GOOD AFTERNOON. IT HAS MAY 29, 2025 . SPECIAL LAND-USE COMMITTEE WILL COME TO ORDER. IT IS TO:07 P.M. I AM MARK SOLOMON, CHAIR OF THE LAND USE COMMITTEE. WILL THE CLERK PLEASE CALL THE ROLL? >> COMMISSIONER STRAUSS, COUNCILMEMBER MOORE , COUNCILMEMBER RINCK, COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA . CHAIR SOLOMON. FOUR MEMBERS PRESENT. >> THANK YOU. IF THERE IS NO OBJECTION, THE AGENDA WILL BE ADOPTED. HEARING NO OBJECTION, THE AGENDA IS ADOPTED. THANK YOU VERY MUCH, EVERYONE, FOR COMING TO THIS THURSDAY AFTERNOON MEETING TO DISCUSS LAND USE. AS ALWAYS, THANK YOU TO CITY STAFF, CITY CLERKS, SDCI AND SDOT FOR HELPING US TO PREPARE FOR THIS MEETING. WE WILL NOW OPEN THE PUBLIC COMMENT , HYBRID PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD. PUBLIC COMMENTS SHOULD RELATE TO ITEMS ON TODAY'S AGENDA AND WITHIN THE PURVIEW OF THIS COMMITTEE. FOR THOSE REGISTERED TO SPEAK TO ITEM TO CHECK ON THE AGENDA, WE WILL ACCEPT COMMENTS ON THIS ITEM ONCE WE REACH IT AND OPEN IT FOR PUBLIC HEARING. HOW MANY SPEAKERS DO WE HAVE WINDUP TODAY? BECAUSE CURRENTLY, ONE IN PERSON AND ONE REMOTE. >> OKAY. IS THE PERSON SIGNED UP TO SPEAK FOR ITEM 1 OR 2? >> THE SPEAKER -- GENERALLY, FOR LAND USE. >> OKAY. SHOULD WE HOLD OFF? >> HEAR IT NOW. >> OKAY. WE WILL HAVE TWO MINUTES AND START WITH IN PERSON SPEAKERS FIRST. CLERK, PLEASE READ THE PUBLIC COMMENT INSTRUCTIONS. >> PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD WILL BE MODERATED. IT IS UP TO 20 MINUTES, SPEAKERS CALLED IN THE ORDER IN WHICH THEY REGISTERED, IN PERSON WILL BE CALLED FIRST, AFTER WHICH WE MOVED TO REMOTE SPEAKERS UNTIL THE PERIOD HAS ENDED. SPEAKERS HERE A TIME WHEN 10 SECONDS ARE LEFT. SPEAKERS WILL BE MUTED IF THEY DO NOT END COMMENTS WITHIN ALLOWED A TIME. THE PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD IS NOW OPEN. WE WILL BEGIN WITH THE FIRST SPEAKER ON THE LIST. THAT IS ALEX ZIMMERMAN. >> YOU REMEMBER MY NAME . >> PLEASE GO AHEAD. PLEASE REFRAIN FROM DOING THE SALUTE. THAT WOULD BE MUCH APPRECIATED. >> A LITTLE BIT JEWISH NAMES. I AM READY. >> PLEASE. THANK YOU. >> MY JOURNEY GESTAPO FASCIST. MY NAME ALEX REIMER MET. I AM SUPER TRUMP. I SPEAK IN COUNCIL CHAMBERS 5000 TIMES. I HAVE 6000 DAYS OF TRESPASS DEMOCRAT MAFIA PROSECUTE ME FIVE TIMES. I WANT TO SPEAK ABOUT AGENDA NUMBER ONE. YOU APPOINT ANOTHER IDIOT FOR COMMISSIONER. I NEVER SEE THIS IDIOT HERE FOR 30 YEARS. WHAT ARE THEY -- EMPTY. THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT I WANT SPEAK RIGHT NOW. FOR PEOPLE LOSE, THEY DON'T LIKE YOU MORE. BYE PIG. I PROPOSE DOING THIS FOR 10 LAST YEAR'S ABOUT OPENING FIRST-FLOOR . ONE DAY PER WEEK CONVERSATION FOR THREE OR FIVE MINUTES. YOU, COUNCIL, RINCK, YOU TALK ABOUT HELP PEOPLE . YOU CAN DO THIS ALONE . ABSOLUTELY LEGAL. YOU CAN DO THIS EVERY WEEK. WE CAN GO. PEOPLE WILL BE GO. I GUARANTEE YOU HUNDRED WILL COME, THOUSAND WILL COME. UNDER CAMERA AND MICROPHONE, THESE PEOPLE CAN EXPLAIN SOMETHING, BECAUSE THEY DON'T BELIEVE THESE CROOKS IN THIS CHAMBER. LOOK, NOBODY HERE. NOBODY. KNOW ONE PERSON. ONLY MY FRIEND. [ LAUGHTER ] COUNCIL RINCK, DOING THIS PLEASE. I SPOKE BEFORE. YOU DON'T LISTEN. YOU WILL BE OUT. I GUARANTEE YOU. VIVA TRUMP, VIVA NEW AMERICAN REVOLUTION. VIVA STOPPING THIS PIG . >> TO WE HAVE ADDITIONAL SPEAKERS? >> WE DO. WE WILL NOW MOVE ON TO REMOTE SPEAKERS. NEXT UP WE HAVE DAVID. >> DAVID, GO AHEAD. PRESS STAR SIX. >> I GUESS COUNCIL WILL BE ON TIME FOR A MEETING EVER AGAIN UNDER THIS LEADERSHIP. IS A REAL WAY TO CONVINCE COUNCIL BUT SPENDING $12 MILLION TO GO FROM WEST SEATTLE ON A DIFFERENT TRACK TO DOWNTOWN SEATTLE, AND THEN OUT TO BALLARD , IS A BAD IDEA, CONSIDERING HOW MANY MILLIONS OF DOLLARS WERE SPENT ON RAPID RIDE C AND D BUSES THAT ALREADY GO OUT TO THE SAME AREA. THE COUNCIL THANKS A-TRAIN NEEDS TO COMPETE WITH . YOU CAN TELL CITY HALL IS TAINTED WITH IMPAIRED JUDGMENTS THAT PERMEATE DECISION-MAKING FOR SELF DEALING CONFLICTS OF INTEREST THAT ARE CONTINUING TO SPELL INTO EVERYTHING YOU DO, SUCH AS FORCING A BUS TO COMPETE WITH A TRAY. BUSES CAN SIMPLY IMPROVE AND SELL $12 BILLION NEEDED TO FIX ALL THE FAILURES. IF YOU TAKE A LOOK AT HOW UNSAFE IT IS TO TRY TO GET TO A LIGHT RAIL AND KING COUNTY METRO BUSES, YOU REALIZE THAT ALL THESE SO-CALLED ENVIRONMENTAL DESIGN EXPERTS ARE FRAUDS LOOKING FOR AN EASIER PAYDAY, ACTUALLY TENDING WITH CONTENDING WITH CRIMINALS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD WELFORD TO SIGNALLY TREE TRANSPLANTING WITH A BAD TAX DOLLARS WATERING DOWN THE INTEGRITY OF ETHICS. THE CHAIR ISN'T EVEN ELECTED BY THE PEOPLE AND WAS A CHOSEN FOR PUBLIC SAFETY, DESPITE THE MISLEADING LIES FROM COUNCIL, WHO CHOSE A REPLACEMENT COUNCIL BASED ON A LANDLORD CONFLICT OF INTEREST STACKING THE DECK AGAINST RENTERS AND RESTRICTING A ROBUST HOUSING BUILDOUT BETTER COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND PROPER POLICY. LANDLORDS DON'T HAVE THE BEST INTERESTS OF THE COMMUNITY. SHAME ON CITY HALL, THE REAL STALLING PROGRESS IN A RACIST WOKE PLEASE RECONSIDER THE $12 BILLION. YOU HAVE ENOUGH BUSES THAT CAN BE IMPROVED AND TO PUT A TRAIN ON THE WATERFRONT AND GO RIGHT UP GOLDEN GARDEN AND MAKE THE NUMBER 44 BUS THAT USED TO GO UP AND TAKE IT TO BALLARD. YOU ALL ARE WASTING A WHOLE BUNCH OF MONEY, JUST LIKE YOU WASTE A LOT OF TIME DOING NOTHING GOOD FOR THE PEOPLE. >> THAT'S ALL THE SPEAKERS. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. WITH NO ADDITIONAL SPEAKERS, THE PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD IS NOW CLOSED. WE WILL NOW MOVE ON TO THE FIRST ITEM ON THE AGENDA. WILL THE CLERK PLEASE READ ITEM 1 INTO THE RECORD? >> AGENDA ITEM 1, APPOINTMENT 3172, REAPPOINTMENT OF MOLLY SPETALNICK AS MEMBER, SEATTLE DESIGN COMMISSION, FOR A TERM TO FEBRUARY 28, 2027. >> THANK YOU. FOR THE RECORD, STATE YOUR NAME AND BEGIN YOUR COMMENTS . >> THANK YOU, COUNCIL MEMBERS. MICHAEL JENKINS , DIRECTOR OF THE DESIGN COMMISSION. WE ARE HERE TODAY TO SEEK REAPPOINTMENT OF MOLLY SPETALNICK INTO THE SECOND TERM OF URBAN DESIGNER FOR THE COMMISSION. YOU HAVE HER REAPPOINTMENT MATERIAL, HER CV AND OTHER MATERIALS IN YOUR POCKET. SHE IS CURRENTLY AN URBAN DESIGNER FROM HERE IN SEATTLE AND SPECIALIZES IN TRANSIT , TOD, MULTIFAMILY AND SITE PLANNING AS AN URBAN DESIGNER. SHE IS ALSO -- SHE HAS BEEN RECENTLY APPOINTED AS VICE CHAIR BEFORE THE COMMISSION, AND WE ARE PLEASED SHE CAN FILL THAT ROLE AS WELL. >> ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMITTEE? REGARDING THE REAPPOINTMENT? OKAY. HEARING NONE, I MOVE THE COMMITTEE RECOMMEND CONFIRMATION OF APPOINTMENT 3172. IS THERE A SECOND? >> SECOND. >> MOVED AND SECONDED TO RECOMMEND CONFIRMATION OF THE APPOINTMENT. ANY FURTHER COMMENTS? OKAY. HEARING NONE, WILL THE CLERK PLEASE CALL THE ROLL ON THE CONFIRMATION OF THE APPOINTMENT? >> [ ROLL CALL ] >> -- FOUR VOTES IN FAVOR AND ZERO OPPOSED. >> MOTION CARRIES THAT THE COUNCIL CONFIRMED THE APPOINTMENT WILL BE SENT TO THE DIRECTOR 2025 COUNCIL MEETING. THANK YOU VERY MUCH . >> THANK YOU . >> CLERK, PLEASE READ ITEM TO CHECK INTO THE AGENDA. >> COUNCIL BILL 120975, AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO LAND USE AND ZONING; ADDRESSING SIGNAGE; CLARIFYING REQUIREMENTS AND SUPPORTING EFFICIENT PERMITTING PROCESSES FOR LIGHT REAL TRANSIT FACILITIES. >> THANK YOU. THIS LEGISLATION TO SUPPORT EFFICIENT PERMITTING PROCESS FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF LIGHT RAIL TRANSIT FACILITIES AND WOULD HELP FULFILL THE PERMIT PROCESS IMPROVEMENT GOALS IDENTIFIED BY THE CITY AND SOUND TRANSIT IN 2019. BYPASSING THIS ORDINANCE, THE AMENDED CODE WOULD SUPPORT TIMELY CONSTRUCTION OF THE WEST SEATTLE LINK EXTENSION AND THE BALLARD LINK EXTENSION PROJECTS. AFTER THE PUBLIC HEARING, REPRESENTATIVES FROM SDCI, SDOT AND CENTRAL STAFF WILL BE AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS THE COUNCIL MAY HAVE. WE HAVE HAD PUBLIC HEARING, PUBLIC COMMENTARY. OKAY. THIS IS PUBLIC HEARING. AS PRESENTING OFFICER, I NOW OPENING THE PUBLIC HEARING ON COUNCIL BILL 120975 RELATED TO LAND USE AND ZONING CODE AMENDMENTS FACILITATING SOUND TRANSIT'S WEST SEATTLE AND BALLARD LIGHT RAIL EXTENSIONS. CLERK, HOW MANY SPEAKERS ARE LINED UP FOR THIS PUBLIC HEARING? >> CHAIR, WE REMOTE. >> OKAY. ALL RIGHT. EACH SPEAKER WILL HAVE TWO MINUTES. CLERK, I WILL NOW HANDED OVER TO YOU TO PRESENT THE INSTRUCTIONS . >> SPEAKERS WILL BE CALLED IN THE ORDER OF REGISTRATION. THET RULES APPLY TO THIS PUBLIC YEAR. THE 10 SECOND CHIME IS YOUR NOTICE IT IS TIME TO WRAP UP COMMENTS. SPEAKERS MICROPHONES WILL BE MUTED AT THE END OF THE ALLOTTED TIME. PUBLIC COMMENT RELATED TO COUNCIL BILL 120975 IS ONLY BEING ACCEPTED AT THIS PUBLIC HEARING. SPEAKERS ARE ASKED TO BEGIN COMMENTS BY STATING THEIR NAME. >> OKAY. >> FIRST -- >> OKAY. >> THE FIRST SPEAKER IS ALEX ZIMMERMAN. PLEASE SPEAK TO COUNCIL BILL 120975. >> MY DIRTY GESTAPO MAFIA. LIGHT RAIL, WHAT HAS COME TO TRANSPORTATION? IT'S A NIGHTMARE WHAT HAS HAPPENED RIGHT NOW. YOU SPEND $100 BILLION FOR NOTHING IN SEATTLE, AND KING COUNTY, EVERYTHING. SOUND TRANSIT RAISES 200 BILLION BUCKS. NOBODY USE. BELLEVUE AND REDMAN , OPEN LIGHT RAIL SIX MILES. NOBODY INSIDE. RIGHT NOW, MOST HERE IT IS OPEN. ABSOLUTELY. $200 BILLION. SEATTLE IS A NIGHTMARE. LOOK, NOBODY HERE. WHY? BECAUSE THEY KNOW YOU CROAK. -- I APPEAL AGAIN TO COUNCIL RINCK, SPEAK FOR THE PEOPLE, YOU LIKE PEOPLE, OKAY, IT'S GOOD. GOPHER OPEN CITY HALL ONE DAY PER WEEK SO EVERYBODY CAN COME AND SPEAK FOR 3 TO 5 MINUTES. I GUARANTEE YOU THOUSAND PEOPLE WILL COME. BECAUSE NOBODY HERE. THE CRUX IS STILL BILLIONS FROM US WITH PEOPLE DYING. SENIOR CITIZEN, LOW INCOME. I DON'T CAN FIND A CHEAPER APARTMENT. IT'S A NIGHTMARE WHAT'S HAPPENING RIGHT NOW. WE HAVE BILLION OF DOLLARS YOU SPEND FOR NOTHING, FOR YOUR PERSONAL INTEREST AND CORPORATION THAT SUPPORT YOU FOR ELECTION. THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT HAS HAPPENED. MY RECOMMENDATION TO YOU, COUNCIL RINCK, YOU CAN DO THIS ALONE. YOU DON'T NEED HER PERMISSION LIKE LAST WEEK . COUNCIL REFUSED TO GO AGAINST YOU. V VIRTUAL. I SUPPORT TROUBLED. VIVA TRUMP, VIVA NEW AMERICAN REVOLUTION. >> THANK YOU. NEXT UP , WE HAVE DAVID. >> THANK YOU . IS HER ANYWAY COUNCIL CAN JUST REJECT THIS COUNCIL BILL AND ST3? I KNOW THERE ARE A LOT OF LAND DOORDASH LANDLORDS ON THE LAND USE COMMITTEE THAT THEY'LL ACKNOWLEDGE THEIR CONFLICTS. YOUR IMPAIRED JUDGMENT ARE CONTINUING TO PUSH FORWARD BAD POLICIES THAT ARE COSTING BILLIONS OF DOLLARS, FORCING A TRAIN TO COMPETE WITH A BUS THAT COULD BE IMPROVED. IT'S JUST REALLY , LIKE, REVOLTING TO SEE HOW SELFISH POLITICIANS ARE WHO ARE BLINDED WITH THEIR OWN GREED THAT THEY ARE JUST WILLING TO GO THROUGH THE MOTIONS TO ACCOMMODATE THE AGENDA PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION DOLLARS GETTING A KICKBACK OR BENEFITING THE FULL DASHBOARD, BUT YET, YOU DON'T APPROVE THE PUBLIC SAFETY. YOU DON'T IMPROVE THE SAFETY OF THE BUS OR EFFICIENCIES. YOU JUST KEEP SPENDING MORE MONEY AND DOUBLING DOWN. ANOTHER TELLTALE SIGN YOU ALL HAVE IMPAIRED JUDGMENT. AND THE TOP THREE ON THE LAND USE THAT HER LANDLORDS SHOULD BE KICKED OUT AND RECUSED THEMSELVES FOR THE MAJORITY OF YOUR DECISION-MAKING, BECAUSE YOU ARE PERMEATING INTEGRITY OF ETHICS. THANK YOU. >> THERE ARE NO MORE SPEAKERS FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING. >> OKAY. AS THERE ARE NO MORE SPEAKERS FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING, WE WILL CALL THAT PORTION OF THE MEETING CLOSED. I SEE OUR PRESENTERS HAVE JOINED US AT THE TABLE. PLEASE INTRODUCE YOURSELVES FOR THE RECORD AND PROCEED WHEN READY. >> COUNCIL CENTRAL STAFF. >> SOUND TRANSIT PROGRAM OFFICE PROJECTS . >> SDCI. >> GREAT. >> THIS IS THE THIRD BRIEFING PUBLIC HEARING TODAY , THE THIRD TIME THIS BILL HAS BEEN IN COMMITTEE. YOU HAVE BEEN BRIEFED ON THIS CONTENT PREVIOUSLY. I WILL SAY A FEW REMARKS BECAUSE THERE HAVE BEEN A FEW CHANGES IN CIRCUMSTANCES SINCE THE INITIAL BRIEFING BACK IN APRIL. AS YOU KNOW, THIS IS A BILL THAT WOULD AMEND BOTH SUBSTANTIVE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS AND PROCEDURAL STANDARDS FOR PERMITTING TRANSIT FACILITIES, WHICH IS AN ESSENTIAL PUBLIC FACILITY AND A TYPE OF REGULATORY STATUS UNDER STATE LAW AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTS ARE PRECLUDED FROM HAVING DEVELOPED THE STANDARDS THAT WOULD PRECLUDE AN ESSENTIAL PUBLIC FACILITY. SINCE THE BILL WAS INITIALLY BRIEFED BACK IN APRIL, THERE HAVE BEEN A COUPLE OF DEVELOPMENTS . ONE IS THAT SOUND TRANSIT, THE FEDERAL TRANSIT ADMINISTRATION, HAS ISSUED A RECORD OF DECISION FOR THE WEST SEATTLE LINK EXTENSION. THAT RECORD OF DECISION CONTAINS LITIGATION REQUIRED PURSUANT TO THE NATIONAL POLICY ACT. ALSO, THERE HAS BEEN A CHANGE IN STATE LAW. IT DOES ACTUALLY AFFECT THE CONTENT OF THE BILL, BUT REINFORCES THE STATUS OF LIGHT RAIL TRANSIT FACILITIES AS ESSENTIAL PUBLIC FACILITIES FOR THE PURPOSES OF THE STATE TRANSPORTATION BILL AND THE GROWTH MANAGEMENT ACT. TO TELEGRAPH A FEW THINGS THAT WILL BE COMING TO THE COUNCIL HERE . AS YOU KNOW, THIS IS NOT SUFFICIENT FOR SOUND TRANSIT TO BEGIN THEIR PERMITTING PROCESS . THERE ARE A COUPLE OF PIECES -- THERE IS A PIECE OF LEGISLATION, TWO PIECES THAT WILL BE COMING TO THE COMMITTEE SHORTLY . I DON'T KNOW WHEN THEY WILL BE HERE. MAYBE YOU CAN FILL THAT IN. THOSE ARE THE TRANSIT AGREEMENTS THAT WILL INCLUDE THE WEST SEATTLE LINK. >> HAPPY TO ADD ONTO THAT. YES, IN ORDER FOR CITY DEPARTMENTS TO BE ABLE TO ISSUE PERMITS FOR SOUND TRANSIT PROJECTS, THE PROJECT HAS TO BE FORMALLY ADOPTED BY THE CITY. THAT HAPPENS THROUGH TWO PIECES OF LEGISLATION, AN ORDINANCE THAT AMEND THE TRANSIT WAY AGREEMENT, WHICH IS A LONG-STANDING 25 YEAR AGREEMENT BETWEEN SOUND TRANSIT IN THE CITY, AND EVERY TIME A NEW ALIGNMENT IS ADDED TO THE REGIONAL TRANSIT SYSTEM, EXHIBITS FOR THAT ALIGNMENT ARE APPENDED INTO THE TRANSIT AGREEMENT SO THE AGREEMENT NOW INCLUDES THOSE NEW SYSTEMS. THERE WILL BE AN ORDINANCE THAT WILL AMEND THE TRANSIT WAY AGREEMENT TO INCLUDE THE WEST SEATTLE LINK EXTENSION. THERE IS ALSO A COMPANION RESOLUTION THAT ADOPTS THE ALIGNMENT ITSELF. IT MENTIONS WHERE THE STATIONS AND GUIDEWAYS ARE GOING TO BE. AS ALSO MENTIONED, THAT ACTION FOLLOWS TWO PREVIOUS ACTIONS. THERE IS THE ACTION BY THE SOUND TRANSIT BOARD TO ADOPT THE PROJECT TO BE BUILT THAT HAPPENED LAST FALL, IN OCTOBER, I BELIEVE. THERE IS THE ACTION BY PUBLISHING THE RECORD OF DECISION. THOSE OF THE FIRST TWO ACTIONS. THE FINAL ONE IS THE CITY OF SEATTLE. ONCE THAT HAPPENS, THE CITY DEPARTMENTS ARE ABLE TO PROCESS PERMITS FOR THE PROJECT. >> OKAY. >> WE ANTICIPATE SENDING OUT LEGISLATION IN JUNE . >> OKAY. IF COUNCIL MEMBERS HAVE QUESTIONS ABOUT THIS BILL, POSSIBLY ABOUT THE UPCOMING TRANSIT WAY AGREEMENT LEGISLATION, COUNCIL MEMBER RIVERA HAS A PROPOSED AMENDMENT WITH PUBLIC OUTREACH. I'M HAPPY TO WALK THROUGH THE AMENDMENT. YOU ALL SHOULD HAVE -- >> IF I CAN PAUSE . I WANT TO REFLECT FOR THE RECORD THAT COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS HAS JOINED US REMOTE. PLEASE CONTINUE. >> YOU ALL SHOULD HAVE AMENDMENT 1 TREACH REQUIREMENTS RELATED TO LIGHT RAIL TRANSIT PERMITTING. THERE ARE FOUR SUBSTANTIVE CHANGES, MOST RELATED TO PRIMARY CHANGE, WHICH IS A REQUIREMENT THAT AN APPLICANT, IN THIS CASE, SOUND TRANSIT, SUBMIT A PRIEST THE MIDDLE FOR TEMPORARY USES FOR LIGHT RAIL TRANSIT FACILITY CONSTRUCTION. LARGER ASPECTS OF TRANSIT PERMITTING. THE COMMUNITY OUTREACH PLAN WOULD BE A PRIEST THE MIDDLE REQUIREMENT. AS PART OF THE -- IT WOULD IT WOULD BE DONE PRIOR TO AN ACTUAL PERMIT APPLICATION, AND AS PART OF THE SDCI PERMIT REVIEW, IT WOULD TAKE A LOOK AT HOW WELL THE COMMUNITY OUTREACH PLAN HAD BEEN ACCOMPLISHED AND INCLUDE INFORMATION ABOUT THE CONTENT OF PUBLIC COMMENT AND HOW THAT WAS REFLECTED IN THE SDCI DECISION. IF YOU OTHER COMPONENTS, A FEW OTHER CHANGES. SDCI WOULD BE REQUIRED TO DOCUMENT HOW THE COMMUNITY OUTREACH PLAN WAS IMPLEMENTED AND INCORPORATE THAT IN ITS DECISION. ANOTHER AMENDMENT WOULD BE THE TEMPORARY USES FOR LIGHT RAIL FACILITIES THAT INCLUDE CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT PLAN INFORMED BY THE COP, AND FINALLY, THE NOTICE OF DECISION BY SDCI WOULD INCLUDE INFORMATION ABOUT THE POSSIBILITY FOR ADDITIONAL APPEAL, WHICH EXISTS , OPPORTUNITY FOR APPEAL PRIMARY THROUGH SUPERIOR COURT. >> THANK YOU. COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA IS A PERSON BRINGING THE MMA, WOULD YOU LIKE TO SPEAK TO THAT? >> PLEASE, THANK YOU, CHAIR. THANK YOU FOR REVIEWING THAT. COLLEAGUES, I VIEW THIS AS A FRIENDLY MMA. I HAD A REALLY GREAT CONVERSATION WITH THE SOUND TRANSIT FOLKS THIS WEEK. I KNOW THEY ARE DOING OUTREACH AT ALL OF THE STAGES . I THINK THIS IS, SINCE WE ARE THE ONES THAT ACTUALLY HAVE TO PERMIT THESE PROJECTS, IT IS REALLY A WAY TO SHOW OUR WORK ACCOUNTABILITY IS IMPORTANT. THIS IS A WAY WE CAN HAVE INFORMATION BY WHICH WE ARE ISSUING A PERMIT . THIS WAY, IF THERE ANY ISSUES ON THE BACKEND ABOUT PUBLIC OUTREACH THAT WAS DONE, WE HAVE WORK TO SHOW THAT THINGS WERE SUBMITTED. LIKE I SAID, THE SOUND TRANSIT IS ALREADY DOING THIS WORK. I DON'T VIEW THIS AS A HEAVY LIFT ON SOUND TRANSIT'S PART SINCE YOU ARE ALREADY DOING IT, BUT THEY WOULD HAVE TO PROFFER IT SO WE SEE IT. THEY ARE SHOWING THEIR WORK, AND WE CAN SHOW OUR WORK. WHEN WE DO THOSE PERMIT DECISIONS, THEN WE HAVE THAT OFFER TO THE PUBLIC. TO ME, IT SEEMS LIKE A VERY PRUDENT THING TO DO AS THE GOVERNMENT ENTITY THAT HAS TO ISSUE THOSE PERMIT -- PERMITS. YOU SAID, I KNOW THEY ARE DOING THE WORK, SAID TO ME, IT DOESN'T SEEM LIKE A HEAVY LIFT TO HAVE THEM SUBMIT THE WORK THEY ARE DOING THEM A BASICALLY, SO THAT IT SHOWS -- YOU KNOW, WE CAN SEE WHAT IT IS. IN A MORE FORMAL WAY, I SUPPOSE. NEVERTHELESS, IT WILL BE ON THE RECORD. HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. >> GREAT. I SEE COUNCILMEMBER RINCK AND COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS. I AM NOT SURE WHO RAISED THEIR HAND FOR US. LET'S START WITH COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS. >> THANK YOU, CHAIR. I AM GOING TO SHARE -- AS YOU CAN SEE, I'M STILL HERE AT THE SOUND TRANSIT BOARD MEETING HERE. IT IS VERY -- I WILL SHARE THREE THINGS THAT ARE ALL TRUE. THE FIRST IS THAT IT IS VERY IMPORTANT THAT WE MOVE THIS LEGISLATION FORWARD TODAY, AND QUICKLY. THE SECOND THING THAT IS TRUE IS THAT COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA'S AMENDMENT IN INTENTION AND SPIRIT ARE GOOD , AND THE THIRD THING THAT IS TRUE IS THAT WE HAVE NOT HAD A LOT OF TIME TO REFLECT ON THE LANGUAGE OF COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA'S AMENDMENT, BECAUSE I BELIEVE IT WAS SHARED OUT IN THE LAST 30 TO 60 MINUTES. MY ASK TODAY IS THAT WE MOVE THE BILL FORWARD , WE HOLD COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA 'S AMENDMENT UNTIL FULL COUNCIL WHEN IT CAN BE SUBMITTED AS A NORMAL AMENDMENT, RATHER THAN A WALK ON. THANK YOU, CHAIR. >> VERY GOOD. COUNCILMEMBER RINCK. >> I HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS TO THE PANEL. IS IT CORRECT TO SAY THE GOAL OF THIS UNDERLYING BILL IS TO CUT COSTS AND SHORTEN THE TIMELINE OF OUR SOUND TRANSIT PROJECTS? >> I WAS SAY THERE ARE A COUPLE OF GOALS. I WOULDN'T PUT CUT COSTS THAT I WOULD SAY KEEPING THE PROJECT ON TIME AND ON BUDGET IS ABSOLUTELY PARAMOUNT. AS MENTIONED EARLIER, WE ARE LOOKING AT THE GROWTH MANAGEMENT ACT AND THE ESSENTIAL PUBLIC FACILITY LANGUAGE AND THE PARTNERING AGREEMENT THAT WAS ADOPTED BY CITY COUNCIL AND SIGNED BY THE MAYOR AND 20 AND T AS ARE FOUNDATIONAL DOCUMENTS THAT ARE TELLING US TO STREAMLINE THE PERMIT PROCESS, KEEP THESE PROJECTS MOVING FORWARD. ALL OF THAT IS REALLY IN SERVICE TO THE VOTERS THAT PASSED THE -- PAST ST3 NINE YEARS AGO AND TRY TO KEEP THIS PROJECT MOVING FORWARD SO THEY CAN BE DELIVERED IN A REASONABLE TIMEFRAME. >> -- SDCI IS THE AUTHOR OF THIS LEGISLATION. I WANT TO MAKE SURE IF THERE'S ANYTHING AT ABOUT THE GOAL. >> I THINK ALL OF THAT IS TRUE. I THINK WE ALSO INTEND TO CREATE CLEAR REGULATIONS FOR SOUND TRANSIT TO FOLLOW, AND ALSO FOR THE PUBLIC TO UNDERSTAND WHAT THE REGULATIONS ARE THAT PERTAIN TO LIGHT RAIL TRANSIT FACILITIES. I THINK IN ALL INSTANCES WE ARE TRYING TO MITIGATE THE IMPACT OF THE PROJECT BY THE DIFFERENT PLANS AND STRATEGIES AND STANDARDS THAT WE PUT IN THE CODE. SO WHILE WE ARE KEEPING IT ON TIME AND ON BUDGET, WE ARE ALSO WORKING IN THE BEST INTEREST OF THE PUBLIC TO BOTH ASSESS AND MITIGATE THE IMPACTS OF THE PROCESS THROUGH OUR PERMITTING WORK. >> THANK YOU BOTH FOR CENTERING US ON THAT. AS A FOLLOW-UP TO THAT, DO YOU HAVE A SENSE AT THIS TIME HOW MUCH IMPLEMENTING THIS BODY OF WORK OUTLINED IN THIS AMENDMENT WOULD COST? >> WE JUST SAW THE AMENDMENT AS WELL. WE ARE ABSOLUTELY SUPPORTIVE OF ENGAGEMENT HAVE BEEN REALLY HAPPY TO BE INTEGRATED INTO THE ENGAGEMENT THAT SOUND TRANSIT HAS BEEN DOING SINCE 2017 ON THESE PROJECTS. REALLY GRATEFUL TO HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO MEET WITH COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA LAST WEEK WITH SOUND TRANSIT TO WALK THROUGH A LOT OF THAT ENGAGEMENT. HAVING JUST SEEN THE AMENDMENT, IT IS A LITTLE TOO QUICK FOR US TO RESPOND DIRECTLY TO WHAT THE IMPACT WOULD BE ON OUR PERMIT PROCESS. I THINK WE WOULD LIKE TO TAKE IT BACK AND LOOK AT WHAT WE DO FOR OTHER MAJOR PROJECTS AND HOW IT COMPARES TO THAT, AND WHETHER THERE WOULD BE ANY ANTICIPATED ADDITIONAL TIME OR PROCESS OR DELAY ASSOCIATED WITH IT. IN THEORY, WE ARE VERY SUPPORTIVE OF COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT AND ENSURING THAT, AS COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA SAID, WE ARE SHOWING THE WORK. >> CERTAINLY AGREED WITH THE MATTER OF WANTING TO ENSURE COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT. OF COURSE, ALSO WANTED TO UNDERSTAND THE ASSOCIATED COSTS. MY FOLLOW-UP WOULD BE A MATTER OF TIME AND UNDERSTANDING HOW MUCH ADDITIONAL ASSOCIATED STAFF TIME THIS MIGHT TAKE IN ORDER TO IMPLEMENT. UNDERSTAND THE AMENDMENT SPONSOR HAS ENGAGED A BIT WITH SOUND TRANSIT . WONDERING HOW -- THIS IS AGGRESSION FOR BOTH THE MOMENT SPONSOR AND THE PANEL, HOW WE HAVE BEEN ENGAGING WITH KING COUNTY METRO AND SDOT AND OTHER MAJOR STAKEHOLDERS IN DEVELOPING THE AMENDMENT BEFORE US. >> THE AMENDMENT CAME OUT OF THIS LEGISLATION . WE HAVE BEEN TALKING ABOUT THE PUBLIC OUTREACH AND THE IMPORTANCE OF THE PUBLIC OUTREACH. SO RATHER THAN JUST HAVE A CONVERSATION, I WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT GOT CAPTURED AS PART OF THE LEGISLATION. I DIDN'T THINK THIS WAS A HEAVY LIFT AS SOUND TRANSIT IS DOING THE ENGAGEMENT, AND HAS TO DO THE ENGAGEMENT. IT IS MORE THAT, ASKED THE BODY THAT IS PERMITTING THE PROJECT , THE PUBLIC LOOKS TO US WHEN SOMETHING DOES NOT GO WELL , AND I WANT TO MAKE SURE WE HAVE DOCUMENTATION ON OUR BOOKS TO MAKE SURE THAT WE CAN SHOW, HEY, THEY SHOWED IT TO US . WE ISSUE THE PERMIT. IT IS REALLY TO AVOID, ON THE BACKEND, SOME POTENTIAL FOLKS SAYING THEY DIDN'T KNOW ABOUT THE PROJECT. YOU KNOW, OFTENTIMES WE DO THE OUTREACH AND MANY THEY NEVER HEARD ABOUT IT, EVEN THOUGH THE OUTREACH IS DONE. IT IS REALLY, LIKE I SAID, A WAY TO SHOW OUR WORK. DIDN'T SEE THIS AS A HEAVY LIFT. DID NOT -- THIS IS NOT INTENDED -- AND BY THE WAY, THE REASON THIS IS COMING TODAY AS A WALK ON IS BECAUSE I SHARED THE LANGUAGE WITH CENTRAL STAFF, I BELIEVE, A COUPLE WEEKS AGO, BUT IT HAS TO GO THROUGH LAW REVIEW, LAURA REVIEWED IT AND GAVE THEIR COMMENTS. WE HAD THE CONVERSATION ABOUT THE INTENT. DEFINITELY DO NOT INTEND TO DELAY, AS I SAID, LAST TIME. I HAVE SAID EVERY TIME I AM A BIG PROPONENT OF PUBLIC TRANSIT AND WANT TO MAKE SURE THESE THINGS GET DONE. I AM TRYING TO MITIGATE ON THE BACK AND -- END FROM THE PUBLIC SAYING THE OUTREACH HAD NOT BEEN THE PART OF THE END OF THE DAY, EVEN THOUGH THIS IS A SOUND TRANSIT PROJECT, AS THE PEOPLE THAT HAVE TO PERMIT THE PROJECT, THE PERM -- THE PUBLIC WILL LOOK TO US, AND WE WILL GET BLAMED IF SOMETHING DOES NOT GET DONE WELL REGARDLESS OF WHO IS ACTUALLY CONSTRUCTING THE PROJECT. AGAIN, I'M TRYING TO MITIGATE FOR THE CITY'S RESPONSIBILITY HERE IN TERMS OF HAVING TO GIVE THAT PERMITTING AND MAKE SURE THIS IS ALL DONE IN A WAY WE ARE ABLE TO SHOW OUR WORK TO THE PUBLIC. IF WE -- I WILL GO FURTHER TO SAY, IF SHOWING OUR WORK IS A HEAVY LIFT AND A PROBLEM, THEN I HAVE BIGGER CONCERNS THAN I HAD, ACTUALLY, COMING INTO THIS AMENDMENT THAT WAS NOT MEANT TO STALL THE PROJECT OR CREATE , YOU KNOW, AN OBSTACLE, IF YOU WILL. QUITE THE OPPOSITE. I WANT TO MAKE SURE ON THE BACK END WHERE NOT STALLING PROJECTS BECAUSE SOMEBODY IS SUING. ALL THESE THINGS TO HAPPEN ON THE BACK END. WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT IS NOT HAPPENING. >> THANK YOU FOR THAT BACKGROUND AS SPONSOR OF THE AMENDMENT, COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA. TO SPEAK TO THE PANEL, THE MAIN POINT HERE ABOUT ENGAGEMENT WITH OTHER TRANSIT AGENCIES ALSO ON THIS MATTER , HAVE YOU CONNECTED WITH SDOT OR KING COUNTY METRO OR OTHER MAJOR STAKEHOLDERS? IF NOT YET, WHAT WAS THAT ENGAGEMENT LOOK LIKE FOLLOWING TODAY? WHAT WOULD BE THE KEY THINGS YOU WANT TO UNDERSTAND FROM SOME OF THOSE PARTNERS TO BETTER UNDERSTAND IMPACT OF THIS AMENDMENT? >> WE HAVE NOT ENGAGE. WE JUST SAW THE AMENDMENT RIGHT BEFORE THE COMMITTEE MEETING. WE HAVE NOT ENGAGE, APART FROM FORWARDING IT TO SOUND TRANSIT. WE HAVE NOT ENGAGED WITH OTHER TRANSIT AGENCIES ABOUT THE CONTENT OF THE AMENDMENT YET. >> IT IS UP TO THE DEPARTMENTS TO DO THAT ENGAGEMENT, BECAUSE THEY ARE THE ONES ISSUING THE PERMITTING AS WELL. THE OTHER THING IS, THOSE DEPARTMENTS ARE NOT GOING TO BE ISSUING THOSE PERMITS. WE ARE -- IT IS OUR RESPONSIBILITY TO KEEP OUR CONSTITUENTS'INTEREST AT HEART. MANY OF US UP HERE HAVE TALKED ABOUT THE DISPLACEMENT TO RESIDENTS AND BUSINESSES IN THE IMPORTANCE OF MAKING SURE WE ARE DOING THAT ROBUST OUTREACH. MY RESPONSIBILITY IS TO THE CONSTITUENTS. >> CERTAINLY CAN APPRECIATE THAT. I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND HOW WERE ALSO BEING IN LOCKSTEP WITH THE OTHER PARTNERS. HEARING THERE WILL BE THAT ENGAGEMENT HAPPENING TO UNDERSTAND THE FULL IMPACT OF THIS AMENDMENT, IT CERTAINLY HEAR THE SPIRIT OF THE AMENDMENT, AND I, IN GOOD FAITH, NEED TO UNDERSTAND THE FULL IMPACT OF WHAT IT MEANS FOR COST AND TIME FOR THESE PROJECTS BECAUSE OF THIS UNDERLYING GOAL OF WHAT WE ARE TRYING TO DO HERE. WITH THAT, I WILL CLOSE ON THIS NOTE. AGAIN, THE PUBLIC HAS VOTED TO APPROVE THESE PROJECTS AND HAS BEEN PAYING FOR THEM FOR YEARS. WE SHOULD NOT FORCE THEM TO KEEP PAYING BALL PROGRESS IS STALLED. THAT IS SOMETHING THAT IS FRONT OF MIND FOR ME. INSTANTLY WANT TO UNDERSTAND, AGAIN, THE BROADER IMPACTS. I DID HEAR COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS MAKING , AT LEAST A COMMENT ON A POTENTIAL MOTION FOR HOW TO MOVE FORWARD TODAY. I WOULD VOICE MY SUPPORT FOR THAT APPROACH BY BEING ABLE TO ADVANCE THE BILL OUT OF COUNCIL TODAY AND, PERHAPS, REVISIT COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA'S A MEMO BEFORE FULL COUNCIL WHILE WE ALSO ARE ABLE TO GARNER ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ABOUT THE IMPACT FROM DEPARTMENTS. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS , IS THAT A NEW HAND? >> YEAH. IT IS A NEW HAND. THANKS. I JUST WANTED -- COUNCILMEMBER RINCK BROUGHT UP THE QUESTION OF COST SAVINGS, ET CETERA. I WILL SHARE WITH YOU THAT FROM THE BOARD MEETING TODAY IT HAS BEEN ANNOUNCED THAT BY THE MID-2040S THE SOUND TRANSIT BUDGET IS NOT STABLE. THIS HAS KICKED OFF OUR PROCESS TO ENGAGE IN ENTERPRISE SERVICE DELIVERY WHERE WE WILL BE LOOKING AT STREAMLINING COSTS , REDUCING COSTS ACROSS MAINTENANCE OPERATIONS CAPITAL PLANNING, CAPITAL IMPLEMENTATION ACROSS ALL SECTORS. I WILL BE HAPPY TO SHARE WITH YOU AT BRIEFING AT THE MONDAY COUNSEL BRIEFING MORE INFORMATION ON THIS, AND TO SAY THAT THIS BILL IS INCREDIBLY IMPORTANT, NOT NECESSARILY FOR COST SAVINGS, BUT TO ENSURE THAT WE ARE NOT COST DRIVERS. G FOR EVERYO IS THE MOST EXPENSIVE COST DRIVER IS TIMELINE DELAY . WITH THIS BILL, WE ARE STREAMLINING AND MAKING MORE CONSISTENT AND MORE PREDICTABLE THE TIMELINES TO BUILD THIS HUNDRED YEAR INFRASTRUCTURE. IT IS IMPORTANT FOR US TO PASS THIS BILL OUT TODAY SO WE DON'T BECOME BELLEVUE IN REGARDS TO SOUND TRANSIT. MY QUESTION TO THE SPONSOR OF THE AMENDMENT IS, ARE YOU COMFORTABLE BRINGING THIS TO FULL COUNCIL? I CAN SAY THAT REAL QUICKLY, SINCE WE RECEIVED IT, I WAS WALKING AROUND SOUND TRANSIT STAFF TRIED TO GET CONCERTED FEEDBACK ON YOUR AMENDMENT, AND THE GENERAL CONSENSUS I GET IS THAT THIS IS A GOOD AMENDMENT, WE ARE NOT SURE ABOUT THE LANGUAGE JUST BECAUSE OF THE TIGHT TURNAROUND. WOULD YOU BE COMFORTABLE BRINGING THIS BACK TO FULL COUNCIL >> I WOULD BE MORE COMFORTABLE PASSING THIS AS WE PASS THIS BILL TODAY. AGAIN, I'M A LITTLE CONFUSED ABOUT THE RETICENCE TO PASS FORWARD A PIECE OF LEGISLATION WHERE ALL IT SAYS IS SOUND TRANSIT, YOU HAVE TO SHOW US YOUR PUBLIC OUTREACH PLAN THAT YOU SHOULD ALREADY HAVE DONE, WHICH YOU -- THEY HAVE ASSURED ME THEY HAVE DONE, BEFORE WE ISSUE THESE PERMITS SO WE ARE KEEPING OUR EYE OUT. THIS IS IN SERVICE OF CONSTITUENTS. QUITE FRANKLY, COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS, I AM VERY CONFUSED BY THE RETICENCE TO PASS THIS VERY SIMPLE, YOU KNOW, BILL TODAY, OR AMENDMENT AS PART OF THIS BILL AS WE ARE KEEPING OUR EYE OUT FOR CONSTITUENTS. I HONESTLY DO NOT UNDERSTAND. IN TERMS OF THIS BILL , IT SHOULD NOT HAVE CAUSED ANY DELAYS TO THE PROJECT. BECAUSE THEY HAVE ALREADY DONE ALL THIS WORK. AND LESS -- I MEAN, THE CONVERSATION WE HAD EARLIER, -- NOT YOU, SOUND TRANSIT, HAS DONE ALL THIS WORK. IT IS A MATTER OF SHOWING THE WORK. >> I THINK THAT IS ONE REASON WHY WE JUST WANT TO HAVE SOME TIME WITH THE LANGUAGE TO UNDERSTAND THERE ISN'T AN UNINTENDED -- DOES IS ADD ANY ADDITIONAL ONUS OR PROCESS, OR IS THIS JUST DOCUMENTING WHAT HAS ALREADY BEEN DONE OVER THE LAST NINE YEARS . LITERALLY, I ONLY READ IT ONCE BEFORE THE COMMITTEE MANY. I HAVE NOT HAD TIME TO TALK WITH SOUND TRANSIT, LAW, THE DEPARTMENTS IMPLICATED BY IT JUST TO DO BASIC DUE DILIGENCE FOR OPINING ON WHAT THE RIGHT COURSE OF ACTION WOULD BE. TO TALK -- >> THANK YOU. I WILL SAY I DID TALK TO LAW, AND THEY DID NOT FLAG FOR ME THAT THIS WOULD ADD -- BECAUSE WE DO HAVE A LAW AT THE STATE LEVEL THAT PREVENTS US FROM SITTING ON PERMITS, YOU KNOW, SO THAT WAS REALLY IMPORTANT TO ME AS WELL THAT THE WAY IT WAS WRITTEN WAS NOT WRITTEN IN A WAY THAT WAS GOING TO DELAY ANYTHING. I WILL SAY THAT. >> I THINK ALL THE INTENTION, 100% ON THE SAME PAGE. I THINK THERE IS JUST BASIC DUE DILIGENCE WE NEED TO DO BEFORE WE REPRESENT THE EXECUTIVE OR REPRESENT OTHER DEPARTMENTS OR AGENCIES. >> THANK YOU. COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS, AND THEN COUNCILMEMBER MOORE. >> THANK YOU. I WANTED TO RESPOND. THE ONLY RETICENCE I HAVE IS THAT I ONLY RECEIVED THE LANGUAGE AN HOUR OR SO AGO. EVERY TIME I'VE SPOKEN ON THIS AMENDMENT, THE CONTENT AND INTENT IS GOOD, MY RETICENCE IS THAT I NEED TO MAKE SURE I TELL MY CONSTITUENTS AND MY VOTERS THAT I HAVE DONE MY JOB IN REVIEWING THE LEGISLATION, WHICH HAS NOT BEEN POSSIBLE IN THIS SHORT TIMELINE. THANK YOU, CHAIR . >> COUNCILMEMBER MOORE . >> THANK YOU, CHAIR. WHAT WAS I GOING TO SAY? I THINK IT IS IMPORTANT THAT WHEN WE LOOK AT THE LANGUAGE OF THE AMENDMENT THAT IT DOES SAY THE CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT PLAN SHALL INCORPORATE TO THE EXTENT FEASIBLE PUBLIC COMMENT. THAT IS A HUGE -- WHAT'S THE WORD? CAVEAT TO THE EXTENT FEASIBLE. I AM NOT AT ALL CONCERNED THAT THIS IS GOING TO CREATE UNNECESSARY DELAY OR UNNECESSARY ADDITIONAL COST . BASICALLY, IT IS JUST SAYING THAT YOU NEED TO SHOW YOUR WORK , AS COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA HAS CONTINUED TO SAY, AND AT THE BACK OF IT IT SHOWS YOU WHAT WE WANT TO SEE IN YOUR WORK. I THINK IF WE ARE ARGUING THAT IT IS TOO BURDENSOME, TOO CUMBERSOME TO INCORPORATE PUBLIC FEEDBACK, THAT IS A SIGNIFICANT PROBLEM. THE FACT THAT THERE IS SO MUCH RETICENCE -- I UNDERSTAND THE NEED TO DO DUE DILIGENCE. IT IS VERY EASY TO READ WHAT IS HERE. I THINK THE INSTITUTIONAL POSITION IS ALWAYS GIVE US MORE TIME , BUT IT IS OUR JOB TO DECIDE WHETHER WHAT WE ARE ASKING IS BURDENSOME, AND I DON'T BELIEVE IT IS. I DON'T THINK IT WILL ADD ANY ADDITIONAL COSTS THAT YOU ARE ALREADY REQUIRED TO DO THAT. EVEN IF IT ADDS A LITTLE BIT ADDITIONAL COSTS, THAT IS WHAT WE NEED TO INCUR, BECAUSE WE ARE MAKING SIGNIFICANT CHANGES , AND THE PUBLIC HAS THE RIGHT TO BE ENGAGED AND FOR US TO BE ABLE TO GO BACK TO THEM WHEN THEY SAY THEY HAVE NOT BEEN ENGAGED TO SAY, ACTUALLY, YOU WERE. THIS IS AS MUCH ABOUT COVERING OUR GROUND AS IT IS ABOUT MAKING SURE THAT A PROPER PROCESS IS DONE . I'M NOT GOING TO VOTE FOR THIS TO GET IT OUT OF COMMITTEE TODAY IF THIS AMENDMENT DOESN'T PASS. TALK ABOUT SLOWING THINGS DOWN. THIS IS A BASIC PROCESS AMENDMENT . IT IS BEING -- ANYWAY. IT IS A BASIC PROCESS AMENDMENT . IF IT IS NOT, THAT IS A BIGGER PROBLEM. THANK YOU. >> BEFORE WE CONTINUE, I JUST WANT TO BE CLEAR ABOUT OUR TIMELINE. WHEN IS THIS VOTE -- IF WE VOTE OUT OF COMMITTEE TODAY OR NEXT WEEK, WHEN DOES IT COME BEFORE FULL COUNCIL FOR CONSIDERATION? JUNE 10. OKAY. REGARDLESS OF WHETHER WE PASS IT OUT TODAY OR NEXT WEEK AFTER PEOPLE HAVE HAD A CHANCE TO DO DUE DILIGENCE FOR SOUND TRANSIT, SDCI TO LOOK AT IT. IT DOESN'T MATTER, IT WILL GO BEFORE FULL COUNCIL UNTIL JUNE 10. CORRECT? OKAY. SO AGAIN, I WANT TO BE CLEAR ON THE TIMELINE. COUNCILMEMBER RINCK, DID YOU HAVE YOUR HAND UP? OKAY. RIGHT NOW, THE ISSUE BEFORE US IS A PROCEDURAL ONE. DO WE VOTE ON THE AMENDMENT TO THE BILL , AND THEN VOTE ON THE BILL , OR DO WE VOTE TO POSTPONE? YOU COULDN'T MAKE IT EASY FOR ME, COULD YOU? GO AHEAD, PLEASE . >> I AM GOING TO SUGGEST WE HOLD -- THAT WE DON'T VOTE ON IT TODAY, BECAUSE I BEEN HEARING MY COLLEAGUES CHARACTERIZE MY CONCERNS AS NOT WANTING SOUND TRANSIT TO DO THE BASIC WORK WE ARE ASKING THEM TO DO, AND BASED ON THE CONTENT OF THE AMENDMENT, WHICH IS FACTUALLY INACCURATE, I WOULD SAY FALLS, I'VE SAID IT AT EVERY POINT THAT THE INTENTION OF THIS AMENDMENT IS GOOD WITH THE PROBLEM BEING WE ONLY JUST RECEIVED IT. IF THAT IS THE CASE, YOU KNOW, I WOULD SAY, LET'S HOLD THE BILL IN COMMITTEE , LET'S HAVE TIME TO BE ABLE TO READ IT WHILE WE ARE NOT DOING, YOU KNOW, WHEN IT IS NOT 30 TO 60 MINUTES BEFORE THE COMMITTEE . I JUST REALLY HOPE, COLLEAGUES, WE ARE NOT BECOMING THE NEXT BELLEVUE IN REGARDS TO SOUND TRANSIT. THANK YOU. >> ALL RIGHT. >> CHAIR, MAY I? >> YES, PLEASE . >> THANK YOU, CHAIR. HONESTLY, I AM VERY STUNNED BY THIS REACTION. I DID NOT MEAN TO CAUSE DELAYS OR ISSUES FOR YOU TODAY. MY APOLOGIES . THAT IS NOT WHAT I WAS TRYING TO DO. THIS IS -- ALSO, I WASN'T TRYING TO DELAY THIS VOTE. THIS IS AN IMPORTANT VOTE. IF WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THIS BILL OR MIMIC I AM BRINGING WOULD NOT CAUSE DELAYS, BUT VOTING ON THESE THINGS WILL. ALSO, COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS, I APPRECIATE THAT THIS IS A WALK ON AMENDMENT. YOU TOO HAVE BROUGHT WALK ON COMMITMENTS IN THE PAST. WE HAVE, AS A BODY, GIVEN EACH OTHER GRACE. SOMETIMES IT TAKES A LITTLE LONGER TO BRING THESE THINGS FORWARD. BUT IF I HAD THOUGHT IT WOULD CREATE THIS MUCH DISCONTENT, I WOULD NOT HAVE BROUGHT IT . I JUST DIDN'T WANT TO DELAY THIS BOAT, BECAUSE THIS IS AN IMPORTANT VOTE. I KNOW THIS AMENDMENT WAS REALLY NOT -- THERE WAS NOT A LOT HERE , IN MY OPINION . HAVING HAD THE OPINION FROM LAW AND KNOWING THAT LAW WAS VERY CLEAR , AND HAS BEEN VERY CLEAR I'M NOT TRYING TO DELAY THE PROCESS. I'M JUST TRYING TO MAKE SURE WE HAVE DOCUMENTATION FOR THE OUTREACH THAT WAS DONE, SO IF WE ARE CONSTANTLY -- WHEN WE GIVE PERMITS AND MAKE OTHER DECISIONS, NOT JUST PERMITTING, WE ARE CONSTANTLY HEARING FROM CONSTITUENTS, YOU DIDN'T LET US KNOW THIS HAPPENS, YOU DIDN'T HAVE A PUBLIC HEARING, AND SOME OF THIS STUFF ISN'T US. WE ARE GIVING PERMITS, BUT IT IS NOT UNDER OUR CONTROL. AT THE VERY LEAST, WE SHOULD BE ABLE TO SHOW THE PUBLIC THAT OUTREACH THAT WAS DONE, TO COUNCILMEMBER MOORE'S PART, SO THEY DON'T SAY NOBODY TOLD US WE COULD SAY, ACTUALLY, IT IS RIGHT HERE , SORRY YOU DIDN'T SEE IT. THAT PUTS US IN A MUCH STRONGER POSITION THAN NOT BEING ABLE TO PROFFER THAT AND BE ABLE TO GIVE THAT TO OUR CONSTITUENTS. IT IS TO PUT THE CITY IN A BETTER POSITION THAT I OFFERED THIS. AGAIN, APOLOGIES. I AM STUNNED BY THE REACTION. THANK YOU, CHAIR. >> THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA. WE HAVE TALKED ABOUT THE AMENDMENT COMING FORWARD. YOU KNOW, BEING VERY UP FRONT THAT AGAIN, WITH SOUND TRANSIT, SHOW YOUR WORK. FROM WHAT I'VE BEEN HEARING IN TERMS OF THE ENGAGEMENT THAT HAS BEEN DONE, THEY ARE DOING THE WORK. TO ME, THIS IS REINFORCING THAT. I ALSO UNDERSTAND THE POINT YOU ARE MAKING TO SAY, YEAH, WE JUST SAW THIS, SO WE REALLY CAN'T COMMENT ON IT AS TO WHAT WE CAN DO WITH IT. TRYING TO FIND A WAY TO MOVE FORWARD. AGAIN, UNDERSTAND THE SPIRIT AND INTENT OF THE AMENDMENT . WE ALSO WANT TO MOVE THIS LEGISLATION . WE WANT TO DO -- YOU KNOW, WE WANT TO GET THERE. TRYING TO FIGURE OUT PROCEDURALLY HOW WE MAKE THAT HAPPEN. COUNCILMEMBER RINCK. >> THANK YOU, CHAIR. I JUST HAD AN ADDITIONAL QUESTION RELATED TO THIS FOR MY OWN UNDERSTANDING. DOES THIS AMENDMENT CREATE NEW REQUIREMENTS THAT HAVE NOT PREVIOUSLY EXISTED? >> NOT CURRENTLY , AND NOT IN THE MAHER'S PROPOSAL. IT WOULD BE A NEW REQUIREMENT FOR A COMMUNITY OUTREACH PLAN. SORT OF A KEY COMPONENT IS THAT IT IS A PRIEST THE MIDDLE REQUIREMENT, BUT THEN ALSO BECOMES PART OF THE SDCI DIRECTOR'S REVIEW ONCE THE APPLICATION IS MADE. IT IS ULTIMATELY REFLECTED IN THE DECISION THAT GOES ALONG WITH THE PERMIT APPLICATION MADE BY SOUND TRANSIT. A NEW COMPONENT TO THIS IS THAT THERE IS A BODY OF WORK THAT WOULD NEED TO PRECEDE A PERMIT APPLICATION. >> I THINK THERE IS ONE ADDITIONAL PIECE TOO THAT NOT ONLY PRECEDES THE PERMIT APPLICATION ON THE PART OF THE APPLICANT, BUT THEN THERE'S ALSO THIS FINAL SENTENCE ABOUT THE PERMIT DECISION SHALL SUMMARIZE THE OUTREACH AND IT'S PLAIN HOW THE DECISION ADDRESSES PUBLIC, WHERE FEASIBLE. THAT PIECE WE ARE TRYING TO DISSECT IN REAL TIME HERE -- I THINK THAT IS SOMETHING THAT I AM NOT SURE WHAT THAT WOULD LOOK LIKE. THAT IS SOMETHING THAT IS NOT REQUIRED OF OTHER PERMITS NOW. TRYING TO UNDERSTAND IF THIS IS SOMETHING WE ARE APPLYING TO SOUND TRANSIT THAT WE DON'T APPLY TO OTHER PROJECTS. MAYBE IT IS A VERY SIMPLE EXERCISE . THAT IS SOMETHING WE WOULD WANT TO GO BACK, ESPECIALLY SINCE IT IMPLICATES DIRECTORS OF A COUPLE OF -- DEPARTMENTS, WE WOULD WANT TO CHECK WITH THOSE DEPARTMENTS TO SEE WHAT THEY THINK THIS MEANS FOR THEM. >> CAN I ADD TO THAT? TYPICALLY, IN A MASTER USE PERMIT DECISION, WE HAVE PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD. WE DO A POSTING ON THE SITE. WE DO A MAILING TO EVERYONE WITHIN 300 FEET. THEY THEN SUBMIT COMMENTS DIRECTLY TO THE DEPARTMENT THAT BECOME THE BASIS OF OUR DECISION AND DECISION-MAKING. WHAT THIS DOES IS SET THE PLAN THAT SOUND TRANSIT WOULD BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THAT WE WOULD APPROVE . THEY WOULD IMPLEMENT, EXCEPT THE COMMENTS AND SHOW HOW THEY ARE RESPONSIVE TO THE COMMENTS. THEN WE WOULD HAVE TO RENDER ABOUT OA RELATIVE TO THEIR ENGAGEMENT PLAN. THAT IS SOMETHING THAT DOESN'T EXIST IN THE CODE RIGHT NOW. NORMALLY, WE ARE RESPONSIVE TO THE PUBLIC COMMENTS SUBMITTED DIRECTLY TO THE DEPARTMENT, AND NOT THROUGH AN OUTSIDE AGENCY AND THEN CEMENTED TO THE DEPARTMENT. THAT IS MY CONCERN WITH IT, THAT NORMALLY THERE IS A DIRECT REPRESENTATION BETWEEN THE PUBLIC AND THE DEPARTMENT FOR US TO RENDER A DECISION. >> THANK YOU ALL FOR WEIGHING IN ON THAT. THAT IS HELPFUL CLARIFICATION. I THINK, COLLEAGUES, TO THIS POINT, THESE ARE THE PIECES I AM SEEKING TO UNDERSTAND BEFORE TAKING A VOTE ON THIS. UNDERSTAND THAT LAW HAS WEIGHED IN. I WOULD LIKE TO HEAR DIRECTLY FROM THE DEPARTMENTS THAT WILL BE IMPLEMENTING THIS WHAT THIS WOULD MEAN LOGISTICALLY AND THE COST AND TIME ASSOCIATED WITH IT. I JUST WANT TO HAVE THAT KNOWLEDGE BEFORE TAKING A VOTE ON THIS MATTER. CERTAINLY WOULD WELCOME MORE TIME FOR THAT ANALYSIS TO BE CONDUCTED AND BROUGHT BEFORE US. THANK YOU. >> COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA . >> THANK YOU, CHAIR. WE ARE NOT PRECLUDED FROM DOING OUR OWN OUTREACH AND DOING ALL THAT. SOUND TRANSIT IS NOT OUR AGENCY. THEY'RE NOT UNDER OUR AUTHORITY. ALL WE ARE SAYING IS SOUND TRANSIT, YOU'RE GOING TO DO OUTREACH AND HAVE TO TELL US WHAT OUTREACH WE ARE DOING. IT DOESN'T PRECLUDE OUR OUTREACH, BUT IT SHOULD IT ALSO MEANS THAT WE ARE ONLY GOING TO RELY ON OUR OUTREACH AND NOT THERE OUTREACH SINCE THEY ARE THE ONES ACTUALLY HAVING THE IMPACT ON COMMUNITY. ONE DOES NOT PRECLUDE THE OTHER. THIS DOES NOT SAY WE DON'T GET TO STILL DO OUR OWN OUTREACH. I JUST WANTED TO MAKE THAT VERY CLEAR . CHAIR, I DO HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT -- DO WE HAVE A LAND USE COMMITTEE NEXT WEEK? >> YES, WE DO. JUNE 4. >> WERE YOU PROPOSING EARLIER TO DELAY THE ENTIRE VOTE UNTIL TUESDAY? >> WE COULD DO THAT. >> MY COLLEAGUES CAN HAVE MORE TIME , AND DEPARTMENTS CAN HAVE MORE TIME WITH THE AMENDMENT. >> THAT WAS SOMETHING I WAS THINKING ABOUT. I WAS ACTUALLY -- THIS IS WHERE, PROCEDURALLY, I WANT TO FIGURE OUT WHAT WE ARE GOING TO DO. ADVANCED THE BILL WITHOUT THE AMENDMENT , AND THEN HAVE THE AMENDMENT BE TAKEN UP IN THE NEXT COMMITTEE MEETING BEFORE WE GET TO THE NEXT COUNCIL MEETING, OR DELAY THE VOTE UNTIL NEXT WEEK ON THIS AMENDED BILL TO GIVE OUR PARTNERS AT SDCI, SDOT, SOUND TRANSIT AND COLLEAGUES TO HAVE A CHANCE TO REVIEW THE AMENDMENT AND SEE HOW THAT PLAYS WITH EVERYTHING. AGAIN, GIVEN THAT , IF WE VOTE OUT OF COMMITTEE ON THE FOURTH, IT CAN STILL BE TAKEN UP AT FULL COUNCIL ON THE 10th. AS IT STANDS RIGHT NOW, EVEN IF WE VOTED ON IT TODAY, IT IS STILL NOT COME TO BE UNTIL THE TENSE WHEN THIS WILL BE BEFORE THE FULL COUNCIL. >> I WOULD FEEL MOST COMFORTABLE NOT VOTING ON THE BILL TODAY AND WAITING TILL TUESDAY, AND THEN FOLKS CAN HAVE THEIR TIME WITH THE AMENDMENT FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION, CHAIR. >> ALL RIGHT. WHAT I'M HEARING -- I'M GETTING A STRONG FEELING THAT YOU ALL THE TIME . COLLEAGUES NEED TIME. I DON'T KNOW IF I CAN JUST UNILATERALLY DECIDE THAT WE'RE GOING TO DELAY THE VOTE ON THIS FULL BILL UNTIL THE NEXT LAND USE COMMITTEE, WHICH WILL BE NEXT WEDNESDAY . SO -- >> I THINK, AS A CHAIR, YOU CAN. WE HAVE A PARLIAMENTARIAN. AS THE CHAIR, UNLESS SOMEBODY WANTS TO MOVE THE BILL, YOU CAN ADJOURN THE MEETING , THERE HAS BEEN DISCUSSION, AND WE CAN COME BACK ON WEDNESDAY AND TALK MORE. >> OKAY. THANK YOU FOR THAT. ANY OTHER THOUGHTS OR COMMENTS? YOU KNOW, AS THE CHAIR OF THE COMMITTEE, THAT IS WHERE I THINK I WANT TO GO. I WANT TO GIVE MY COLLEAGUES TIME. I WANT TO GIVE OUR PARTNERS TIME TO CONSIDER EVERYTHING. HOPEFULLY, WE WILL HAVE A FINAL VOTE NEXT WEEK , MOVE EVERYTHING FORWARD TO KEEP US ON TIME, AND ON SCHEDULE. IF THAT IS EVEN A THING WITH TRANSPORTATION PROJECTS. I DON'T KNOW. ANY OTHER COMMENTS FROM THE COMMITTEE? GREAT. GIVEN THAT, ANY ADVICE FROM THE CLERK? VERY GOOD. OKAY. I WANT TO THANK EVERYONE. WE HAVE REACHED THE END OF THE AGENDA. WANT TO THANK YOU ALL FOR PRESENTING. I WANT TO THANK COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA FOR BRINGING FORWARD THE AMENDMENT THAT, GET, WE TALKED ABOUT I LIKE IT. LET'S DO IT, BUT LET'S GIVE COLLEAGUES TIME TO ABSORB IT . WERE GOING TO HAVE THE FINAL VOTE NEXT WEEK AT THE JUNE 4 LAND USE COMMITTEE, WHICH WILL BE AT 2:00 P.M. WEDNESDAY. ANY FURTHER BUSINESS TO COME BEFORE THE COMMITTEE? OKAY. HEARING NONE AND SEEING NONE. WE ARE ADJOURNED. THANK YOU VERY MUCH, EVERYONE. APPRECIATE YOUR PARTICIPATION TODAY. >> THANK YOU, CHAIR.