORT ANNUALLY ON THE STATE OF ETHICS OF THE CITY AND RECOMMENDATION HOW WE CAN FURTHER BUILD TRUST . THERE'S A LOT OF CHANGING OF PEOPLE. THERE'S A LOT OF DIFFERENT SCENARIOS THAT COME UP. THERE'S A LOT OF DIFFERENT THINGS THAT ARE MOVING FAST. TO BE ABLE TO SAY HERE ARE SOME RECOMMENDATIONS WE WOULD LIKE TO HELP STRENGTHEN OUR LAWS. >> I HAVE A QUESTION. IS THERE ANY KIND OF REGULARITY WITH WHICH WE WOULD ASK FOR OR REQUEST THAT INPUT? >> THIS WOULD BE ANNUALLY. SO WE'D HAVE AN ANNUAL REPORT ON HEY, THIS IS THE STATE OF ETHICS. THIS IS WHAT WE SEE CONFLICT WHICH OF CONFLICTS OF INTEREST. >> I THINK THAT WOULD BE A GREAT REPORT TO HAVE AT SOME POINT WHEN COUNCIL IS IN SESSION SO WE COULD CONSIDER AND MAKE THOSE CHANGES INSTEAD OF HAVING IT HAPPEN RIGHT BEFORE A LONG BREAK OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT. GO AHEAD. ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM OTHER PEOPLE? COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA. >> YES. THIS IS COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH'S LAST AMENDMENT, I WANT TO THANK YOU FOR IMPROVING UPON WHAT COUNCILMEMBER MOORE BROUGHT AND, COUNCILMEMBER MOORE, ACKNOWLEDGING YOU HAD MANY OF THESE AND BASED ON SOME OPINION YOU GOT WENT BACK AND FORTH, BUT ALSO SAY I APPRECIATE YOU, COUNCILMEMBER MOORE, AND YOU, COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH, FOR THE TIME AND THE DUE DILIGENCE AND ALL YOU'VE DONE TO REALLY SUPPORT AND TAKE DIRECTOR BARNETT'S RECOMMENDATION TO UPDATE THE ETHICS CODE WITH THE THOUGHTFULNESS THAT YOU'VE PUT INTO IT. REALLY WANTED TO THANK YOU FOR THAT AS WE'RE LOOKING AT THIS LAST AMENDMENT AND TO UNDERSCORE WE DID GET A RECOMMENDATION FROM SOMEONE I KNOW TO BE THE HOLDER OF THE ETHICS WORK AT THE CITY AND SOMEONE I REALLY HAVE TRUSTED OVER THE YEARS AND THAT IS REALLY IMPORTANT TO ME IN ALL THIS. IF DIRECTOR BARNETT HAD SAID DIFFERENTLY, THEN I WOULD HAVE GONE THAT DIFFERENT DIRECTION AND SO I REALLY WANT TO UNDERSCORE THIS IS NOT LOWERING OUR STANDARDS. THIS IS MAKING SOME AMENDMENTS AS RECOMMENDED BY OUR ETHICS OFFICER AND, OF COURSE, EVEN PUTTING MORE AMENDMENTS TO IT TO MAKE IT AS ROBUST OF AN ETHICS BILL AS IT CAN BE. SO THANK YOU ALL. >> COUNCILMEMBER KETTLE. >> I DIDN'T HAVE A HAND RAISED. >> OH. DID YOU SAY ANYTHING ABOUT A WALK-ON, I THOUGHT? >> YES. I SAID THAT EARLIER AND AS I MENTIONED TO YOU PREVIOUSLY, EARLIER BEFORE THE MEETING, IT WAS A POSSIBILITY, BUT I WILL NOT BRING AMENDMENT 7 WALK-ON AMENDMENT TODAY. >> TODAY. OKAY. COUNCILMEMBER MOORE, I INVITE YOU TO MAKE SOME CLOSING COMMENTS. >> POINT OF INFORMATION. >> PLEASE GO AHEAD. >> WE HAVE NOT VOTED ON AMENDMENT 6, COUNCIL PRESIDENT. >> GOSH, GETTING AHEAD OF MYSELF. CLERK, WOULD YOU PLEASE CALL THE ROLL ON AMENDMENT 6. >> COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA? >> AYE. >> COUNCILMEMBER KETTLE? >> AYE. >> COUNCILMEMBER SOLOMON? >> AYE. >> COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH? >> YES. >> CHAIR NELSON? >> AYE. >> FIVE IN FAVOR, NONE OPPOSED. >> OKAY. THE MOTION CARRIES. TWO HANDS JUST WENT UP. LET ME SAY THIS BECAUSE I HAVE TO. THE MOTION CARRIES AND AMENDMENT 6 IS ADOPTED. ARE THERE ANY FINAL COMMENTS ON THE BILL AS AMENDED BEFORE WE VOTE ON THE BILL? COUNCILMEMBER -- WHAT TIME DO WE HAVE A HARD STOP FOR THIS COMMITTEE MEETING? >> COUNCILMEMBER NELSON, IF I MAY. >> GO AHEAD. TECHNICAL PROBLEMS. I HAVE TO BE AT AN EVENT HONORING PRESIDENT KOWSIT. I KNOW THIS IS AT THE END OF OUR VOTE. IF THERE'S ANY WAY WE CAN VOTE FOR THE FULL THING, I KNOW A COUPLE COUNCILMEMBERS HAVE QUESTIONS, BUT I KNOW THEY'RE NONVOTING MEMBERS OF MAYBE IS IT POSSIBLE TO JUST TAKE THE VOTE AND THEN YOU CAN GET YOUR QUESTIONS? >> I AM FINE WITH TAKING A VOTE AND NOT CALLING ADJOURNMENT UNTIL COUNCILMEMBERS CAN MAKE COMMENTS ON THE END. COUNCILMEMBER MOORE, WOULD YOU LIKE TO MAKE CLOSING COMMENTS BEFORE WE COME TO A VOTE? >> COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH HAS HER HAND UP. >> COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH, GO AHEAD. >> THANK YOU, COUNCIL PRESIDENT. REALLY QUICK, I WANTED TO STATE SOMETHING FOR THE RECORD, MY INTENSE AND GOAL, NUMBER ONE, WAS TO PROVIDE MORE STRUCTURE TO OUR ETHICS OF WHAT I HAVE SEEN IN MY OWN PERSONAL EXPERIENCE BEHIND THE SCENES TO SEE WHAT HAPPENS WITH CERTAIN EXPERIENCE, SO STRUCTURE AND MORE TRANSPARENCY AS WELL. THAT'S WHY I HAD BROUGHT AMENDMENT NUMBER 3 TO THE TABLE, BUT I KNOW IT NEED TO BE WORDED BETTER BECAUSE FROM MY EXPERIENCE IF THERE IS AN ETHICAL DILEMMA AND SOMEONE WANTS TO KNOW ABOUT THAT, THEY HAVE TO FILE A PUBLIC DISCLOSURE REQUEST AND THAT TAKES A LONG TIME. I THINK JUST PUTTING THAT OUT THERE AND BEING TRANSPARENT ABOUT WHAT FINDINGS WERE AND IF THOSE FINDINGS WERE TO BE A CONFLICT, THAT IS THE MOST TRANSPARENT PROCESS YOU COULD POSSIBLY BE FROM A GOVERNMENT'S PERSPECTIVE ON SOMEONE'S GOVERNMENT WEBSITE. SO I JUST WANTED TO STATE THAT FOR THE RECORD. I DON'T CONSIDER THAT LOWERING STANDARDS. I CONSIDER THAT BEING HONEST AND OPEN INSTEAD OF A TWEET OR SOCIAL MEDIA POST OR A GOSSIP. I JUST WANTED TO STATE THAT. I CONSIDER THAT TO BE WAY MORE TRANSPARENT THAN WHAT IS CURRENTLY BEING DONE RIGHT NOW AND ALSO AND DATA AND INFORMATION TO PEOPLE WITH THE STRUCTURE THAT WE NEED TO HAVE, MORE SO WITH RESPONSES WITHIN FIVE DAYS AND ALSO GETTING AN ANNUAL REPORT ABOUT HOW WE CAN IMPROVE OUR ETHICS I THINK IS INCREDIBLY IMPORTANT AS WELL, HAVING A STRUCTURED REPORT WHERE WE CAN ANALYZE AND UNDERSTAND AND DATA AND FACTS SO WE CAN GET BETTER AS A COUNCIL I THINK IS INCREDIBLY IMPORTANT. SO I WANTED TO STATE THAT. I ALSO TRIED MY BEST TO BRING FORWARD SOME AMENDMENTS I THOUGHT WAS MIDDLE GROUND BECAUSE I HAVE SEEN EXTREMES ON BOTH SIDES. IN ORDER FOR US TO MOVE FORWARD, WE HAVE TO HAVE A COMMON MIDDLE GROUND BALANCE APPROACH SO WE CAN MOVE FORWARD AND THAT'S HOW I TOOK TO THESE ETHICS PIECE. THAT'S HOW I TAKE TO ANY TYPE OF LEGISLATION WE'RE DOING. I'M ALWAYS TRYING TO FIND THE COMMON GROUND SO WE CAN MOVE FORWARD TO MAKING SURE THAT WE CAN CONTINUE TO HAVE PROGRESS BECAUSE THAT IS THE UNDERLINING PIECE TO OUR CITY OF BEING PROGRESSIVE IS PROGRESS. I JUST WANTED TO STATE THAT BECAUSE I KNOW THAT WE CAN -- EVERYONE HAS THEIR OWN OPINION. I GET IT. JUST TRYING TO MAKE PROGRESS HERE FOR A MIDDLE GROUND. THE OTHER GROUND IS THE AMENDMENT 3, BECAUSE I DIDN'T HAVE THAT IN ENOUGH TIME, I'M GOING TO HAVE TO ABSTAIN FROM THE VOTE TODAY UNTIL WE GET IT CORRECTLY BECAUSE I DON'T FEEL COMFORTABLE ENOUGH TO VOTE ON THE UNDERLINING BILL UNTIL WE HAVE THIS AMENDMENT WHERE I THINK NEEDS TO BE WELL. I JUST WANTED TO STATE THAT FOR THE RECORD, MY INTENTIONS AND THANK YOU ALL FOR YOUR TIME, BUT I THINK WE -- YEAH. THANK YOU SO MUCH. >> WHAT WAS THE TOPIC OF 3? >> IT'S TO PUBLIC ONLY THE COMPLAINTS WE DEAL NECESSARY TO INVESTIGATE WHERE THERE WAS AN ETHICAL -- WHERE THERE WAS AN OUTCOME WHERE THERE WAS A CONFLICT OF INTEREST AND WHY THAT IS. SO THAT IS TO BE PUBLISHED. THOSE ARE MY INTENTIONS TO GET IT RIGHT WITH LAW AND TO MAKE SURE THAT IT CAN BE AS TRANSPARENT AS POSSIBLE. THANK YOU. >> OKAY. THANK YOU. THAT IS A VERY IMPORTANT PIECE OF -- THAT IS IMPORTANT. COUNCILMEMBER MOORE, DO YOU WANT TO CLOSE US OUT WITH ANY COMMENTS? >> COUNCIL PRESIDENT. >> YOU'RE BEHIND SOME WRITING ON MY SCREEN. GO AHEAD, COUNCILMEMBER KETTLE. >> I WANTED TO STATE THIS WAS THE POINT I WAS GOING TO RAISE MY HAND TO SAY AS I ALLUDED TO AND BASICALLY MENTIONED THERE IS AN AMENDMENT 7 WALK ON. UPON CONSIDERATION I WILL NOT BE PLACING THAT AMENDMENT IN TODAY. CAN I JUST SAY, TOO, AGAIN, AS I STATED EARLIER, THERE'S A LOT OF DIFFERENT PIECES HERE. SO I APPRECIATE THE WORK DONE BY ALL INVOLVED REGARDING THE CHALLENGES THAT WE FACE TO INCLUDE THE ADD ON OF COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH WITH ALL HER AMENDMENTS IN ADDITION TO WORK DONE PREVIOUSLY BY COUNCILMEMBER MOORE AND OTHERS. I JUST WANTED TO END THAT WAY. THANK YOU. >> IT IS MY IMPRESSION -- THANK YOU VERY MUCH -- I'LL JUST SAY ONE. IT IS MY IMPRESSION WE HAVE STRENGTHENED THE EXISTING ETHICS CODE. THERE IS THE MODIFICATION OF RECUSAL OR DISCLOSURE, BUT THERE IS A LOT TO THE ETHICS CODE THAT HAS BEEN STRENGTHENED BY THE SUITE OF AMENDMENTS. SE SUITE OF AMENDMENTS BEFORE GOING FORWARD. OKAY. ARE THERE ANY OTHER COMMENTS? COUNCILMEMBER MOORE. >> THANK YOU. I JUST WANTED TO SAY THANK YOU SO MUCH COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH FOR ALL YOUR REALLY HARD WORK ON YOUR AMENDMENTS, FOR BRINGING THE RECUSAL AMENDMENT. I THINK IT DEMONSTRATES OUR DEMOCRACY IS ALIVE AND WELL WHEN WE HEAR A LOT OF FEEDBACK AND WE ARE RESPONSIVE AND RECEPTIVE AND WE HAVE GONE BACK TO I THINK A RECUSAL PROVISION THAT IS THE A BRIGHT LIGHT, WHICH IS IMPORTANT. IT HAS BEEN SHOWN TO WORK IN MANY OTHER JURISDICTIONS AND IT GIVES THE ETHICS AND ELECTIONS DIRECTOR AND COMMISSION SOME GUIDELINES ON WHICH TO BE ABLE TO MAKE THESE VERY DIFFICULT DECISIONS. I ACTUALLY BELIEVE WE ARE NOT TAKING THE GUARDRAILS OFTEN. WE ARE MAKING THEM BETTER SO THAT WE AS A COUNCIL CAN WORK MORE EFFECTIVELY AND DO THE BUSINESS OF REPRESENTING ALL THE VOICES. THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO BRING THIS BEFORE YOUR COMMITTEE TODAY. >> THANK YOU. COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS. I'M SORRY. >> OVER THE PAST FEW DAYS WE'VE SEEN REPUBLICANS ON THE SUPREME COURT -- >> JUST A SECOND. >> I'M SORRY. >> YOU CALLED ON ME. >> AND THAT WAS -- I APOLOGIZE. I MEANT TO GIVE COUNCILMEMBER MOORE THE LAST WORD AND LOOKED AT THE CLOCK AND REALIZED WE DO HAVE TO BRING THIS. >> I'LL JUST MAKE MY COMMENTS BRIEF. OVER THE PAST FEW DAYS WE'VE SEEN EVEN REPUBLICANS ON THE SUPREME COURT TAKE PRINCIPAL RECUSALS. JUSTICE AMY CONEY BARRETT RECUSED HERSELF WHILE SHE WAS THE DECIDING VOTE ON A CASE THAT WOULD HAVE APPROVED THE COUNTRY'S FIRST PUBLIC RELIGIOUS CHARTER SCHOOL. IT'S SOMETHING SHE'S ON THE RECORD SUPPORTING BUT RECUSED HERSELF ANYWAYS, ALL THIS TO SAY I DON'T THINK WE SHOULD BE THE ONES LEADING WITH LEGISLATION THAT IN MY OPINION LOWERS OUR ETHICAL STANDARDS. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I AM GOING TO INTERRUPT YOU NOW AND GET THE VOTE. >> WE NEED TO BE TAKING MORE TIME ON THIS BILL AS I'M HEARING THERE MAY BE ADDITIONAL AMENDMENT IDEAS AND THAT THE COMMISSION HAS NOT PROVIDED THEIR FEEDBACK. THERE'S NO NEED TO RUSH THIS UNLESS THERE IS. I HAVE ONLY SPOKE TO THE MERITS OF THIS, THE 2016 AND THE 2018 BILLS. IF WE SEE IN THE NEXT FEW WEEKS LEGISLATION THAT WILL ONLY PASS BECAUSE OF THE BILL BEFORE US, WE'LL KNOW WHY THIS PROCESS WAS RUSHED. >> COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS, YOU ARE NOT ON THIS COMMITTEE. I ERRONEOUSLY SAID YOUR NAME BECAUSE YOU WERE AT THE TOP LEFT OF MY SCREEN. I WAS PROCEEDING TO A VOTE ON THIS BILL BECAUSE WE HAD A HARD STOP AND WE'RE ALREADY PAST IT. YOU WILL HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK TO THIS WHEN IT IS BEFORE FULL COUNCIL. I'M SORRY TO INTERRUPT, BUT WE HAVE TO MOVE ON. WILL THE CLERK PLEASE CALL THE ROLL ON THE PASSAGE OF COUNCILMEMBER BILL 120978 AS AMENDED. >> COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA? >> AYE. >> COUNCILMEMBER SOLOMON? >> AYE. >> COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH? >> ABSTAIN. >> COUNCILMEMBER KETTLE? >> ABSTAIN. >> CHAIR NELSON? >> I WILL ALSO ABSTAIN. >> TWO IN FAVOR, THREE ABSTAINED. >> OKAY. THE MOTION CARRIES AND COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION THAT THE BILL PASSED AS AMENDED WILL BE SENT TO THE JUNE 3rd CITY COUNCIL MEETING. THIS WILL COME BEFORE THE COUNCIL ON -- HELP ME OUT HERE, JUNE, OUR NEXT -- >> JUNE 3rd CITY COUNCIL MEETING. >> JUNE 3rd CITY COUNCIL MEETING. OKAY. I ABSTAIN BECAUSE IT DOES SEEM AS THOUGH THERE WILL BE ADDITIONAL AMENDMENTS AND I WANT TO SEE THE FULL SUITE BECAUSE THAT COULD CHANGE MY VOTE AND I DON'T WANT TO HAVE TO EXPLAIN MYSELF AFTER THE FACT. IF THERE'S NO FURTHER BUSINESS, THIS MEETING WILL ADJOURN. >> COUNCIL PRESIDENT, WE STILL HAVE HANDS, POINT OF ORDER. >> YES. AND I AM THE CHAIR OF THIS COMMITTEE AND I DO APOLOGIZE TO THE NONCOMMITTEE MEMBERS. I WILL MOVE MY SCRIPT TO SEE IF THERE ARE COMMITTEE MEMBERS THAT WISH TO SPEAK. THERE ARE NO COMMITTEE MEMBERS THAT WISH TO SPEAK AND WE ARE WELL PAST TIME. I WAS GENEROUS WITH PUBLIC COMMENT. I DO HAVE TO END THIS MEETING SO PEOPLE CAN GET TO OTHER ENGAGEMENTS. IT IS NOW 5:27. HEARING NO FURTHER BUSINESS, THIS MEETING IS ADJOURNED. >> COUNCIL PRESIDENT. >> YES. >> I DO THINK IT'S IMPORTANT WE HEAR FROM COUNCILMEMBER RINCK. I WANT TO STATE FOR THE RECORD, I DON'T WANT TO OVERSTEP MY -- >> BUT YOU ARE, IN FACT, OVERSTEPPING AND I WILL LET COUNCILMEMBERS THAT NEED TO LEAVE THE MEETING, YOU ARE FREE TO GO TO GET TO YOUR ENGAGEMENTS AND YOU ARE FREE TO SPEAK BEFORE WE OFFICIALLY END THE MEETING. GO AHEAD, COUNCILMEMBER RINCK. >> WHEN THIS LEGISLATION BECAME PUBLIC EARLIER THIS MONTH, I WAS THE FIRST MEMBER OF THIS BODY TO SPEAK OUT AGAINST IT. I'LL DO SO AGAIN TODAY FOR THE OFFICIAL PUBLIC RECORD. I AM AGAINST THIS LEGISLATION BECAUSE I DON'T BELIEVE WE SHOULD LOWER OUR ETHICAL STANDARDS AND YOU CAN SAY IT'S NOT LOWERING STANDARDS, BUT IT IS BY DEFINITION LOWERING STANDARDS. OUR DEMOCRACY IS FRAGILE, ESPECIALLY AS WE WATCH PROFIT OVER PEOPLE IN THE FORM OF PUBLIC POLICY HAPPENING IN REALTIME IN D.C. THIS WEEK AS HOUSE REPUBLICANS GIVE OUT TAX BREAKS TO WEALTHY CORPORATIONS WHILE SLASHING S.N.A.P. AND MEDICAID FOR THE POOREST AMERICANS AS PART OF THE TRUMP REGIME'S BIG BEAUTIFUL TAX BILL. THIS IS NOT THE MOMENT WE SHOULD BE WEAKENING OUR CITY'S CODE OF ETHICS. IN FACT, GIVEN THE FRAGILE NATIONAL ENVIRONMENT I'D GO AS FAR TO SAY THIS IS THE WORST POSSIBLE TIMING FOR THIS. OVER THE PAST TWO WEEKS ALONE MY OFFICE HAS RECEIVED OVER 1,300 EMAILS FROM CONSTITUENTS AGAINST THIS, MOST OF WHICH ARE UNIQUE EMAILS, NOT FORM LETTERS. ONLY ONE EMAIL WAS FOUND THAT WE COULD FIND THAT ACTUALLY SUPPORTS THIS. TO PUT THIS INTO CONTEXT, IN THE SIX MONTHS I'VE HELD THIS OFFICE, WE'VE RECEIVED 3,200 EMAILS, ALMOST ALL FORM LETTERS, ON THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. SO THE FACTS WE'VE RECEIVED, ABOUT A THIRD OF THAT IN JUST A FEW WEEKS SHOULD TELL US SOMETHING. THE HOURS OF PUBLIC COMMENT WE'VE RECEIVED ON THIS SHOULD TELL US SOMETHING. THE PEOPLE DON'T WANT THIS. EARLIER TODAY AS COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS MENTIONED, CONSERVATIVE U.S. SUPREME COURT JUSTICE AMY CONEY BARRETT REDUCED HERSELF OF A VOTE ON A CASE RELATED TO PUBLIC FUNDING FOR WHAT COULD HAVE BEEN THE NATION'S FIRST RELIGIOUS CHARTER SCHOOL. WHY SHOULD SEATTLE CITY COUNCIL HAVE LOWER ETHICAL STANDARDS THAN THE U.S. SUPREME COURT? TO MY COLLEAGUES ADVOCATING FOR THIS LEGISLATION VOTING YES TO MOVE