>> GOOD MORNING.
TODAY IS THURSDAY, MARCH 21,
2019.
THE HOUSING, HEALTH, ENERGY,
AND WORKERS' RIGHTS COMMITTEE
WILL COME TO ORDER.
MY NAME IS TERESA MOSQUEDA.
WE DID HEAR FROM VICE CHAIR
DEBORAH JUAREZ THAT SHE IS ON
HER WAY BATTLING TRAFFIC.
NOT TO DO SOMETHING ABOUT THAT.
WE ARE WORKING ON IT.
WE WILL PROBABLY BE JOINED SOON
BY COUNCILMEMBER BAGSHAW.
COUNCILMEMBER JUAREZ IS ON HER
WAY.
IS GOING TO BE A FEW MINUTES
LATE.
THANK YOU FOR JOINING US TODAY.
WE ARE GOING TO START WITH FOUR
ITEMS ON THE AGENDA.
THERE ARE MAYORAL APPOINTMENTS
TO THE DOMESTIC WORKERS
STANDARDS BOARD.
THERE ARE MAYORAL APPOINTMENTS
TO THE SEATTLE CITY LIGHT
REVIEW PANEL.
THERE IS GOING TO BE A SHORT
WAITING ON INITIATIVE 124.
THERE'S NOT GOING TO BE ANY
POLICY ACTION TODAY BUT WE
WANTED TO TEE UP A BASELINE
INITIATIVE THAT HAD PASSED
PREVIOUSLY AND WHERE WE ARE AT
NOW.
AND THEN THERE IS GOING TO BE A
RESOLUTION ON THE SKAGIT
ENVIRONMENTAL ENDOWMENT
COMMISSION.
THAT IS OUR FULL AGENDA FOR
TODAY.
WE ARE GOING TO GET STARTED
WITH PUBLIC COMMENT AND ASK
FOR, AS USUAL WE HAVE ALEX
TSIMERMA WITH US TODAY.
YOU HAVE 2 MINUTES. PLEASE,
KEEP YOUR COMMENTS FOCUSED ON
TODAY'S AGENDA.
>> THANK YOU, MA'AM.
HEIL, MY LOVELY SWEET FUHRER.
TODAY YOU WILL .2 PEOPLE FOR
CITY LIGHT.
COMMISSION MEMBER, SOMETHING
LIKE THIS.
APPOINTMENT CITY LIGHT REVIEW
PANEL.
I COME TO THIS MEETING MANY
TIMES BEFORE.
FOR LAST FEW MONTHS, I COME
EVERY MEETING.
WHAT MAKES ME ABSOLUTELY UNIQUE
IS ABOUT CONFUSION.
WE HAVE 2 POINTS WHAT IS
CRITICAL.
LOOCK RIGHT NOW.
300 PEOPLE MOST PEOPLE FROM
CITY LIGHT.
THIS MEETING CAUSED US
APPROXIMATELY $300,000 IS MY
CALCULATION.
PER YEAR, THIS MEETING CAUSED
US PROBABLY $10 MILLION ONLY
FOR ONE DEPARTMENT.
I TALK ABOUT THIS FOR MANY
TIME.
TENURE I COME MORE THAN 2000
TIME. I SAY GUYS, THIS COST US
APPROXIMATELY $10 MILLION.
IT'S VERY IMPORTANT.
IT'S NUMBER ONE.
NUMBER TWO.
I COME TO THIS PANEL MEETING
AND I SEE EVERY TIME DIRECTOR
SCHMIDT.
YOU SUPPOSED TO HAVE EVERY
MEETING WITH EVERY DEPARTMENT
IN EVERY DIRECTOR LISTEN TO THE
PEOPLE.
WE PAY YOU $200,000, $300,000,
$350,000 FOR MANAGEMENT.
THIS IS LIKE ALL BUSINESS.
BUT CITY GOVERNMENT CAN'T SIT,
CAN'T LISTEN TO PEOPLE?
SO RIGHT NOW, I BRING MY TWO
NEW IDEA.
THIS COST $1 MILLION.
WE NEED TO CLEANSE THIS DIRTY
CHAMBER FROM THESE CROOKS WHO
DON'T HAVE EXPERIENCE WITH
BUSINESSES.
>> THANK YOU.
THE NEXT PERSON TO SPEAK IS
SHYZA DAMICH.
THAT'S ALL THE FOLKS I HAVE
SIGNED UP AFTER THIS.
IF YOU ARE SIGNED UP FOR PUBLIC
COMMENT, PLEASE SIGN UP.
[ SPEAKING NON-ENGLISH ]
THANK YOU FOR LETTING ME DO THE
PSA IN SPANISH VERY BRIEFLY.
>> NO PROBLEM.
I FOLLOWED MOST OF IT.
GOOD WOMAN CHAIRWOMAN BAGSHAW,
COUNCILMEMBER MOSQUEDA AND ANY
OTHER INCOMING MEMBERS.
MY NAME IS SHYZA DAMICH FROM
DISTRICT 5 . I AM ALSO A MEMBER
OF MAYOR DURKAN'S SMALL
BUSINESS ADVISORY COUNCIL BUT
THIS MORNING I AM TESTIFYING ON
BEHALF OF THE SEATTLE HOTEL
ASSOCIATION IN CONNECTION WITH
THE PROPOSED DISCUSSION OR
UPDATE OF THE HOTEL EMPLOYEES
HEALTH AND SAFETY INITIATIVE,
WHICH I UNDERSTAND THIS
COMMITTEE WILL BE CONSIDERING
GOING FORWARD.
I JUST WANT TO EXPRESS SEATTLE
HOTELS ARE VERY CONCERNED AND
COMMITTED TO THE HEALTH AND
WELFARE OF OUR EMPLOYEES,
INCLUDING ENSURING THAT EACH
EMPLOYEE IS SAFE IN THE
WORKPLACE, AND SPECIFICALLY WE
ACT SOLELY ACTIVELY SUPPORT
PROVIDING PANIC BUTTONS TO OUR
EMPLOYEES.
THAT IS JUST ONE IMPORTANT
COMPONENT TO OUR EMPLOYEE
SAFETY, WHICH ALSO INCLUDES
POLICIES, PROCEDURES AND
TRAININGS.
WE ARE COMMITTED TO PREVENTING
SEXUAL HARASSMENT AND ASSAULT
IN THE WORKPLACE.
AS WE WOULD LIKE TO REQUEST IS
THAT THE COMMITTEE AND THE CITY
COUNCIL DISCUSSED THE HOTEL
EMPLOYEES HEALTH AND SAFETY
INITIATIVE.
WE LOOK FORWARD TO BEING AT THE
TABLE TO HELP ADDRESS THE
UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES IN
VARIOUS PROVISIONS OF THE LAW
IN ORDER TO ENSURE THAT THE
OUTCOMES FURTHER THE INTENTIONS
OF THE LAW AND THE BEST
INTERESTS OF THE EMPLOYEES.
WE LOOK FORWARD TO BE IN BEING
PART OF THE SOLUTION.
>> THANK YOU.
REALLY NICE TO MEET YOU.
I LOOK FORWARD TO SEEING YOU AT
THE NEXT SMALL BUSINESS
ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING.
GOOD ANYBODY ELSE HERE TO GIVE
PUBLIC TESTIMONY?
[ SPEAKING NON-ENGLISH ] OKAY.
THAT WILL CLOSE OUR PUBLIC
TESTIMONY FOR THIS MORNING.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR THAT.
AT THIS POINT, WE ARE GOING TO
MOVE TO THE FIRST ITEM OF THIS
MESS.
THAT WILL BE THE DOMESTIC
WORKER STANDARD BOARD
APPOINTMENTS.
COULD YOU PLEASE READ INTO THE
AGENDA, ITEMS ONE THROUGH FOUR?
>> AGENDA ITEMS ONE THROUGH
FOUR.
APPOINTMENTS OF SYLVIA GONZALEZ,
TERESA HILLIS, ELIZABETH HUNTER-
KELLER, LANNY TODD, AND MIKEL
HANSEN.
>> CAN WE BE JOINED AT THE
BOARD FROM THE OFFICE OF LABOR
STANDARDS?
WE WILL ALSO HAVE ANTONIO
RICHARDSON WHO WILL BE DOING
INTERPRETATION FOR US, FOR ONE
OF OUR APPOINTEES.
IF YOU COULD JOIN US, AS WELL?
WE WOULD ALSO LIKE TO INVITE UP
THE APPOINTEES.
[ SPEAKING NON-ENGLISH ] AND
WELCOME, COUNCILMEMBER JUAREZ.
WE GOT YOUR MESSAGE.
THANK YOU SO MUCH ALL FOR
JOINING US.
IT'S GREAT TO SEE SO MANY FACES
AGAIN AS WE ARE COMING TOGETHER
TO TALK ABOUT THE DOMESTIC
WORKERS STANDARDS BOARD AND
THANK YOU TO ALL OF YOU. MANY
OF YOU WERE HEAVILY INVOLVED IN
HELPING CRAFT THE DOMESTIC
WORKER STANDARD BOARD, ARMS ARE
THE LEGISLATION WHICH INCLUDED
THE STANDARD BOARD.
VERY EXCITED TO SEE THE MAYOR
SEND YOUR NAMES DOWN FOR
APPOINTMENT.
BEFORE WE GO AROUND, IF YOU
GUYS COULD INTRODUCE YOURSELF
FOR THE RECORD, THAT WOULD BE
GREAT.
LET'S START HERE.
>> LANI TODD FOR THE RECORD.
>> ELIZABETH HUNTER-KELLER.
>> TERESA HILLIS.
>> KARINA BULL, THE POLICY
MANAGER AT THE OFFICE OF LABOR
STANDARDS.
JENNY JAN.
>> SYLVIA GONZALEZ FROM CASA
LATINA DOMESTIC WORKER.
>> ANTONIO RICHARDSON,
INTERPRETING FOR SYLVIA.
>> WELCOME FINE.
WOULD YOU LIKE TO OFFER ANY
WORDS FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF
LABOR STANDARDS?
>> I WILL BEGIN AND THEN TURN
IT OVER TO JENNY, WHO HAS BEEN
WORKING EXTREMELY HARD TO BRING
THIS ALL TOGETHER.
WE ARE VERY EXCITED AND WE ARE
OFFICIALLY LAUNCHING THE BOARD
AND THE PUBLIC PROCESS WITHIN
THE NEXT COUPLE OF WEEKS.
>> WE ARE VERY EXCITED TO HAVE
THE LAST FOUR MEMBERS BEFORE
YOU.
IF EVERYTHING GOES SMOOTHLY, WE
WILL HAVE OUR FIRST MEETING ON
MONDAY.
IF ANYTHING CHANGES, WE WILL
RESCHEDULE.
OUR RULEMAKING PROCESS FOR THE
ORDINANCE WILL START THE FIRST
WEEK OF APRIL SO WE'LL HAVE THE
SCHEDULE OUT HOPEFULLY WITHIN
THE NEXT FEW BUSINESS DAYS.
LOOKOUT FOR THE RSVP IF YOU ARE
INTERESTED IN PARTICIPATING.
BACK TO THE REASON WE ARE HERE,
GREET THESE WONDERFUL FOLKS.
BACK TO YOU.
>> I THINK WE WILL GO IN THE
ORDER WE HAD FOLKS INTRODUCE
THEMSELVES.
MILD AND GOOD FRIEND LANI TODD.
SHE IS WITH SEIU.
I HAVE WORKED WITH HER ON A
NUMBER OF LABOR AND HEALTHCARE
POLICIES.
I AM EXCITED ABOUT YOUR NAME
COMING DOWN.
I KNOW YOU HAVE PERSONAL
EXPERIENCES WITH NEEDING CHILD
CARE AND NEEDING TO WORK FULL
TIME.
LOOKING FORWARD TO HAVING THAT
ON THE COUNCIL OR THE BOARD.
WOULD YOU TALK ABOUT WHAT IS
MAKING YOU WANT TO PARTICIPATE
IN THE DOMESTIC WORKERS
STANDARDS BOARD?
>> IT'S GOOD TO SEE YOU, TOO.
VERY EXCITED.
I THINK THE THINGS THAT, YES,
AS A PARENT WITH A TODDLER
DOING OF CHILDCARE AND I HAVE A
BACKGROUND IN CHILDCARE POLICY,
AND IN THE CURRENT POSITION
WORKED ON LONG TERM CARE ISSUES.
GRANTED, THE NUMBERS I
REPRESENT ARE IN THE MEDICAID
REALM AND HAVE A CERTAIN
DIFFERENT DYNAMIC BUT A LOT OF
THE ISSUES WE ARE SEEING THERE
PERTAIN TO WORKERS HERE IN THE
IN-HOME CARE WORLD.
I'M VERY EXCITED ABOUT WORKING
ON ISSUES OTHER THAN THE
CURRENT MANDATE, THINKING ABOUT
RESPONSES TO DISSEMINATION AND
SEXUAL HARASSMENT, AND HOW WE
CAN RESPOND TO THOSE AND MAKING
SURE THE JOB PEOPLE SIGNED UP
FOR IS THE JOB THEY ARE ASKED
TO DO WHEN THEY GET THERE.
>> ELIZABETH HUNTER-KELLER,
THANK YOU FOR JOINING US.
I CAN SEE HERE YOU'RE ALSO AN
EMPLOYEE OF DOMESTIC WORKERS.
YOU WORK AT UW IN THE SCHOOL OF
NURSING.
MY PASSION.
AND I WANTED TO ENSURE DIGNITY
AND RESPECT IN THE WORKPLACE
ARE THINGS WE HEARD FROM YOU.
WHAT'S INTERESTING TO YOU ABOUT
SERVING ON THIS BOARD?
>> I'M NOT WORKING RIGHT NOW
BECAUSE I HAVE AN EIGHT WEEK
OLD BABY.
>> CONGRATULATIONS.
>> BELIEVE IT OR NOT, WE WERE
NOT MEANT TO CARE FOR OUR
YOUNGEST ALONE, OR AT LEAST
WITH ONE OTHER PERSON, SO
THAT'S WHY I FEEL VERY STRONGLY
ABOUT DOMESTIC WORKERS.
I AM PLAY BOTH A NANNY AND A
HOUSEKEEPER.
THEY ARE LIKE FAMILY.
I SEE AN OPPORTUNITY TO PROVIDE
BETTER FOR THEM AND HELP OTHER
WOMEN UNDERSTAND THAT THEY ARE
EMPLOYERS AND THEY HAVE A
RESPONSIBILITY TO THE PEOPLE
THAT THEY EMPLOY.
THEY GET INCREDIBLE BENEFITS,
MAKING SURE THEY ARE ONLY THERE
TO DO THE JOB AND THEY GET PAID
FOR WHATEVER THEY ARE DOING.
I HAVE LOTS OF STORIES ABOUT
DOMESTIC WORKERS WHO DO A LOT
MORE THAN THEY ARE PAID FOR.
PLUS, I THINK OF THESE WOMEN
LIKE MY FAMILY.
I WOULD WANT TO TAKE CARE OF
THEM LIKE I WOULD MY OWN.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
TERESA HILLIS FROM DISTRICT 2.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR ONGOING WORK
WITH US TO HELP DIG INTO THE
POLICY DETAILS AS WE CRAFTED
THIS POLICY, ESPECIALLY FROM
THE EMPLOYER PERSPECTIVE.
A MEMBER OF MOMS RISING.
I'M INTERESTED IN WHAT YOU WANT
TO DO ON THIS BOARD.
>> THANK YOU FOR HAVING ME.
I WAS PART OF THE STAKEHOLDERS
GROUP THAT HELPED CRAFT THE
ORDINANCE LAST WEEK.
I WAS REALLY THRILLED TO BE
PART OF THAT AND EXCITED TO
JOIN AS A MEMBER OF THE BOARD.
I AM A WORKING MOM OF TWO
CHILDREN SO I HAVE A 5 1/2-YEAR-
OLD AND A 2 1/2-YEAR-OLD.
WE HAVE EMPLOYED SEVERAL PART-
TIME NANNIES, NUMEROUS
BABYSITTERS AND WE HAVE AN AU
PAIR FROM GISELLE, ISABELLA,
LIVING WITH US.
AND I AM PLAY A PART-TIME
HOUSEKEEPER.
I REALLY BELIEVE PEOPLE LIKE
MARIA AND OUR NANNIES DESERVE
ACCESS TO BENEFITS THEY DON'T
CURRENTLY HAVE ACCESS TO,
ESPECIALLY FREEDOM FROM
HARASSMENT AT WORK, ACCESS TO A
LIVING WAGE AND ACCESS TO
BENEFITS LIKE SICK LEAVE AND
RETIREMENT.
THAT'S WHAT MOTIVATES ME TO BE
HERE.
I LOOK FORWARD TO WORKING
ALONGSIDE OTHERS TO ADDRESS THE
CHALLENGE OF REACHING OVER
30,000 HOUSEHOLDS IN SEATTLE,
AND I DO BELIEVE MANY IF NOT
MOST OF THEM CARE DEEPLY ABOUT
THE PEOPLE WHO WORK IN THEIR
HOMES.
IT'S JUST A MATTER OF ROLLING
THIS OUT AND MAKING SURE PEOPLE
ARE ABLE TO ACCESS THE
INFORMATION THEY NEED TO HELP
OUT THOSE THAT ARE WORKING IN
THEIR HOMES.
>> THANK YOU.
[ SPEAKING NON-ENGLISH ]
SYLVIA, THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR
BEING HERE.
[ SPEAKING NON-ENGLISH ] THANK
YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR HELP.
AND YOUR ASSISTANCE IN LAST
YEAR, THROUGHOUT THE YEAR AS WE
DRAFTED THE POLICY.
[ SPEAKING NON-ENGLISH ] WHY
ARE YOU INTERESTED IN SERVING
IN THIS POSITION?
>> [ SPEAKING NON-ENGLISH ]
>> TRANSLATOR: GOOD QUESTION.
FIRST OF ALL, I HAVE BEEN
WORKING AS A DOMESTIC WORKER
SINCE 2003.
>> [ SPEAKING NON-ENGLISH ]
>> Translator: THAT TIME SHE
WAS THE VICTIM OF WAGE THEFT AND
SHE FEELS THAT A LOT OF HER
COLLEAGUES WHO ARE PRESENT HERE
TODAY, AS WELL, PROBABLY HAVE
EXPERIENCED WAGE THEFT.
NOT ALL EMPLOYERS ARE AS GOOD
AS LIZ AND SOME OF THE OTHER
PEOPLE WHO ARE HERE.
>> [ SPEAKING NON-ENGLISH ]
>> Translator: SHE IS LOOKING
FORWARD TO HAVING THE FIVE MAIN
POINTS OF THE BILL OF WORKER
RIGHTS IMPLEMENTED, AT LEAST
THE FOUR MOST IMPORTANT ONES,
AND A NUMBER OF OTHER IMPORTANT
POINTS, AS WELL.
>> [ SPEAKING NON-ENGLISH ]
>> Translator: SHE IS LOOKING
FORWARD TO HAVING OTHER SKILLS
LIKE YARDWORK OR LANDSCAPE
WORKERS AS WELL AS COOKS AND
OTHER PEOPLE WHO DO SIMILAR WORK
TO ALSO BE COVERED BY THIS KIND
OF LEGISLATION AND REGULATIONS.
>> [ SPEAKING NON-ENGLISH ]
>> Translator: I AM HERE ON MY
BEHALF AND ESPECIALLY THEIRS.
>> [ SPEAKING NON-ENGLISH ]
THANK YOU SO MUCH.
VERY GOOD.
YOU ARE ALL VERY IMPRESSIVE.
I WANT TO COMES ON THIS BOARD
WITH YOU AS YOU TALK THROUGH
THE DETAILS AND IMPLEMENTATION
STRATEGIES, OUTREACH, AND
EDUCATION IS GOING TO BE REALLY
CRITICAL, SO ONE THING I WANT
TO FLAG FOR FOLKS, AND I THINK
THIS IS SOMETHING WE SHOULD BE
REALLY PROUD OF.
WHEN I WAS IN D.C. LAST WEEK, I
MET WITH CONGRESSWOMAN JAYAPAL
WHO IS COSPONSORING THE
NATIONAL DOMESTIC WORKER BILL
OF RIGHTS.
AND MET WITH THE NATIONAL
DOMESTIC WORKER'S ALLIANCE WHO
HAD TOLD US THEY ARE REALLY
TAKING OUR LEGISLATION AND
PUTTING IT INTO FEDERAL POLICY.
THEY ARE GOING TO DO THINGS WE
WEREN'T ABLE TO DO HOPEFULLY
RELATED TO UNEMPLOYMENT
INSURANCE, HEALTHCARE,
RETIREMENT AND PAID LEAVE
POLICIES.
THESE ARE ITEMS I THINK WE
WOULD LOVE TO SEE AT THE STATE
LEVEL BUT IF THE FEDERAL LEVEL
CAN DO IT, THAT'S GREAT.
YOU GUYS ARE GOING TO HELP US
FIGURE OUT IF THERE IS A CITY
LEVEL, AS WELL.
I AM INCREDIBLY PROUD THIS HAS
NOT ONLY INSPIRED OTHER CITIES
BUT HOPEFULLY WILL BE APPLIED
AT OUR NATIONAL LEVEL.
I DO WANT TO LET FOLKS KNOW
WE'RE NOT GOING TO VOTE TODAY.
INSTEAD, WE WOULD BE VOTING ON
MARCH 25.
JUST BECAUSE OF THE TIMING OF
THE INTRODUCTORY AND REFERRAL
CALENDAR BUT WE WANT TO MAKE
SURE ALL OF YOUR QUESTIONS GET
ANSWERED TODAY SO AS WE GO INTO
MONDAY, WE FEEL FULLY CONFIDENT
TO EXPRESS OUR SUPPORT FOR THE
CANDIDATES AND WOULD OPEN IT UP
TO OUR COLLEAGUES TO ASK
QUESTIONS.
>> I WOULD LIKE TO START WITH
THOSE OF YOU WORKING ON
CHILDCARE.
AND WHAT YOU SEE THE CITY CAN
DO TO HELP SUPPORT,
FINANCIALLY, FAMILIES THAT ARE
HIRING DOMESTIC WORKERS THE
CITY AND THE STATE.
MY EXPERIENCE IS NOW 12 YEARS
OLD IN THIS FIELD BUT MY DAD,
WHO WAS LIVING WITH US, WE
HIRED A MYSTIC HELP TO COME IN
AND WE PAID EVEN AT THAT TIME
ABOUT $20 AN HOUR.
WE WERE FORTUNATE BECAUSE WE
WERE ABLE TO DO THAT BUT I KNOW
A LOT OF OTHER FAMILIES, THAT'S
A GIANT STRETCH.
IN ADDITION TO THE HOURLY PAY,
WE WERE PAYING I THINK
UNEMPLOYMENT TAX AND TO THE
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR FOR ANOTHER
REQUIREMENT.
IT WAS PRETTY AMAZING HOW
DIFFICULT IT WAS EVEN FOR PEOPLE
THAT ARE TWO LAWYERS IN THE
FAMILY TO FIGURE OUT WHAT IS IT
YOU HAVE TO PAY AND RECORD, WHO
DO YOU PAY AND WHEN.
SO I WOULD LIKE TO HEAR MORE
ABOUT YOUR THINKING IN THE
CHILDCARE ARENA AND AS A GLOBAL
LORD, WHAT CAN WE DO TO
SIMPLIFY THAT SO PEOPLE
ACTUALLY HAVE A CHECKLIST OF
WHAT THEY ARE GOING TO BE
REQUIRED TO PAY AND THEN ARE
THERE WAYS THAT WE CAN FIND
SOME SUPPLEMENTAL HELP?
>> GOOD LUCK.
>> I KNOW.
FIRST OF ALL, I WOULD SAY I AM
NOT AN EXPERT, AT ALL.
MANY PEOPLE IN THE HOME DON'T
EVEN CONSIDER THEMSELVES
EMPLOYERS WHO HAVE SOMEONE
WORKING 10 OR 12 HOURS A WEEK,
OR A HOUSEKEEPER COMING IN TWO
DAYS A MONTH.
BUT I AGREE WITH YOU.
MY FRIENDS AND COLLEAGUES ARE
TRYING TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO
AFFORD CHILDCARE IN THIS
ATMOSPHERE AND THAT IS PART OF
THE REASON I HAVE AN AU PAIR.
WE ADORE HAVING HER THERE BUT
IT'S ALSO THE MOST ECONOMICAL
SOLUTION FOR US, AND ALSO IT
WAS MADE EASY BY AN AGENCY WHO
SPELLED OUT EVERY DETAIL OF THE
PROCESS.
THAT COULD BE AN EXAMPLE FOR US
OF HOW WE COULD UTILIZE SOME OF
THE WAYS THAT THOSE MORE FORMAL
CHILDCARE ARENAS THAT HAVE
TAKEN PLACE ON THE FEDERAL LEVEL
HAVE RULED OUT SOMETHING THAT
SIMPLE FOR PEOPLE TO
PARTICIPATE IN BUT I THINK IT'S
GOING TO BE A CHALLENGE AND ONE
I AM EXCITED TO TAKE ON WHEN
YOU HAVE 30 INDIVIDUAL
HOUSEHOLDS DOING SOMETHING
DIFFERENT.
IT TAKES A LOT OF WORK TO DO
SOMETHING THAT WOULD BE SIMPLE
AND EASY ENOUGH FOR THEM TO
UTILIZE AND COMPELLING ENOUGH
FOR PEOPLE TO WANT TO
PARTICIPATE IN AND VOLUNTARILY
JOIN ON SO WE CAN HAVE A WAVE AT
A THINK THERE IS WAYS TO DO
THAT.
THERE IS A LOT OF ONLINE
COMMUNITIES RIGHT NOW THAT
PEOPLE ARE VERY ACTIVE IN.
MANY OF THEM AS A WAY PEOPLE
FIND CHILDCARE AND SHARE THAT
THEY ARE INTERESTED IN
PARTICIPATING IN THE SYSTEM AND
I THINK THERE ARE WAYS TO
UTILIZE THAT TO BE ABLE TO
UTILIZE THIS EFFECTIVELY.
>> I AM HAPPY TO SPEAK AT A
MORE UNIVERSAL WORLD.
THE HEALTHCARE WORLD HAS COME
FROM A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF
SYSTEMATIC DISSEMINATION BASED
ON ITS WOMEN DOING THE MOST OF
THE WORK.
FOR THE LAST 50 YEARS, WOMEN
HAVE BEEN WILLING TO DO THE
WORK REGARDLESS OF PAY BECAUSE
OF THE DISCRIMINATORY NATURE OF
THE SYSTEM.
WE HAD A SYSTEM WHERE YOU HAVE
THE WORKERS NOT BEING ABLE TO
MAKE DO AND YOU HAVE THE ACTUAL
CONSUMERS NOT ABLE TO PAY FOR
IT BECAUSE WE HAVE TREATED WHAT
IS REALLY A GOVERNMENT UTILITY
AS A PRIVATE MARKET ENTITY AND
FUNDED IT ACCORDINGLY, SO I
THINK THERE'S A LOT WE CAN DO
AT THE CITY LEVEL BUT WE HAVE
TO RECOGNIZE THE CARE WORLD IS
A UTILITY AND SOMETHING THAT
GOES ALONG WITH A STRONG
COMMUNITY AND START INVESTING
IN IT.
>> GOOD.
>> I WOULD LOVE TO TALK TO YOU
MORE.
ONE OF THE THINGS COUNCILMEMBER
MOSQUEDA AND I ARE WORKING ON
IS A CHILDCARE FACILITY FOR
CITY HALL.
WE WOULD LOVE TO HAVE YOUR
EXPERT PIECE EXPERTISE ADVISING
US.
WE KNOW THE REQUIREMENTS ARE
CHANGING BUT WE ARE TRYING TO
SCHEDULE SOME TIME.
>> I AM HAPPY TO BE A LIAISON.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR
THOSE ANSWERS.
COUNCIL MEMBER COUNCILMEMBER
JUAREZ?
>> THIS IS A NINE MEMBER BOARD
AND WE HAVE FILLED EIGHT
ALREADY?
ARE THEY ALL WOMEN?
>> I WAS JUST WRITING THAT DOWN.
SPEAKING OF WOMEN DOING THE
WORK.
I'M ACTUALLY LOOKING TO SEE IF
YOU HAVE A RUNNING LIST.
>> ELIJAH.
>> OH, OKAY.
>> I THINK IT'S A POINT WELL
TAKEN.
WE TALK ABOUT UNDOING
INSTITUTIONAL RACISM OR SEXISM.
WE TALK ABOUT THOSE WHO HAVE
BEEN OPPRESSED SHOULD NOT BE
RESPONSIBLE FOR MAKING THE
CORRECTIONS AND ALWAYS SPEAKING
UP.
WE ALSO TALK ABOUT MAKING SURE
HOSE WHO'VE BEEN DIRECT
AFFECTED BY POLICY OR INACTION
SHOULD BE AT THE TABLE TO CREATE
THOSE POLICY SOLUTIONS, SO I
THINK YOU ARE RAISING A REALLY
IMPORTANT POINT.
WE WANT TO HAVE THOSE WITH THE
MOST LIVED EXPERIENCE AT THE
TABLE, WHICH IS WHAT I THINK
YOU ALL REPRESENT AND I THINK
IT'S CRITICAL THAT WE DON'T
JUST ASSUME THIS IS ONE
ADDITIONAL THING THAT WE CAN
EXPECT OUR FRIENDS TO PICK UP
BECAUSE THEY'VE ALREADY ALSO
SAID THEY'VE GOT THREE OR FOUR
FULL-TIME JOBS ON A DAILY
BASIS.
GREAT POINT.
>> THE OTHER POINT I WANTED TO
RAISE IS COUNCILMEMBER BAGSHAW
BROUGHT UP ONE ISSUE.
I AM MORE INTERESTED -- WELL, I
AM INTERESTED IN ALL THE ISSUES
BUT ONE THING I'M LOOKING
FORWARD TO HIS ON THE WORKER
RETENTION, WORKER SAFETY, WAGE
THEFT, AND SOME OF THE
QUESTIONS WE RAISED WHEN WE
WERE PUTTING THE COMMITTEE
TOGETHER THAT WE ARE GOING TO
BE PUNTING A LOT OF STUFF TO
YOU FOLKS BECAUSE WE DON'T DO
WHAT YOU DO, SO I UNDERSTAND
THE CHILDCARE PIECE BUT I AM
ALSO REALLY GOING TO DRILL DOWN
ON THE DOMESTIC WORKERS AND
WORKERS WITHIN HOTELS.
I AM REALLY CONCERNED ABOUT THAT
AND RECENT LEGISLATION AND
COURT OPINIONS
AND I REALLY WANT THIS TO BE
COLLABORATIVE SO THAT WE PASS
LEGISLATION THAT WITHSTANDS
LEGAL SCRUTINY AND FIRST AND
FOREMOST PROTECTS OUR WORKERS,
BUT SECOND OF ALL RESPECTS AND
PROMOTES THE BUSINESS ITSELF
BECAUSE I'M INTERESTED IN ALL
SIDES AND HAVING SOMETHING THAT
ACTUALLY IS GOOD LAW, THAT'S
FAIR AND EQUITABLE, HAS DUE
PROCESS AND LIKE I SAID,
WITHSTANDS NOT ONLY LEGAL
SCRUTINY, BUT WHERE WE CAN BE
AGAIN, SEATTLE CAN BE AGAIN
CUTTING EDGE, AND ACTUALLY
PASSING A LAW THAT'S RIGHT.
THAT'S WHAT I WANT TO DO.
IT'S A LITTLE BIT TIRING WHEN
WE PASS LAWS AND THAT'S OUR
JOB, BUT WHEN THEY GET ANOTHER
OPPORTUNITY, WE WOULD SAY
ANOTHER BITE AT THE APPLE.
I WANT TO DO IT RIGHT.
THAT'S WHAT I'M LOOKING FORWARD
TO.
>> WORKING TOGETHER IS
IMPORTANT BECAUSE I KNOW A LOT
OF THE HOUSEKEEPERS THAT WORK
IN OUR HOMES ALSO WORK IN
HOTELS.
ON THE DAYS THEY ARE NOT AT OUR
HOMES, THEY ARE AT HOTELS.
THERE IS A BIG OVERLAP
>> YOU MENTIONING THAT RINGS UP
THE OVERLAP.
THAT IS NOT SOMETHING YOU WOULD
HAVE THOUGHT OF.
I WAS MORE FOCUSED ON HOTELS,
BUT YOU ARE RIGHT.
THEY WORK IN HOMES, SENIOR
CENTERS, FACILITIES THAT HAVE
CHILDREN, GROUP HOMES, AND SO
THOSE ARE THE KIND OF
CATEGORIES WE'RE LOOKING FOR
YOUR EXPERTISE IN HOW WE CRAFT
THIS NEW LAW THAT WE HAVE TO
TAKE ANOTHER RUN AT.
>> THANK YOU.
SYLVIA?
>> [ SPEAKING NON-ENGLISH ]
>> Translator: THANK YOU FOR
BRINGING THIS IMPORTANT
QUESTION.
SYLVIA IS POINTING OUT THAT
OSHA AT THE FEDERAL LEVEL DOES
NOT REALLY COVER DOMESTIC
WORKERS.
THEIR EMPHASIS HAS HISTORICALLY
BEEN ON CONSTRUCTION WORK AND
DOMESTIC WORKERS ARE ROUTINELY
EXPOSED TO DANGEROUS CHEMICAL
PRODUCTS THAT HAVE A NEGATIVE
IMPACT ON HEALTH, SO SHE WOULD
LIKE TO SEE HOW THIS AGENCY
FOCUSES MORE AND MORE GENERALLY
THAT LEGISLATION FOCUSES MORE
ON DOMESTIC WORKER SAFETY THAT
SHOULD ALSO EXTEND TO LANDSCAPE
WORKERS WHO ARE EQUALLY EXPOSED
TO DANGEROUS CHEMICALS.
>> EXCELLENT.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FROM OUR
COLLEAGUES?
THANK YOU SO MUCH.
THANKS FOR BRINGING THAT POINT
UP IT WILL TIE INTO ANOTHER
ITEM ON OUR AGENDA AS WELL, AS
WE THINK ABOUT INDUSTRY
STANDARDS FOR HOTELS.
I LOVE THAT YOU BROUGHT UP THE
INDIVIDUALS WE ARE TALKING
ABOUT ARE ALSO SUPPLEMENTING
INCOME BECAUSE WE STILL HAVE A
LOT TO DO TO RAISE THE WAGES
FOR SENIOR CENTERS, HOTELS, AND
THINGS LIKE THAT, SO FOLKS HAVE
A GOOD LIVING WAGE JOB.
WE WATCH DOMESTIC WORK TO BE A
GOOD, LIVING WAGE, AS WELL.
THE AU PAIR IS DEFINITELY FULL-
TIME WORK.
THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR
INTEREST IN SERVING ON THIS
COMMITTEE, FOR YOUR PASSWORD TO
MAKE THIS BILL POSSIBLE AND
WHILE WE ARE NOT TAKING A
FORMAL VOTE TODAY, YOUR NAMES
WILL BE ON THE AGENDA MONDAY
THE 25th AT 2:00 P.M.
IT SOUNDS LIKE YOU HAVE A
MEETING ON MONDAY.
IF YOU COULD ALSO TRANSMIT TO
US THE WHOLE LIST OF THE
UPCOMING COMMITTEE MEETINGS .
MAYBE, WE WOULD LIKE TO COME IN
AND CHECK IN WITH FOLKS, AND
THANK YOU AGAIN FOR YOUR WORK.
WITH THAT, [ SPEAKING NON-
ENGLISH ] THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR
YOUR TIME AND WE WILL TALK
ABOUT YOU ON MONDAY.
THANK YOU ALL.
LET'S MOVE TO OUR SECOND ITEM
OF BUSINESS.
IF YOU COULD READ INTO THE
AGENDA ITEMS FIVE AND SIX, WE
WILL GET STARTED WITH OUR
SEATTLE CITY LIGHT REVIEW PANEL.
>> AGENDA ITEMS FIVE AND SIX,
APPOINTMENTS OF McKELL HANSEN
AND CHRIS MEFFORD FOR CITY
LIGHT REVIEW PANEL.
>> COULD WE BE JOINED AT THE
TABLE?
ANYBODY ELSE COMING UP?
DEBRA SMITH, WE WOULD LOVE TO
HAVE YOU.
THANK YOU FOR JOINING US.
MY GOODNESS.
CHECK THIS OUT.
>> WELL DONE SEATTLE CITY LIGHT.
>> EXCELLENT.
IT SAYS SNOW FIGHTERS FOR OUR
VIEWING AUDIENCE AT HOME.
SEATTLE CITY LIGHT, THANKS TO
YOUR INCREDIBLE TEAM FOR ALL
THE WORK YOU DID, ESPECIALLY
DURING THE SEATTLE FREEZE TO
KEEP THE LIGHTS ON AND TURN THE
LIGHTS BACK ON FOR FOLKS.
COUNCILMEMBER BAGSHAW'S
COMMITTEE WILL HAVE A REPORT
BACK AS WELL ON THE RESPONSE
DURING THE STORMS, PLURAL
BECAUSE THEY LASTED FOR MORE
THAN TWO WEEKS AND IT'S NOT
JUST FOLKS NAVIGATING BUT THE
INCREDIBLE TEAM THAT WAS OUT
THERE.
>> COUNCILMEMBER BAGSHAW
RESPONDED TO THE OUTAGES.
IF YOU READ THAT, YOU SAW IT WAS
KIND OF EXTRAORDINARY THE
NUMBER OF MINUTES THAT WERE
EXCLUDED IN CALCULATING THE
OUTAGE INFORMATION BECAUSE OF
THE STORM.
AND IT HAD HAPPENED OVER A
NUMBER OF DAYS SO IT WASN'T ONE
AND DONE. IT WAS THREE DAYS, I
THINK.
ANYWAY.
VERY INTERESTING.
>> THANK YOU.
>> YOU DON'T WANT HAD HAIR?
>> WHY DON'T WE HAVE YOU GUYS
INTRODUCE YOURSELVES FOR THE
RECORD?
>> LEIGH BARRECA CITY LIGHT.
>> DEBRA SMITH, SEATTLE CITY
LIGHT.
>> EXCELLENT.
TODAY, WE ARE MOVING FORWARD ON
TWO LONG-AWAITED APPOINTMENTS
AND I KNOW YOU ARE WAITING FOR
ONE MORE FROM US.
WE WANT TO MAKE SURE OUR
VOLUNTEERS AT THE CITY LIGHT
REVIEW BOARD GET A CHANCE TO
HAVE A FULL TEAM AND TODAY, WE
ARE TALKING ABOUT McKELL HANSEN
AND CHRIS MEFFORD, BOTH FROM
DISTRICT 6. SINCE THEY ARE NOT
ABLE TO MAKE IT TODAY, WE
USUALLY LIKE TO HAVE FIRST TIME
APPOINTEES PRESENT GIVEN THAT
THESE POSITIONS HAVE BEEN
VACANT AND YOU HIGHLY
RECOMMENDED THEM, IT WOULD BE
GREAT TO HEAR MORE FOR THEIR
QUALIFICATIONS FROM YOUR
PERSPECTIVE AND WE WILL TAKE
YOUR WORD AS THEIR WORD AND WE
LOOK FORWARD TO HEARING MORE
ABOUT THEIR ACTIVITIES.
>> BOTH CANDIDATES REGRET THAT
THEY WERE UNABLE TO ATTEND.
THEY HAD PREPLANNED BUSINESS
TRIPS BUT THEY EACH SUBMITTED A
LETTER OF INTEREST TO
PARTICIPATE.
I HAVE LITTLE EXCERPTS FROM THE
LETTERS.
THOSE HAVE BEEN SHARED WITH
YOUR STAFF.
CHRIS MEFFORD IS A NOMINEE FOR
POSITION ONE, WHICH IS THE
ECONOMIST POSITION.
CHRIS IS AN INDEPENDENT PARTNER
IN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT TO
CITIES, COUNTIES, GOVERNMENTS
AND BUSINESSES.
AS A CONSULTANT, HE SERVES ALL
CLIENTS WITH ECONOMIC AND
FISCAL IMPACT ANALYSES,
FACILITATION AND STRATEGIC
PLANNING LEADERSIP FOR
COMMUNITIES AND ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT.
OVER THE COURSE OF HIS NEARLY
25-YEAR CAREER IN SEATTLE, HE
HAS WORKED WITH ELECTED
OFFICIALS AND LEADERS TO SOME
OF THE REGION'S MOST
TRANSFORMATIVE BUSINESSES.
HE STRIVES TO PROVIDE AN
OBJECTIVE, TRANSPARENT, AND
BALANCED VIEWPOINT THAT
SERVICES THE REGION'S ECONOMIC,
SOCIAL, AND ENVIRONMENTAL NEEDS
AND INTERESTS.
HE IS COMMITTED TO BRINGING THE
SAME CRITICAL AND SUPPORTIVE
CONSIDERATIONS TO SUPPORT
DECISION-MAKING FOR SEATTLE
CITY LIGHT AND THE REGION'S
ENERGY RESOURCES.
McKELL HANSEN IS A NOMINEE FOR
POSITION FIVE, OUR COMMERCIAL
CUSTOMER REPRESENTATIVE.
MIKE IS THE CHIEF OPERATING
OFFICER FOR SEBI CORPORATION,
WHICH IS A LONGTIME PUGET SOUND
FAMILY-OWNED AND OPERATED
BUSINESS WITH A LONG HISTORY OF
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT.
IT HAS A WIDE RANGE OF HIS
MISSES IN THE SEATTLE CITY
LIGHT SERVICE TERRITORY
INCLUDING THE DEVELOPMENT AND
OPERATION OF DATA CENTERS,
MEDICAL OFFICE SPACES, WHERE
HOUSES AND GENERAL OFFICE
SPACES.
IN HIS ROLE, MIKE MANAGES MORE
THAN 4 MILLION SQUARE FEET OF
COMMERCIAL AND DATA CENTER
PROPERTIES.
THOSE PROPERTIES ARE PRIMARILY
IN OUR FRANCHISE AREA OF
TUKWILA.
OVER HIS PAST 15+ YEARS, MIKE
HAS BEEN ACTIVELY INVOLVED WITH
CITY LIGHT AND HAS PARTICIPATED
IN NUMEROUS STRATEGIC PLANNING
AND RATE DESIGN SESSIONS.
MIKE IS LOOKING FORWARD TO
USING HIS BACKGROUND AND
INTEREST IN CITY LIGHT TO BE A
PRODUCTIVE, ENGAGED PARTICIPANT
IN FULFILLING THE REVIEW
PANEL'S MISSION.
>> EXCELLENT.
THANK YOU.
IF BOTH INDIVIDUALS ARE
CONFIRMED, WILL THEY BE ABLE TO
JOIN THE REVIEW PANEL RIGHT
AWAY?
>> YES, THEY ARE INVITED TO OUR
NEXT MEETING ON THE 26th.
>> I DON'T KNOW MISTER HANSON
BUT I HAVE WORKED WITH CHRIS
MEFFORD FOR MANY YEARS.
HE IS AN EXCELLENT CANDIDATES.
I AM DELIGHTED THAT HE IS
WILLING TO DO THIS.
HIS INVOLVEMENT WITH PUGET
SOUND REGIONAL COUNCIL FOR
YEARS IS MOST IMPRESSIVE.
I IMPRESSED THAT HE IS WILLING
TO DO THIS.
>> I DON'T KNOW CHRIS BUT I
KNOW MIKE AND HE IS A GREAT GUY.
FROM WHAT I UNDERSTAND, I THINK
THEY WILL BE GREAT CONTRIBUTORS
TO THE GROUP.
>> EXCELLENT.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS?
THE LAST THING I WANT TO SAY IS
THANK YOU.
I UNDERSTAND THE REVIEW PANEL
HAS DONE INTENSE WORK OVER THE
LAST YEAR.
SIX TO EIGHT MONTHS, ESPECIALLY
BUT IT DOES SOUND LIKE YOU GUYS
ARE ON TRACK TO SUBMIT THE
APRIL 1 REPORT WHICH IS ABOUT
10 DAYS SO THANK YOU FOR THAT.
ANY OTHER COMMENTS ON THE WORK
COMING UP NEXT FOR THE REVIEW
PANEL WANTS THE PIECE IS
COMPLETED?
>> WE ARE ALREADY OVERLAPPING.
WE HAD A MEETING WHERE WE MET
YESTERDAY.
WE ARE WORKING ON A PILOT
PROJECT WITH THE ENERGY PROJECT
TO LOOK AT A POTENTIAL PILOT FOR
THE UNDERSERVED POPULATION AND
WE ARE WORKING ON THE NEXT
PIECE WHICH IS THE STRATEGIC
RATE DESIGN AND WHAT KIND OF
PILOTS WE COULD EXPERIMENT WITH
BETWEEN NOW AND THEN.
I THINK PARTNERING WITH FOLKS
IN THE COMMUNITY WHO'VE HAD A
LOT OF SUCCESS, AND THEY'VE
LOOKED AT MODELS THAT ARE
ALREADY IN PLACE WITH AVISTA
AND OTHERS, WE ARE LOOKING AT A
PERCENTAGE OF INCOME PROGRAM,
SO A PIP.
I THINK IT'S EXCITING.
WE ARE GOING TO BE PUTTING
TOGETHER A GROUP THAT WILL
úINCLUDE STAKEHOLDERS, AND
COMMUNITY MEMBERS SO WE CAN
DESIGN SOMETHING RESPONSIVE TO
THE COMMUNITY.
WE ARE ALREADY MOVING AHEAD ON
THE NEXT PIECE.
WE ARE EXCITED TO GET THE
POLICY PIECE IN PLACE SO WE CAN
GO FULL STEAM AHEAD.
>> ONE MORE TIME, THANK YOU TO
YOUR TEAM AND THE REVIEW PANEL
MEMBERS.
THANK YOU TO MISTER HANSON AND
MISTER MEFFORD FOR SERVING ON
THIS PANEL.
WE WILL BE FOLLOWING UP WITH
ONE MORE ADDITIONAL APPOINTMENT
FOR YOU TO COMPLETE THE REVIEW
PANEL.
WE'RE NOT GOING TO TAKE A
FORMAL VOTE TODAY BUT THESE
NAMES WILL BE ON THE 1-DAY
AGENDA MARCH 25 AT 2:00 P.M.
FOR THE FULL COUNCIL'S
CONSIDERATION.
THANK YOU FOR THE HAT.
>> DID EVERYONE GET ONE?
WE HAD APPRECIATION EVENTS
YESTERDAY FOR OUR CRUISE.
THEY GOT HATS.
AND BURRITOS.
>> READ ITEM 7 INTO THE AGENDA.
THANK YOU, DAN FOR JOINING US
AT THE TABLE.
DAN EDER HAS JOINED US, AND WE
ARE NOW PUTTING THE DOCUMENT ON
THE SCREEN.
>> AGENDA ITEM 7 BACKGROUND AND
STATUS OF INITIATIVE 124
RELATING TO PROTECTIONS OF
HOTEL WORKERS COUNCILMEMBER
JUAREZ DISCUSSED THIS.
THERE IS A LOT OF DISCUSSION ON
THIS.
OVERWHELMINGLY, VOTERS APPROVED
74 BY 76%.
THIS EXTENDED ON THE JOB
PROTECTIONS FOR HOTEL WORKERS
BUT IT'S NOT WIDELY KNOWN THAT
THE PROTECTIONS THAT WERE
INCLUDED IN INITIATIVE 124 ARE
NOT CURRENTLY IN EFFECT DUE TO
LEGAL CHALLENGES.
THIS LEAVES A VERY VULNERABLE
POPULATION SIMILAR TO THE
POPULATION WE TALKED ABOUT THIS
MORNING OUT WITHOUT THESE
PROTECTIONS SO I'M INTERESTED
IN ENGAGING WITH THE FULL
COUNCIL AND THIS COMMITTEE, A
NUMBER OF OUR COLLEAGUES,
COUNCILMEMBER DOLLARS AND
COUNCILMEMBER HERBOLD WERE
INTERESTED IN MAKING SURE WE
HAVE A COOPERATIVE
CONVERSATION, ENGAGEMENT WITH
THE MAYOR'S OFFICE,
COUNCILMEMBER COLLEAGUES, FOLKS
FROM THE HOTEL INDUSTRY AND
HOTEL WORKERS TO EVALUATE WHAT
IT WILL TAKE TO PUT INTO PLACE
COMMON SENSE PROTECTIONS THAT
124 ENVISIONED.
I THINK THIS APPROACH IS
CONSISTENT WITH THE CLEAR
INTENT OF SEATTLE VOTERS.
THE FIRST STEP IS FOR THE
COMMITTEE TO HAVE A BASELINE
UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT
INITIATIVE 124 INCLUDES, THE
CURRENT STATUS OF PENDING LEGAL
CHALLENGES AND WE APPRECIATED
WORKING WITH DAN IN THE PAST.
THANK YOU FOR PROVIDING US THIS
COMPREHENSIVE MEMO AND IN
UPCOMING MEETINGS, WE EXPECT TO
DIVE INTO DEEPER DISCUSSIONS
ABOUT POLICY DETAILS, AND
POTENTIALLY WITH THE CITY CAN
AND WILL DO IN PARTNERSHIP WITH
FOLKS IN THE COMMUNITY TO
ADDRESS THE CURRENT SITUATION.
TODAY IS A BASELINE
UNDERSTANDING.
I WILL PROBABLY REPEAT THEM FOR
COUNCIL COLLEAGUES WHO COULDN'T
BE HERE TODAY BUT IT SEEMED
LIKE A GOOD OPPORTUNITY TO SET
THE STAGE FOR WHAT'S TO COME.
>> THANK YOU, CHAIR MOSQUEDA AND
COUNCIL.
124 PROVIDED PROTECTIONS FOR
SEATTLE HOTEL WORKERS.
I'M GOING TO SPEND A FEW
MINUTES WALKING THROUGH A
CENTRAL STAFF MEMO.
IT'S ATTACHED TO YOUR AGENDA.
THE MEMO DESCRIBES THE CURRENT
STATUS OF THE AMENDMENT AND KEY
PROVISIONS.
AT A HIGH SUMMARY LEVEL, THE
INITIATIVE WAS APPROVED AS THE
CHAIR MENTIONED BY SEATTLE
VOTERS ON NOVEMBER 6, 2016.
BUT IS CURRENTLY NOT IN EFFECT.
THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE IS
DEFENDING THE INITIATIVE IN
STATE AND FEDERAL COURT SYSTEM.
AT THE STATE LEVEL, AN
ASSOCIATION OF HOTEL OWNERS
CHALLENGED THE VALIDITY OF THE
INITIATIVE ON MULTIPLE GROUNDS.
KING COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT
INITIALLY SIDED WITH THE CITY
BUT SUBSEQUENTLY, THE COURT OF
APPEALS AGREED WITH HOTEL
OWNERS THAT THE INITIATIVE
VIOLATED THE REQUIREMENT THAT A
VALID INITIATIVE MAY ONLY
ADDRESS ONE SUBJECT.
THE CITY HAS FILED A PETITION
FOR REVIEW.
CURRENTLY PENDING AT THE STATE
SUPREME COURT, BUT IN THE
MEANTIME, THE LAW IS NOT IN
EFFECT.
AT THE FEDERAL LEVEL, THERE IS
A SEPARATE FEDERAL DISTRICT
COURT CHALLENGE THAT IS
CURRENTLY ON HOLD PENDING A
DECISION AT THE STATE SUPREME
COURT ABOUT WHETHER TO REVIEW
THE CASE AND IF SO, WHAT THE
RULING WILL BE.
IF THE SUPREME COURT DOESN'T
TAKE UP THE CASE OR IT TAKES UP
THE CASE AND DETERMINES, SIDES
WITH THE COURT OF APPEALS
RULING, THEN THE INITIATIVE IS
OFFICIALLY INVALIDATED AND
THERE IS NO NEED FOR THE
FEDERAL COURT CASE TO PROCEED.
>> THIS MAY BE SOMETHING YOU
WANT TO PUNT BACK TO THE LAW
DEPARTMENT BUT I KNOW WE ARE
ALL VERY AWARE OF MULTIPLE
SUBJECTS IN AN INITIATIVE.
WHAT DID THE APPEALS COURT FIND
WAS A PROBLEM?
I THOUGHT IT WAS ONE SUBJECT,
DOMESTIC WORKERS.
I'M SORRY, THE HOTEL WORKERS AND
MAKING SURE THEY WERE PROTECTED.
>> I AM NOT REALLY IN THE BEST
POSITION TO GIVE YOU THE SUMMARY
OF THE LAWSUIT SPECIFICS.
ANY INITIATIVE IS GOING TO HAVE
MORE THAN LITERALLY ONE SECTION
THAT IT DEALS WITH. THERE IS
DEFINITIONS, OF THE MAIN
PROVISIONS, AND THEN THERE ARE
THE SUBSTANTIVE PARTS.
THE COURTS MADE AN APPEAL THAT
THE SUBSTANTIVE PARTS EXCEEDED
THE SCOPE OF THE SINGLE SUBJECT
RULE.
I CAN'T TELL YOU WHY THEY CAME
TO THAT CONCLUSION BUT IT IS
THE SUBJECT OF A PENDING
PETITION FOR A SUPREME COURT
REVIEW.
WE HOPE THE DECISION WILL BE
RETURNED.
>> COUNCILMEMBER BARTCHAK, I
READ THE COURT OF APPEALS
DECISION.
AND THE CITY'S BRIEF TO THE
STATE SUPREME COURT.
IT IS MUCH MORE SOPHISTICATED.
I LEARNED MORE THAN I NEEDED TO
KNOW ABOUT THE ONE SUBJECT
RULE, LOG RULING AND RULING.
BUT IT DID TAKE APART ALL SEVEN
PARTS.
I THINK SOME OF THE MOST
TROUBLESOME PART WAS PROBABLY
PART ONE ON THE HOTEL GUEST
REGISTRY AND DUE PROCESS ISSUES.
I DID HAVE A CHANCE TO READ THE
CITY ATTORNEY BRIEF TO THE
WASHINGTON STATE SUPREME COURT,
AND OF COURSE THEY ARE GOING TO
BE APPEALING THIS, BUT THE
REASON I'M SAYING THIS IS NOT
BECAUSE I WANT TO SAY I AM
SMART.
>> YOU ARE SMART AND YOU DO
READ THE CASES.
>> IT'S MAINLY BECAUSE I THINK
I ALREADY GAVE YOU THIS.
THE ONLY REASON I PUT IT
TOGETHER IS BECAUSE I REALLY AM
INTERESTED JUST LIKE
COUNCILMEMBER MOSQUEDA AND
COUNCILMEMBER GONZALEZ, THIS
ISSUE HAS BEEN NOW IN THREE
DIFFERENT COURTROOMS.
WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE TWO
DIFFERENT OPINIONS, THIS IS
JUST MY OPINION.
I THINK THERE IS A WAY WE CAN
REALLY CRAFT A PHENOMENAL LAW
THAT ADDRESSES THE DEFICIENCIES
THAT WERE CALLED OUT IN THE
COURT OF APPEALS.
THAT ADDRESSES AND HIGHLIGHTS
SOME OF THE GREAT ARGUMENTS
THAT THE CITY MADE.
AND I THINK THAT'S WHY IT IS
MORE THAN JUST ILLUSTRATIVE.
IT'S THE LAW.
I THINK THE COURT OF APPEALS
CASE IS ONLY LIKE 20 PAGES OR
SOMETHING, BUT MY POINT IS THEY
ARE VERY SYSTEMATIC AND TAKEN
APART, BUT ALSO TALKING ABOUT
WHY ALL SEVEN PARTS DON'T
NECESSARILY WORK TOGETHER.
WHETHER I AGREE IS A DIFFERENT
ISSUE, BUT THE CITY'S BRIEF IS
VERY STRAIGHTFORWARD.
IT ADDRESSES THOSE ISSUES, SO
THERE IS A WAY FOR US TO REMEDY
THE SINGLE SUBJECT RULE.
I THINK THERE IS A WAY TO
DISCUSS THE OTHER SIX PARTS AND
WORK WITH OUR DOMESTIC WORKERS
AND THE PEOPLE AT THE TABLE
TODAY.
AND ALSO TO HAVE OUR INDUSTRY
FOLKS AT THE TABLE.
HAVING THE HOTEL PEOPLE THERE
TO EXPLAIN TO US HOW THEY CAN
HAVE A SAFE BUTTON, HOW THEY
CAN WORK WITH CHEMICALS, HOW
THE INDUSTRY ACTUALLY WORKS ON
THE FLOOR WITH THE 5000 SQUARE
FEET.
ALL OF THOSE ISSUES, WE CAN
SOLVE IF WE SIT DOWN AT THE
TABLE.
THAT'S WHAT I AM HOPING WE CAN
DO.
>> THANK YOU FOR YOUR RESEARCH
IN THE MEMO YOU PROVIDED.
I KNOW, DARREN, YOU HAVE ABOUT
A 10 MINUTE WINDOW.
I'M GOING TO ASK THAT YOU WALK
US THROUGH YOUR MEMO AND I WANT
TO FLAG FOR THE COMMITTEE, WE
HAVE TALKED TO THE LEGAL TEAM
IN THE LAW DEPARTMENT, WHO ARE
HAPPY TO COME MEET WITH US.
I THINK WE WILL SCHEDULE
SOMETHING FOR OUR COUNCIL AS A
WHOLE THING BUT THANK YOU FOR
THAT AND GO AHEAD AND WALK US
THROUGH THE DETAILS.
WELCOME, COUNCILMEMBER
HERBOLD.
>> I'M GOING TO BRIEFLY ADDRESS
THE MAIN PARTS OF THE AGENDA.
SORRY, OF THE LEGISLATION
INITIATIVE.
ALL OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE
INITIATIVE APPLY TO WORKERS IN
HOTELS WITH MORE THAN 60
GUESTROOMS.
THERE ARE SOME PROVISIONS THAT
APPLY ONLY TO SO-CALLED LARGE
HOTELS
THOSE ARE DEFINED AS HOTELS
THAT HAVE MORE THAN 100
GUESTROOMS.
PART ONE PROTECTS HOTEL
EMPLOYEES FROM BEING ATTACKED
WHILE WORKING ALONE IN
GUESTROOMS.
AS THE COUNCILMEMBER MENTIONED,
ONE OF THE PROVISIONS HAS TO DO
WITH PANIC BUTTONS, SO SAFE
BUTTONS.
HOTELS ARE REQUIRED TO PROVIDE
EACH WORKER WHO ENTERS, A
GUESTROOM UNACCOMPANIED WITH A
SO-CALLED PANIC BUTTON ALLOWING
THE EMPLOYEE TO ALERT OTHER
STAFF WHEN THEY NEED IMMEDIATE
AID.
HOTELS ARE ALSO REQUIRED TO PUT
SIGNS IN GUESTROOMS AWARDING
GUESTS THAT EMPLOYEES ARE
EQUIPPED WITH THESE PANIC
BUTTONS.
THIS PART ALSO INCLUDES A
PROVISION THAT I DESCRIBED AS A
LIST OF ACCUSED GUESTS.
HOTELS ARE REQUIRED TO MAINTAIN
A LIST OF ALL GUESTS ACCUSED OF
ANY ACT OF VIOLENCE AGAINST AN
EMPLOYEE WITHIN FIVE YEARS.
HOTELS MUST BAN GUESTS FROM A
HOTEL FOR THREE YEARS FROM THE
DATE OF ANY ALLEGATION OF
ASSAULT, SEXUAL ASSAULT OR
SEXUAL HARASSMENT THAT IS
ACCOMPANIED EITHER BY A SWORN
STATEMENT OR CORROBORATING
EVIDENCE.
DURING THE FOURTH AND FIFTH
YEARS AFTER THE INITIAL
OBLIGATION, HOTELS ARE NO
LONGER REQUIRED TO BAN A GUEST
TO REMAINS ON THE LIST, BUT
HOTELS ARE REQUIRED TO ALERT
EMPLOYEES WHO ARE ASSIGNED TO
WORK ALONE IN SUCH A GUEST'S
ROOM.
THERE AR SOME CIRCUMSTANCES IN
WHICH A GUEST MAY BE ACCUSED OF
AN ACT OF VIOLENCE BUT NOT BE
IMMEDIATELY REQUIRED TO CHECK
OUT OF THE HOTEL.
IN SUCH A CIRCUMSTANCE, THE
HOTEL MUST REASSIGN THE
EMPLOYEE WHO MADE THE ACCUSATION
TO WORK ON ANOTHER FLOOR OR IF
THERE ISN'T ANOTHER FLOOR, IN
ANOTHER AREA.
FOR THE DURATION OF THE ACCUSED
GUESTS'S STATE.
AND THE LAST PROVISION IN THIS
PART IS PAID TIME OFF.
IN THE EVENT THAT A HOTEL WORKER
REPORTS AN ACT OF VIOLENCE, THE
HOTEL MUST PAY THAT EMPLOYEE
THEIR REGULAR RATE OF PAY FOR
THE TIME SPENT FILING A POLICE
REPORT AND CONSULTING WITH A
COUNSELOR OF THE EMPLOYEE'S
CHOOSING.
THE SECOND PART, PROTECTS
WORKERS FROM ON-THE-JOB
INJURIES.
THE INITIATIVE REQUIRES HOTELS
TO USE REASONABLE SAFETY
PRACTICES AND TO CONTROL
CHEMICAL HAZARDS.
THE INITIATIVE ALSO LIMITS HOW
LARGE HOTELS, AGAIN, THESE ARE
HOTELS WITH MORE THAN 100
GUESTROOMS, HOW THESE LARGE
HOTELS CAN ASSIGN HOUSEKEEPING
WORK.
SPECIFICALLY, NO HOUSEKEEPER
CAN BE REQUIRED TO CLEAN MORE
THAN 5000 SQUARE FEET.
LARGE HOTELS MUST PAY TIME AND
A HALF FOR THE ENTIRE SHIFT IN
THE EVENT THAT A HOTEL OR I'M
SORRY A HOUSEKEEPER VOLUNTARILY
ACCEPTS AN ASSIGNMENT OF MORE
THAN 5000 SQUARE FEET DURING A
SINGLE SHIFT.
PRO THREE IS INTENDED TO
IMPROVE ACCESS TO AFFORDABLE
HEALTHCARE.
>> BEFORE WE GO ON.
COUNCILMEMBER MOSQUEDA, I KNOW
WE HAVE SOME PEOPLE IN THE
HOTEL INDUSTRY TODAY.
WHAT I AM REALLY INTERESTED IN
IS, IS IT POSSIBLE KIRKMON FROM
AN ECONOMIC STANDPOINT, AS
WELL, TO ASSIGN TWO WORKERS PER
ROOM, SO THERE IS A 5000 SQUARE-
FOOT LIMITATION TO CLEAN DURING
AN EIGHT HOUR SHIFT.
ANY OF US WHO CLEAN HOUSES WE
KNOW THAT TWO PEOPLE CAN MAKE A
BED MUCH FASTER THAN ONE PERSON.
THE SAME THING IS TRUE IF YOU
SPLIT THE WORK.
WE WORKED REALLY HARD FOR LIKE
OUR FIREFIGHTERS AS AN EXAMPLE
TO MAKE SURE THEY HAVE MULTIPLE
PEOPLE DOING WHATEVER THEY NEED
TO DO TO RESPOND.
I WOULD REALLY LIKE TO SEE SOME
SORT OF AN ECONOMIC ANALYSIS
ABOUT WHY YOU COULDN'T AND
SHOULDN'T HAVE TWO PEOPLE GOING
INTO A ROOM, PARTICULARLY IF
THERE IS SOMEONE THERE.
I HAVE NOT SEEN STUDIES ON
THIS.
I WOULD REALLY BE INTERESTED IN
IT.
>> I KNOW THAT A SOMETHING THAT
WAS EXPLORED DURING THE
RULEMAKING SO THAT OFFICE OF
LABOR STANDARDS ISSUED RULES
THAT WENT INTO EFFECT IN JULY
2018.
THOSE RULES ARE ALSO ON HOLD
PENDING THE OUTCOME OF
LITIGATION.
BUT I KNOW THAT WAS ONE OF THE
THINGS THEY GRAPPLED WITH, AND
THAT THE HOTEL OWNERS HAVE ALSO
EXPLORED AND SOUGHT
CLARIFICATION ON. WHAT HAPPENS
IF THERE ARE MORE THAN ONE
HOUSECLEANER ASSIGNED TO A ROOM,
HOW DOES THE 5000 SQUARE FOOT
RULE APPLY?
DOES IT GETS SPLIT BETWEEN THE
TWO?
IS THERE NO DISCRETION, WHERE
EACH PERSON IS ALSO ASSUMED TO
BE WORKING ON 5000 SQUARE FEET
WITH ASSISTACE?
>> FOR THOSE WHO HAVE DONE THIS
WORK, I WILL BE INTERESTED TO
GET MORE INFORMATION BECAUSE IT
SEEMS LIKE A SIMPLE FIX.
I AM SURE THERE IS SIMPLE
ECONOMIC REASONS WHY NOT BUT I
REALLY QUESTION THAT.
>> AGAIN, PART THREE IS ABOUT
ACCESS TO AFFORDABLE
HEALTHCARE.
THIS APPLIES ONLY TO THE LARGE
HOTEL EMPLOYERS.
LARGE HOTEL EMPLOYERS ARE
REQUIRED TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL
COMPENSATION TO LOW-WAGE
WORKERS, WHICH IS DEFINED IN
THE INITIATIVE AS THOSE LIVING
IN HOUSEHOLDS WITH INCOMES
BELOW 400% OF THE FEDERAL
POVERTY LINE.
THERE IS A FORMULA FOR
DETERMINING THE AMOUNT OF
ADDITIONAL COMPENSATION
DESCRIBED IN THE MEMO, BUT I
WOULD SUMMARIZE IT BY SAYING IT
IS INTENDED TO ENSURE THAT LOW-
WAGE WORKERS CAN AFFORD A GOLD
LEVEL HEALTH PLAN.
LARGE HOTEL EMPLOYERS ARE NOT
REQUIRED TO PROVIDE SUCH
ADDITIONAL COMPENSATION IN THE
EVENT THAT THEY DIRECTLY
PROVIDE A QUALIFYING EMPLOYER-
SPONSORED HEALTH PLAN.
>> IF FOLKS HAVE QUESTIONS ABOUT
GOLD, SILVER, PLATINUM AND
BRONZE, I CAN HELP ANSWER
THOSE, TOO.
>> PART FOUR PROTECTS THE JOBS
OF WORKERS WHEN HOTEL OWNERSHIP
CHANGES HANDS.
THE INITIATIVE PROVIDES THAT A
NEW HOTEL OWNER MUST OFFER JOBS
TO THE EXISTING WORKERS AT THE
HOTEL BEFORE REPLACING THEM
WITH NEW STAFF UNLESS THE NEW
OWNER EITHER EMPLOYS OVER
OVERALL FEWER WORKERS OR
DISCHARGES ONE OR MORE EXISTING
EMPLOYEES FOR COST.
THE LAST SECTION THAT I WILL
ADDRESS IS ENFORCEMENT.
THE INITIATIVE PROVIDES HOTEL
EMPLOYEES WITH A PRIVATE RIGHT
OF ACTION TO BRING SUIT AGAINST
THEIR EMPLOYER IN THE EVENT
THAT THEY ALLEGE THERE HAS BEEN
ACTION THAT IS NOT IN KEEPING
WITH THE INITIATIVE PROVISIONS.
THIS IS UNLIKE SOMETHING THAT
IS UNLIKE OTHER CITY LABOR
LAWS.
FOR INSTANCE, MINIMUM WAGE,
SECURE SCHEDULING AND OTHERS.
THE CITY DOES NOT HAVE A DIRECT
ROLE IN ENFORCING MOST OF THE
PROTECTIONS OF INITIATIVE 124.
THE OFFICE OF LABOR STANDARDS
CAN INVESTIGATE AND ENFORCE
ALLEGATIONS OF WAGE THEFT UNDER
SEPARATE MUNICIPAL LAW, BUT THE
CITY CANNOT DIRECTLY ENFORCE
INSTANCES WHEN A HOTEL DOES NOT
LIVE UP TO OTHER REQUIREMENTS
OF INITIATIVE 124.
AS AN EXAMPLE, IF A HOTEL DID
NOT PROVIDE REQUIRED PANIC
BUTTONS, THAT WOULD BE
SOMETHING WHICH THE CITY HAS
THE ABILITY TO INVESTIGATE, BUT
NOT TO ENFORCE OR TAKE ACTION
TO RECTIFY.
>> CAN I ASK YOU A QUICK
QUESTION?
WE ARE STILL ON FIVE?
I THOUGHT THE CITY OR THE STATE
ALREADY ADDRESSED THAT HOTELS
CANNOT ASK WORKERS ABOUT THEIR
CITIZENSHIP OR IMMIGRATION
STATUS?
I THOUGHT WE DEALT WITH THAT
WITH MOTEL 6 OR HOTEL 8 OR
WHATEVER?
>> I AM NOT AWARE OF THAT.
>> LET'S FOLLOW UP ON THAT.
THERE IS SEVEN PARTS HERE.
SOME OF THEM YOU CAN WHITTLE
DOWN AND SOME YOU CANNOT BUT
SOME OF THIS STUFF IS SOLID AND
WE CAN FIND IT IN STATE LAW.
I THINK THE SINGLE ISSUE RULE
IS WHERE IT GOT HUNG UP IN THE
HOTEL REGISTRY, BUT SOME OF
THESE STANDING ALONE ARE GOOD
LAW.
IT'S THE COMBINATION OF ALL
SEVEN THAT HURT US.
I AM NOT GOING TO SAY I TOLD
YOU SO, BUT I DID SAY SO.
SO DID YOU.
I'M JUST GOING TO LEAVE IT AT
THAT.
>> PARTS SIX AND SEVEN ARE I
WOULD SAY A SERIES OF TECHNICAL
PROVISIONS THAT HAVE
DEFINITIONS AND MISCELLANEOUS
PROVISIONS LIKE SEVERABILITY AND
I'M NOT GOING TO WALK THROUGH
THE DETAILS UNLESS THERE ARE
QUESTIONS ON THOSE.
>> MATT?
>> QUESTIONS ABOUT THE
ENFORCEMENT AND THE RULEMAKING
THAT THE OFFICE OF LABOR
STANDARDS HAS DONE.
THE RULEMAKING THAT THEY'VE
DONE THUS FAR, IS IT ONLY
RELATED TO THEIR ABILITY TO
INVESTIGATE WAGE THEFT UNDER
THIS ORDINANCE?
OR HAVE THEY MADE RULES ABOUT
OTHER PARTS OF THE ORDINANCE?
IF THEY'VE MADE RULES I HAVE
LITTLE DIFFICULTY UNDERSTANDING
THE LEGAL FRAMEWORK BECAUSE
IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING, THE
RULES ARE ABOUT A DEPARTMENT'S
ADMINISTRATION AND IN OSMENT OF
A LAW, AND IF THEY ARE NOT
ADMINISTRATING OR ENFORCING IT,
I'M NOT SURE WHY THEY WOULD
NEED TO MAKE RULES ABOUT IT.
>> JENEE JAHN'S IS IN THE
AUDIENCE.
IF SHE IS WILLING TO ANSWER
THAT QUESTION, SHE CAN ANSWER
IT DIRECTLY.
I THINK GENERALLY, THE
RULEMAKING IS INTENDED TO
PROVIDE SOME CLARIFICATION OF
WHAT THE CITY UNDERSTANDS TO BE
HOW TO APPLY THE LAW.
AND IT IS A LITTLE BIT UNUSUAL
THAT WE ARE NOT IN AN
ENFORCEMENT ROLE FOR THIS
PARTICULAR LAW.
BUT I STILL THINK THE
RULEMAKING IS INTENDED TO AGAIN
CLARIFY HOW TO APPLY THE BROAD
STROKES OF THE LAW.
>> YOU'RE WELCOME TO COME AND
JOIN US IF YOU HAVE SOMETHING
TO ADD.
I THINK WHAT WE WILL DO FOR THE
FULL COUNCIL'S BENEFIT IS WE
WILL PRINT OUT THE INITIATIVE.
WE WILL PRINT OUT ALL THE RULES
THAT HAVE BEEN CREATED SO FAR,
THE MEMO FROM EDER AND WE WILL
BEGIN A BINDER FOR THE ENTIRE
COUNCIL.
>> AND VISITORS?
>> ABSOLUTELY.
>> ONLY ONE PIECE OF CLARIFYING
INFORMATION.
THE INITIATIVE ITSELF GRANTED
US RULEMAKING FOR THE ENTIRETY
OF THE ORDINANCE, SO NOT JUST
THOSE WE COULD ENFORCE UNDER
WAGE THEFT.
>> UNDERSTOOD.
WHAT IS THE PURPOSE OF
RULEMAKING ABOUT PARTS OF THE
ORDINANCE THAT YOU ARE NEITHER
ADMINISTERING NOR ENFORCING?
I JUST HAVE AN IDEA OF WHAT
RULEMAKING IS ABOUT, SO I AM
HAVING A HARD TIME UNDERSTANDING
WHAT THE FUNCTION OF THOSE
RULES WOULD BE IN THAT
INSTANCE.
>> SURE.
TYPICALLY, WHAT THEY ARE
MENTIONED BEFORE IS IT PROVIDES
CLARITY ON HOW THE AGENCY WILL
INTERPRET THE LAW.
IT ALSO PROVIDES COURTS SOME
GUIDANCE, ALTHOUGH THEY DO NOT
HAVE TO TAKE IT, AROUND OTHER
PROVISIONS OF THE ORDINANCE.
TO THE EXTENT THAT WE ARE
GRANTED AND INVESTIGATORY
AUTHORITY, WE WOULD CLARIFY
THAT, AS WELL EVEN THOUGH WE
WEREN'T ALLOWED ENFORCEMENT.
>> THAT'S HELPFUL.
>> ICBM TAKING NOTES.
THANK YOU FOR FOLLOWING UP WITH
US ON THOSE PIECES.
>> LET ME ASK YOU A QUICK
QUESTION.
WHEN THE COURTS WERE TAKING
APART ALL SEVEN PARTS OF THIS,
AND WE TOUCHED ON THIS, ONE OF
THE FIXES IN PART SIX STATES
THAT THE ORDINANCE DIDN'T
DEFINE SEXUAL ASSAULT OR SEXUAL
HARASSMENT.
THAT'S AN EASY FIX, RIGHT?
THAT WOULD PUT US BACK WITH
HAVING THE DEFINITION.
I DON'T KNOW WHY IT WASN'T PUT
IN THERE.
I DON'T KNOW IF YOU HAVE A
LEGAL STANDARD YOU WOULD PULL
FOR THE MUNICIPAL CODE, OR WHAT
THE DEFINITION WOULD BE?
I AM GUESSING MAYBE NOT?
I SHOULDN'T SAY THAT.
BUT MY POINT IS THAT SEEMS LIKE
AN EASY FIX.
EVEN THOUGH CAUGHT THANK YOU
DAN FOR BRINGING IT UP, BUT
LIKE SECTION 7 LABELED
MISCELLANEOUS.
IT DOES HAVE THE SEVERABILITY
CLAUSE, BUT IT ALSO TALKS ABOUT
IT PROTECTS EMPLOYEES SO THAT
THEY CAN'T WAIVE THE ISSUE IN
FACT AN EMPLOYER CAN'T MAKE AN
EMPLOYEE WAIVE THE ISSUE ABOUT
MAINTAINING HOTELS, MAINTAINING
A LIST OF ACCUSED GUESTS.
THAT TO ME MAKES SENSE.
THAT STANDS AS SO.
SO THIS IS A LITTLE BIT OF MY
FRUSTRATION.
I JUST FELT LIKE WE DIDN'T HAVE
THE INDUSTRY LOOKS HERETO KIND
OF GUIDE US.
AND ANSWER SOME OF THE
QUESTIONS LIKE COUNCILMEMBER
BAGSHAW JUST RAISED.
JUST BASIC MEAT AND POTATO
QUESTIONS.
HOW DOES AN INDUSTRY CLEAN A
ROOM?
HOW BIG IS 5000 SQUARE FEET?
HOW MANY PEOPLE GO IN?
JUST BASIC STUFF.
I WAS READING THIS BRIEF AND
STATE SUPREME COURT. HINGTON
SOME OF IT, THE TEXT ITSELF IS
ABOUT THE LAW BUT PUTTING THAT
ASIDE, JUST REAL WORLD, HOW
DOES IT WORK IN THE INDUSTRY,
AND HOW DO WE TAYLOR A LAW LIKE
WE DID WITH SCHEDULING,
REMEMBER?
SECURE SCHEDULING.
IT WAS HELPFUL FOR ME, WHEN I
MET WITH SUBWAY, TARGET, AND
ROSS, AND STARBUCKS, AS WELL AS
THE PEOPLE FOR THE LAW WAS
INTENDED FOR.
I DIDN'T FEEL LIKE WE HAD THAT.
THAT'S FOR ME.
I CAN'T SPEAK FOR EVERYBODY
ELSE.
I WAS ALWAYS CONCERNED ABOUT
THAT REGISTRY.
I THINK THERE SHOULD BE
SOMETHING, BUT THE WAY THAT GOT
DRAFTED, I KNEW THAT WAS GOING
TO GET
>>> DOWN.
I HAD REAL CONCERNS ABOUT
ANYONE MAINTAINING A REGISTRY
IN WHICH SOMEONE DOESN'T KNOW
THEY ARE ON A LIST FOR FIVE
YEARS WITH NO DUE PROCESS, NO
STANDARD OF COMMONALITY AND I
AM NOT SAYING SOMEONE IS GUILTY
OR INNOCENT BUT I HAD A REAL
ISSUE WITH THAT BECAUSE THAT IS
SOMETHING YOU CAN ACTUALLY PULL
OUT IN THE CITY ATTORNEY'S
OFFICE TO HAVE A SPECIAL
CLASSIFICATION FOR WORKERS IN A
HOTEL THAT CAN BE A MISDEMEANOR.
I JUST THINK THERE ARE A LOT OF
ISSUES THAT WE COULD HAVE DONE
BETTER AND THAT'S WHY WE GET
ANOTHER OPPORTUNITY TO DO IT.
I AM LOOKING FORWARD TO WORKING
WITH YOU FOLKS ON THESE ISSUES.
>> IN PART OF OUR PACKET, WE
WILL INCLUDE THE CITY'S LEGAL
BRIEF, AS WELL.
WE ARE GOING TO HAVE A CHANCE
TO GO INTO THE POLICY DETAILS
AND TALK ABOUT EACH ONE OF
THESE ELEMENTS A LITTLE BIT
MORE.
AS WE HAVE DONE WITH DOMESTIC
WORKERS BILL OF RIGHTS, FOR
EXAMPLE, WE WILL BE BRINGING IN
VARIOUS PLACES.
>> DID YOU GET THE COPY I GAVE
YOU?
>> I DID.
WE CAN INCLUDE THAT FOR FOLKS
IN THE LITTLE PACKET WE ARE
GOING TO CREATE.
DID YOU HAVE ANY SPECIFIC
COMMENTS IN RESPONSE TO ANY OF
THE RULEMAKING PROCESS OR
ANYTHING LIKE THAT YOU NEEDED
TO ADD?
>> WHAT ARE THE NEXT STEPS?
WHAT DO YOU SEE, COUNCILMEMBER
MOSQUEDA?
>> I WANT TO CLARIFY, IT'S MY
UNDERSTANDING THE LEGAL
DECISIONS THAT HAVE BEEN MADE
THUS FAR ARE NOT ABOUT THE
CONTENT.
IT'S ABOUT THE MULTIPLE
SUBJECTS IN THE TITLE, CORRECT?
>> THAT'S EXACTLY RIGHT.
>> I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT
WHEREAS YOU MIGHT BE RIGHT
ABOUT WHAT MAY EVENTUALLY BE
HAPPENING IN COURT, IN THE
FUTURE, THE COURTS HAVE NOT
TAKEN A POSITION ON ANY OF THE
ELEMENTS WHERE THEY ARE FOCUSED
ON THE MULTIPLE SUBJECTS IN THE
TITLE THUS FAR.
>> LET'S HAVE A CLARIFICATION.
THAT'S TRUE, BUT WHAT THEY DO
TALK ABOUT, WHICH IS IMPORTANT,
IS HOW CERTAIN SUBJECTS -- HOW
THEY DON'T COMPLEMENT EACH
OTHER, AND HOW THEY DON'T
FURTHER THE INTENT OF THE LAW
IF THEY ARE NOT ALL WORKING
TOGETHER, THAT THEY ARE
DISCONNECTED.
IT DOESN'T MEAN I AGREE OR
DON'T AGREE, BUT WHEN IT TALKS
ABOUT THIS RATIONAL UNITY, HOW
ALL SEVEN OF THESE PARTS ARE
SUPPOSED TO WORK TOGETHER, IN
THAT SENSE, THEY DO TOUCH UPON
THE TEXT, THE SUBSTANCE OF THE
LAW.
MY OPINION HAS BEEN -- THEY DID
NOT SAY THERE WERE DUE PROCESS
ISSUES WITH THE REGISTRY.
THEY BRING IT UP BUT IT'S CLEAR
FROM READING IT AS A SEASONED
LAWYER, THAT'S WHAT THEY ARE
GETTING OUT.
THAT'S MY OPINION.
I THINK -- I'VE BEEN A LAWYER
FOR 33 YEARS.
I HAVE A SENSE OF WHAT'S GOING
ON HERE AS A FORMER JUDGE AND
TRIAL LAWYER.
I AM JUST TRYING TO OFFER THAT
EXPERIENCE AND WISDOM THAT I
DON'T WANT TO GET CAUGHT UP IN
WELL, THEY DIDN'T GO TO EACH
ISSUE AND SAY THESE WERE BAD,
AND GO RIGHT INTO THE
SUBSTANCE, BUT IT'S PRETTY
CLEAR, AND CERTAINLY THE WAY
THE CITY RESPONDED IN THAT
BRIEF, THAT THEY ARE TALKING
ABOUT THEM TOGETHER IN THE WAY
THAT THEY ARE NOT IN THIS
RATIONAL UNITY PIECE.
IT'S NOT AS STERILE AS YOU
VIOLATED THE SINGLE SUBJECT
RULE AND THAT'S ALL THEY STUCK
TO BECAUSE IF THAT WERE THE
CASE, THEY COULD HAVE WRITTEN
AN OPINION IN THREE PAGES
INSTEAD OF 28.
>> WHAT YOU WILL SEE FROM US IS
A FULL OUTLINE OF THE NEXT
MEETINGS WE HAVE SCHEDULED TO
TALK ABOUT THIS TOPIC.
WE WILL INCLUDE THE FULL
OUTLINE IN A MEMO AS A
COVERSHEET TO THE MATERIALS WE
ARE GOING TO PROVIDE FOR FOLKS.
DARREN, YOUR MEMO WILL BE AT
THE TOP OF THE STACK BECAUSE WE
APPRECIATE THE OVERVIEW YOU
PROVIDED TODAY.
WE ARE GOING TO GET A CHANCE TO
GET BRIEFED BY THE LEGAL TEAM
SO WE CAN ASK SOME OF THESE
SPECIFIC QUESTIONS.
ON OUR NEXT MEETING ON APRIL 4,
WE WILL HAVE A CHANCE TO HEAR
FROM FOLKS IN THE INDUSTRY OR I
SHOULD SAY WHO ARE WORKING IN
THE INDUSTRY AND WE WILL HAVE
MORE STAKEHOLDERS ON THE MAY 13
DATE, AND MORE DISCUSSION ON
JUNE 3, SO YOU CAN EXPECT,
BASICALLY, LIKE WE DID LAST
YEAR, FOR THIS TO BE A
REOCCURRING PAIN SO WE DON'T
RUSH ANY CONVERSATIONS, THAT WE
REALLY HAVE A CHANCE TO
UNDERSTAND THE LEGAL ANALYSIS
AND HAVE MORE CONVERSATION
AROUND POLICY.
TODAY WAS INTENDED TO BE VERY
HIGH LEVEL JUST TO DO SOME
LEVEL SETTING.
>> THERE WAS ONE INDIVIDUAL
FROM THE NEXUS HOTEL, WHO WAS
HERE.
I HOPE WE CAN HAVE SOME OF THE
HOTEL MANAGERS, AS WELL TO TALK
TO US, SO WE CAN ASK SOME
DIRECT QUESTIONS.
I THINK THIS WAS THE POINT YOU
WERE MAKING COUNCILMEMBER
JUAREZ, WE NEED TO HAVE
EVERYBODY AT THE TABLE, SO WE
CAN LOOK AT SOLUTIONS AND NOT
JUST MAKE ASSUMPTIONS ABOUT
WHAT'S GOING TO WORK.
>> YEAH.
I ALSO WANT TO ACKNOWLEDGE AND
THANK EXECUTIVE, THE MAYOR'S
OFFICE WHO IS INTERESTED IN
WORKING ON THIS WITH US.
I THINK IT WILL BE A JOINT
EFFORT BETWEEN THE COUNCIL AND
THE MAYOR.
JUST LIKE WE HAVE WITH EVERY
OPPORTUNITY, MULTIPLE CHANCES
FOR FOLKS TO WEIGH IN AND
PROVIDE FEEDBACK.
I AM LOOKING FORWARD TO
SCHEDULING THE LEGAL BRIEFING.
>> MADAM CHAIR, MAY I MAKE A
POINT?
WHEN YOU COME BACK WITH MORE
INFORMATION, LIKE WHAT I ASKED
ABOUT WHEN MOTEL 6 WAS ASKING
ABOUT IMMIGRATION STATUS, CAN
YOU, WHEN YOU GO THROUGH THAT,
WE CAN TALK OFF-LINE A LITTLE
BIT MORE BUT WHEN YOU GO
THROUGH THE SEVEN PARTS
ADDRESSING WATCH COUNCILMEMBER
HERBOLD BROUGHT UP, SOME OF IT
IS NUANCED IN THOSE OPINIONS,
THOSE OTHER SIX PARTS, WHERE
YOU CAN SAY WE'VE DONE THIS
BEFORE AND IT'S FINE.
WE'VE DONE THIS OTHER PLACES
AND IT'S GOOD, THAT KIND OF
THING, NOT REAL DETAILED BUT WE
HAVE SOME KIND OF GUIDELINES
ABOUT WHERE WE HAVE SOME ROOM
TO SAY WE ARE SOLID ON THIS
ONE, BUT HOW DO WE BUILD ON IT
IN A WAY THAT DOESN'T VIOLATE
STATE LAW?
THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL.
>> EXCELLENT.
THANK YOU BOTH VERY MUCH.
THANK YOU, DAN.
AND AGAIN, THANKS FOR JOINING
US, HERBOLD . WE WILL WORK WITH
THE EXECUTIVES ON TIMING.
WE WILL MAKE SURE PEOPLE HAVE
THE FULL OVERVIEW OF WHEN WE
HOPE TO BRING THIS DISCUSSION
FORWARD.
THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER JUAREZ
FOR YOUR MEMO, AS WELL.
WE HAVE ONE MORE ITEM ON OUR
AGENDA.
THANKS FOR OUR FRIENDS FROM
SEATTLE LIGHT STICKING AROUND.
WE WILL HEAR FROM DEBRA SMITH,
KATIE INGLE, AND ERIC
McCONNAUGHHAY, IF YOU WILL JOIN
US AT THE TABLE.
READ INTO THE RECORD ITEM
NUMBER EIGHT.
>> AGENDA ITEM 8 31872, A
RESOLUTION APPROVING THE OPPOSED
BUDGET INCREASE OF THE SKAGIT
ENVIRONMENTAL ENDOWMENT
COMMISSION FOR FISCAL YEARS
2019 THROUGH 2023 FOR A
BRIEFING DISCUSSION AND
POSSIBLE VOTE.
>> WELCOME BACK.
THANK YOU SO MUCH.
LET'S HAVE YOU INTRODUCE
YOURSELF FOR THE RECORD.
>> I AM ERIC McCONAGHY, COUNCIL
CENTRAL STUFF.
>> KATE INGLE SCIENCE COUNCIL
WITH SEATTLE CITY LIGHT AND
U.S. SECRETARY FOR THE SKAGIT
ENDOWMENT COMMISSION.
>> DEBRA SMITH WITH SEATTLE
CITY LIGHT.
>> WE HAVE A POSSIBLE
RESOLUTION FOR CONSIDERATION
TODAY.
ERIC, DO YOU WANT TO GET US
KICKED OFF WITH AN OVERVIEW OR
DID YOU PREFER SEATTLE CITY
LIGHT?
>> I WOULD PREFER CITY LIGHT
HAVE THE INTRODUCTORY COMMENTS
BECAUSE THEY LIVE AND BREATHE
THIS, SO I WILL GO AHEAD AND DO
THAT.
>> THAT SOUNDS GOOD.
KATE OR DEBORAH, IF YOU HAVE
OPENING COMMENTS, WHY DON'T WE
DO THAT BEFORE THE MEMO AND THE
PRESENTATION?
>> I'M REALLY HERE JUST TO
ADVANCE THE SLIDES AND FOR
MORAL SUPPORT.
I KNOW KATE WILL DO AN
EXCELLENT JOB.
>> GOOD MORNING.
I HAVE TWO HATS AT THIS TABLE
TODAY.
I AM THE SCIENCE POLICY MANAGER
AT SEATTLE CITY LIGHT. I'VE
BEEN THERE ABOUT THREE AND HALF
YEARS NOW.
I'VE BEEN THE U.S. SECRETARY
FOR THE SKAGIT ENVIRONMENTAL
COMMISSION FOR ABOUT SIX
MONTHS.
IT'S VERY INTERESTING BEHIND
THE COMMISSION.
WE WILL GET INTO THAT TODAY TO
GIVE YOU SOME SENSE OF CONTEXT.
AS THE U.S. SECRETARY, I MIGHT
POINT OUT MY MAIN ROLE IS TO
PROVIDE ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPORT
TO THE COMMISSION IN DOING
THEIR BUSINESS.
MY ROLE IS NOT TO DEVELOP
BUDGETS OR APPROVE BUDGETS,
THINGS LIKE THAT.
MINE IS TO HELP SUPPORT THE
WORK OF THE COMMISSION.
TODAY, I AM PLEASED TO PROVIDE
THE BUDGET FRAMEWORK THAT'S
BEEN THE HARD WORK OF THE
COMMISSION.
THE FRAMEWORK IS THE ALLOCATION
OF THEIR BUDGET THAT THEY
APPROVED FOR THE NEXT FIVE
YEARS.
JUST ABOUT THREE MONTHS AGO.
>> BEFORE WE LAUNCH INTO THE
PRESENTATION, ERIC DID YOU WANT
TO MENTION ANYTHING IN YOUR
MEMO THAT YOU PROVIDED TO US ON
MARCH 18?
>> THE MEMORANDUM, I TRIED TO
DO MY BEST TO GIVE SOME HISTORY,
TO HOW WE COME TO BE HERE
TODAY.
FIVE YEARS AGO, THE COUNCIL DID
APPROVE A SIMILAR MEASURE FOR
THE BUDGET.
AT THE TIME, I ACKNOWLEDGED THE
BUDGETS WOULD BE COMING FROM
THE SKAGIT ENVIRONMENTAL
ENDOWMENT COMMISSION SEEC.
IS A CORRECT?
>> YES, IT IS.
>> WE ARE CONSISTENT WITH A
MISSION.
THOSE ARE PROBABLY THE
HIGHLIGHT.
IT'S A FASCINATING TOPIC.
IT GOES BACK REALLY DEEP INTO
THE HISTORY FOR CITY LIGHT.
IT GOES BACK TO THE CITY LIGHT
WORK ON CREATING THE NAME ON
THE SKAGIT RIVER.
A CONTROVERSY THAT INVOLVED
WHETHER OR NOT THE DAM SHOULD
BE TALLER, AND WHAT THAT WOULD
MEAN TO THE LANDS THAT WOULD BE
UPSTREAM OF THE DAM.
ACTIVISTS IN 1970 IN A VERY
FAMOUS INCIDENT PADDLED THE
RIVER, BROUGHT A LOT OF
ATTENTION TO IT.
I NOTED THE DATE BECAUSE IT WAS
THE YEAR THAT I WAS BORN.
THERE YOU GO.
THIS WAS JUST BY WAY OF
TOUCHING HIGHLIGHTS IN THE
MEMORANDUM TO SAY THE HISTORY
IS DEEP.
THE COMMISSION HAS BEEN DOING
THIS FOR A WHILE.
THE INITIAL ENDOWMENT BY
BRITISH COLUMBIA AND THE CITY
OF SEATTLE TO THE BUDGET FOR
SEEC HAPPENED IN THE EARLY 80s.
MOST OF THE BUDGET THAT YOU SEE
HERE COMES OUT OF THE PROCEEDS
FROM THAT ENDOWMENT WITH A
SMALL SUPPLEMENT EACH YEAR FROM
CITY LIGHT, AS WELL AS B.C.
HYDRO.
>> YOU WERE BORN IN 1984?
>> I WAS BORN IN 1970.
I HAVE A TWIN.
MY SISTER AND I WERE BORN IN
1970.
>> THANK YOU FOR SHARING THAT.
>> THANK YOU FOR THAT OVERVIEW.
>> FOLLOWING UP ON WHAT ERIC
SAID, I'M GOING TO BE
PRESENTING A LITTLE BIT OF A
HISTORICAL CONTEXT FOR THIS,
WHICH GOES BACK TO THE
CONSTRUCTION OF THE ROSS DAM IN
1937, AND HOW THAT LEADS INTO
THE TREATY AND AGREEMENT.
A DESCRIPTION OF HOW THAT TIES
TO THE COMMISSION, AND TO THE
ENVIRONMENTAL ENDOWMENT FUND
FOR WHICH THIS BUDGET FRAMEWORK
THAT YOU ARE GOING TO BE
LOOKING AT TODAY IS TIED.
NEXT SLIDE.
JUST TO GIVE YOU A BIT OF
CONTEXT ON THE LANDSCAPE, THE
AREA WE ARE TALKING ABOUT IS ON
THE B.C.
WASHINGTON STATE BORDER.
THIS AREA HERE FALLS UNDER KIND
OF THE PURVIEW OR
RESPONSIBILITY OF THE SEEC TO
DETERMINE ENVIRONMENTAL
INTEGRITY.
I DON'T HAVE A POINTER BUT YOU
SEE DIABLO, AND RIGHT ABOVE
DIABLO, YOU SEE ORANGE LINE
RIGHT THERE.
THAT'S WHERE THE ROSS DAM
CURRENTLY SITS.
ABOVE THAT IS ROSS LAKE, WHICH
HITTING FURTHER UP INTO CANADA
IS THE MAIN STEM OF THE UPPER
SKAGIT RIVER.
IT IS SURROUNDED BY PARKLAND
CURRENTLY, AND DOWN ON THE U.S.
SIDE, IT'S SURROUNDED BY A LOT
OF PARKLAND PROTECTED AREAS.
SOMETHING I MIGHT POINT OUT
ABOUT THIS AREA, THE UPPER
SKAGIT IN B.C.
THERE IS ONE OF THE PRIME AREAS
FOR THE THREATENED FEDERALLY
THREATENED BULL TROUT TO SPOHN.
IT HAS THE HIGHEST DENSITY OF
RAINBOW TROUT AND BULL TROUT
CONCENTRATED UP THERE.
REGIONALLY, IT HAS THE HIGHEST
DENSITIES OF A TROUT SPAWNING
IN BRITISH COLUMBIA, OREGON AND
WASHINGTON.
THAT'S PART OF WHAT MAKES THE
AREA VERY SPECIAL AND PROTECTED.
THERE ARE ALSO GRIZZLY BEARS IN
HERE THAT ARE PROTECTED AS WELL
AS NORTHERN SPOTTED OWLS AND SO
ON.
I THINK THAT'S IT FOR THAT MAP.
HISTORICAL CONTEXT.
THIS TIES WAY BACK TO THE
CONSTRUCTION OF THE ROSS DAM.
IT BEGAN CONSTRUCTION IN 1937.
IN 1940, IT WAS COMPLETED.
THE HEIGHT OF THE DAN WAS AT
1380 FEET ABOVE SEA LEVEL.
THE WAY THE DAM WAS DESIGNED,
YOU CAN SEE ON THESE PICTURES
ON THE LEFT, THERE IS OLD
PICTURES TO GIVE YOU A SENSE OF
HOW OLD THIS IS.
YOU CAN SEE ON THE BOTTOM LEFT,
THERE IS LATTICEWORK GOING UP
THE SIDE OF THE DAM.
I AM NO CONSTRUCTION EXPERT BUT
WHAT I CAN SAY IS IT WAS
DESIGNED FROM THE BEGINNING TO
BE STEPPED UP IN HEIGHT OVER
TIME.
IN 1949, THE DAM WAS RAISED UP
TO 16 -- 1615 FEET ABOVE SEA
LEVEL.
THIS WAS ABOVE THE ELEVATION OF
THE RIVER ON THE B.C.
SIDE, SO THERE WAS FLOODING OF
THE SKAGIT RIVER INTO B.C.
BY ABOUT A HALF-MILE.
ON THE RIGHT, THAT'S JUST YOU
GET A SENSE OF THE PERIMETER OF
ROSS RESERVOIR.
IT'S A DROUGHT DOWN THERE BUT
YOU CAN SEE THE FOOTPRINT OF
IT.
>> I WONDER WHY WE DIDN'T GET
THE DATES?
>> THEY ARE NOT ON THERE?
>> THAT LOOKS LIKE THE --
>> THERE WAS AN UPDATE TO THE
SLIDE DECK.
THAT WAS MAYBE PART OF IT.
>> LET ME HOLD ON SO I CAN
WRITE THE DATE.
>> I CAN GIVE YOU MY COPY.
>> THAT'S OKAY.
I CAN WRITE IT IN.
IT'S COMPLETELY DIFFERENT.
>> MY APOLOGIES.
>> IF WE GET UPDATED SLIDES, WE
WILL LET FOLKS KNOW SO THEY
HAVE THE EMAIL IN THE INBOX.
>> IN 1970, CITY LIGHT APPLIED
TO RAISE THE DAM ONCE AGAIN,
BUT THIS TIME TO 1725 FEET
ABOVE SEA LEVEL.
THIS WOULD HAVE FLOODED AN
ADDITIONAL 2000 ACRES AND TWO
BRITISH COLUMBIA, AND IT RAISED
A LOT OF ALARM AMONG
PARTICULARLY BRITISH COLUMBIAN
GOVERNMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL
GROUPS IN CANADA, AND TRIBES,
YES.
SO, AFTER YEARS OF CONTROVERSY,
WE CAN FLIP TO THE NEXT SLIDE,
IN 1984, I AM SKIPPING OVER A
LOT OF INTERESTING HISTORY
THERE TO GET TO THE POINT THAT
IN 1984, THE HIGH ROSS TREATY
BETWEEN THE U.S. AND CANADA
CAME TO BE, AND THE AGREEMENT
WITH SEATTLE CITY LIGHT BETWEEN
THE CITY OF SEATTLE, AND THE
B.C.
GOVERNMENT THAT IS TIED TO THAT
SETTLED THE CONTROVERSY.
AS PART OF THE AGREEMENT, THERE
WAS AN ESTABLISHMENT OF THE
SKAGIT ENVIRONMENTAL ENDOWMENT
FUND AND THE COMMISSION TO
ADMINISTER THIS FUND, AND THE
PURPOSES OF THIS WAS TO ENSURE
THE ENVIRONMENTAL INTEGRITY
PRIMARILY OF THAT AREA THAT I
SHOWED YOU IN THE MAP
PREVIOUSLY.
THE SKAGIT ENVIRONMENTAL
ENDOWMENT COMMISSION, AS I
MENTIONED, ADMINISTERS THE
ENDOWMENT FUND.
IT'S AN INTERNATIONAL
COMMISSION THAT CONSISTS OF
EIGHT COMMISSINERS APPOINTED
BY THE MAYOR OF SEATTLE AND
EIGHT BY THE PREMIER OF BRITISH
COLUMBIA.
EACH COMMISSIONER SERVES A FOUR-
YEAR TERM AND THEY ARE ON A
STAGGERED BASIS.
>> QUESTION.
SO THE EIGHT COMMISSIONERS
APPOINTED BY THE MAYOR OF
SEATTLE.
FOR THE EIGHT?
BY THE CITY OF SEATTLE?
>> LET'S SEE.
WE'VE GOT JIM DAVIS --
>> GIVE ME THE NAMES OFF-LINE?
IS THERE TRIBAL FOLK ON THAT
ONE?
>> NO.
THIS HAS BEEN UNDER DISCUSSION
WITH THE COMMISSION AS A SIDE
POINT.
>> OKAY.
CAN WE GET A LIST OF THE EIGHT
COMMISSIONERS AND THEIR TERMS?
>> YES.
>> THANK YOU.
>> ON THE CENTRAL STAFF MEMO,
úTHERE IS A LINK TO THE SEEC
PAGE.
>> YOU PUT THAT IN YOUR MEMO?
>> NOT THEIR BIOS BUT A LINK IN
THE FOOTNOTE.
THE FOOTNOTE ABOUT A FOOTNOTE.
I AM REALLY SCORING POINTS WITH
YOU TODAY, COUNCILMEMBER, I CAN
TELL.
>> ERIC, WHAT YEAR WERE THEY
ALL BORN?
I'M JUST KIDDING.
>> WHAT DISTRICTS DO THEY LIVE
IN?
>> THE REASON I ASK IS BECAUSE
I'M GOING TO GET ASKED.
>> AM IT'S BEEN REALLY
IMPORTANT TO YOU.
TRIBES HAVE BEEN INVOLVED BUT
THEY DON'T GET RECOGNIZED.
>> AND TRIBES GET TIRED OF
SUING EVERYBODY AND THEIR
BROTHER, SO SOMETIMES I JUST
LIKE KNOWING.
THANK YOU, CHAIRWOMAN.
>> ANOTHER POINT I MIGHT BRING
UP ABOUT THE COMMISSION IS THAT
DOES NOT MANAGE LAND DIRECTLY
BUT IT WORKS THROUGH GOVERNMENT
LAND AGENCIES ON BOTH SIDES OF
THE BORDER.
NEXT SLIDE?
SO THE ENDOWMENT FUND GOT
SEVERAL MAIN PURPOSES LISTED
HERE.
IT'S ALL ORIENTED AROUND
CONSERVATION AND PROTECTION OF
THE AREA I MENTIONED IN THE
UPPER SKAGIT, AS WELL AS
EDUCATION AND SUPPORTING
RECREATIONAL PURPOSES.
IT'S TO CONSERVE AND DETECT
WILDERNESS AND WILD HABITAT,
ENHANCE RECREATIONAL
OPPORTUNITIES, THE CHOIR
MINERAL AND TIMBER RIGHTS
CONSISTENT WITH RECREATIONAL
PURPOSES, CONDUCT STUDIES OF
FEASIBILITY AND PLAN FOR AND
CONSTRUCT HIKING TRAILS,
FOOTBRIDGES, AND INTERPRETIVE
DISPLAYS, ETC.
THE COMMISSION ORGANIZED THE
BUDGET INTO FOUR MAIN PROGRAM
SPECIFIC AREAS, AND
HISTORICALLY IT HAS BEEN
ORGANIZED THIS WAY.
THERE IS WATERSHED PROJECTS
WITH INTEGRITY, EDUCATION,
RECREATION AND ECOSYSTEM
SCIENCE.
THEN THEY HAVE CROSS PROGRAM
GOALS THAT ARE NOT TIED TO A
SPECIFIC PROJECTS, BUT ARE IN
THE INTEREST OF THE COMMISSION
TO TRY TO INTEGRATE INDIGENOUS
ENGAGEMENT AND WORK TOWARDS
GETTING MORE DIVERSITY AND
ADDRESSING CLIMATE CHANGE, AS
WELL.
NEXT.
HERE ARE A LIST OF THE
PARTNERS, WHAT THEY CALL
PARTNERS THAT THE COMMISSION
WORKS WITH.
THE PARTNERS ARE BASICALLY THE
ORGANIZATION THAT THE
COMMISSION PROVIDES FUNDING TO.
AND YOU CAN SEE A LIST OF THEM
THERE.
THERE IS A COMBINATION OF U.S.
AND CANADA PARTNERS PRIMARILY
WITH THE GOVERNMENT AND WITH
NONPROFIT ORGANIZATIONS THAT
THEY WORK WITH.
BEFORE YOU, YOU HAVE THE FIVE-
YEAR BUDGET ALLOCATION THAT THE
COMMISSION DEVELOPED OVER A
LABORIOUS STRATEGIC PLANNING
PROCESS THIS YEAR.
I MIGHT MENTION THAT THE
COMMISSION MEETS SEVERAL TIMES
A YEAR TO ADMINISTER THIS FUND
BY REVIEWING PROJECT PROPOSALS,
MONITORING CONTRACTS AND
UNDRESSING ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES
IN THE UPPER SKAGIT.
ANOTHER POINT IS THIS FUND IS
MANAGED SEPARATELY FROM THE
CITY BUDGET.
IT'S NOT THE CITY BUDGET.
THE COMMISSION'S BUDGET
FRAMEWORK WAS APPROVED, BUT
EVEN THOUGH IT'S NOT THE CITY
BUDGET, THE BUDGET NEEDS TO BE
APPROVED BY THE PROVINCE OF
BRITISH COLUMBIA, AS WELL AS
THE SEATTLE CITY COUNCIL.
AS SUCH, THE BUDGET FRAMEWORK
HAS BEEN PRESENTED TO CITY
COUNCIL EACH TIME IT'S BEEN
REVISED IN THE PAST.
IT USED TO OCCUR ANNUALLY FOR
COUNCIL UNTIL 2014, AND THAT
IT WAS EXTENDED TO A FIVE-YEAR
PROCESS TO KIND OF DECREASE THE
LABOR INTENSITY OF DOING IT
EVERY YEAR.
THIS IS THE SECOND TIME WE ARE
SEEKING APPROVAL FOR THE BUDGET
FRAMEWORK FOR A FIVE-YEAR
BUDGET.
>> YOU HAVE THEM ALL LISTED
WHERE THE MONEY GOES.
YOU HAVE A LITTLE OVER 1
MILLION FOR EDUCATION.
WHAT DOES THAT MEAN?
WHAT DOES THAT LOOK LIKE?
>> EDUCATION FUNDING IS
TYPICALLY -- AND THIS AGAIN IS
HISTORICALLY HOW THEY'VE DONE IT
BUT I HAVE BEEN GETTING
FAMILIARIZED WITH IN MY ROLE,
BUT THERE IS FUNDING THAT GOES
TO LIKE THE STUDENT
CONSERVATION ASSOCIATION, NORTH
CASCADES TO TOOT, AND THE LIKE
TO SUPPORT THEIR PROGRAMS.
THEY ALSO SUPPORT DEVELOPMENT
OF INTERPRETIVE DISPLAYS,
THINGS LIKE THAT.
>> I THINK WE TALKED ABOUT THIS
LAST YEAR WHEN YOU WERE HERE,
ABOUT HOW THIS TIES IN WITH
CLIMATE CHANGE AND THE EFFORTS
THAT WERE -- THAT WE ARE TRYING
TO MAKE STATEWIDE.
CAN YOU DIVE INTO THAT?
>> THE COMMISSION HAS -- ONE OF
THE'S CROSS PROGRAM GOALS THAT
I MENTIONED IS TO ADDRESS
CLIMATE CHANGE, SO THEY'VE BEEN
DOING SOME WATER QUALITY
MONITORING, INCLUDING
TEMPERATURE MONITORING IN THE
RESERVOIRS.
THEY'VE ALSO BEEN PAYING
ATTENTION TO THE SEDIMENTATION
GOING INTO THE AREA FROM
SURROUNDING AREAS.
I THINK THOSE ARE PROBABLY THE
TWO PRIMARY AREAS I CAN THINK
OF OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD THEY
CURRENTLY FUND THAT ADDRESS
THAT.
LET'S SEE.
WHERE WAS I? THIS DISTRIBUTION
OF FUNDS, I MIGHT POINT OUT,
CLOSELY MATCHES THE PERCENTAGE
DISTRIBUTION THEY'VE HAD IN THE
PAST.
THEY TEND TO DO THEIR BUSINESS
IN A WAY THAT KIND OF FOLLOWS A
PATTERN OF WHAT THEY'VE DONE IN
THE PAST THAT THEY MODIFY EACH
YEAR.
IT HAS WORKED FOR THEM.
BUT THE COMMISSION ALWAYS
MAINTAINS THE FLEXIBILITY TO
ADJUST THE DISTRIBUTION OF
THESE FUNDS.
THROUGHOUT THE LIFE OF THE
STRATEGIC PLAN, SO THE DOLLAR
AMOUNTS YOU SEE THERE BY THE
AND OF THE PROCESS WILL LIKELY
BE SHIFTED AROUND BASED ON
PERHAPS LACK OF PERFORMANCE BY
A PROJECT PARTNER, THEIR ABILITY
TO COME UP WITH MATCHING FUNDS,
OR A GOVERNMENT SHUTDOWN THAT
COULD INTERFERE WITH THEIR
ABILITY TO EXECUTE THE WORK.
ALSO, THERE IS OPPORTUNITY
FUNDS AVAILABLE IN HERE FOR
ITEMS THAT THE COMMISSION
HADN'T ANTICIPATED THAT MEET
THE COMMISSION'S NEEDS THAT
THEY WANT TO HAVE AN
OPPORTUNITY TO GO AFTER.
THE WATERSHED INTEGRITY
CONTINGENCY FUND OF $1 MILLION
AT THE END IS NOTABLE.
THAT'S A LARGE CONTINGENCY THEY
SET ASIDE FOR BIG ITEMS LIKE
MINERAL RIGHTS ACQUISITION
OPPORTUNITIES, FOR EXAMPLE.
IF THEY GET THE OPPORTUNITY TO
DO THAT, THEY HAVE MONEY SET
ASIDE TO DO THAT.
>> ON THE LAST ONE, HOW OFTEN
-- I AM GUESSING IF WE ARE
LOOKING AT PHONING TO
REESTABLISH THE FRAMEWORK
BUDGET APPROVAL, WHAT IN THE
PAST HAS THE WATERSHED
INTEGRITY CONTINGENCY BEEN AND
HAS IT BEEN USED?
>> I CAN'T ANSWER THAT QUESTION
OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD, WHETHER
THEY'VE USED THE WATERSHED
CONTINGENCY FUND.
HAVING BEEN RECENTLY PICKED UP
THIS ROLE WITH THE COMMISSION,
I CAN'T SPEAK TO THAT BUT I CAN
FIND OUT.
>> THIS IS MY CONCERN BESIDES
NOT KNOWING WHERE SOME OF THE
EDUCATIONAL GOES, BUT I JUST
DON'T WANT TO RUBBERSTAMP
SOMETHING WHERE YOU ARE ROLLING
OVER $1 MILLION EVERY FIVE
YEARS, I DON'T KNOW WHERE IT'S
GOING AND WE HAVE TO APPROVE
THIS, AND I DON'T HAVE A LOT OF
INFORMATION BECAUSE WE HAVE TO
APPROVE THIS AT COUNCIL,
ESPECIALLY IN LIGHT OF WHAT
COUNCILMEMBER BAGSHAW JUST
úRAISED WITH ISSUES THAT WE GET
ADDRESSED ABOUT CLIMATE
CHANGE, AND ALL THE BILLS
PENDING IN OLYMPIA AND STUFF
WE'RE TRYING TO DO WITH THE
BUDGET.
I SAW AN INTERESTING TERM ON
NPR ABOUT WATER POVERTY THIS
MORNING, SO WHEN I SEE THIS
LIST, THAT'S FINE BUT IT
DOESN'T TELL ME WHERE
EVERYTHING IS GOING.
WHEN WE LOOK AT BUDGET, WHEN WE
ALLOCATE AND WE APPROVE,
USUALLY, WE HAVE SOMETHING THAT
TELLS US WHERE IT IS GOING.
EVERY TIME I SEE A CONTINUED
REFUND, I ASK WHEN IS THE LAST
TIME YOU USED IT, AND IS IT
ALWAYS $1 MILLION OR DID YOU
ROLL IT OVER?
IT WOULD BE HELPFUL TO KNOW
THAT IN MISSION.
I AM NOT TRYING TO PUT YOU ON
THE SPOT.
I'M JUST SAYING A PERSON HAS TO
VOTE ON THIS.
A LITTLE MORE INFORMATION WOULD
BE HELPFUL.
>> HOW THEY SPEND MONEY, THE
COMMISSION IS RESPONSIBLE FOR
ALLOCATING THE BUDGET, AND THEY
ENSURE THAT THE BUDGET IS THE
INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION, SO
THEY GATHERED TOGETHER AT LEAST
QUARTERLY TO DEVELOP PLANS FOR
HOW THEY ARE GOING TO SPEND THE
MONEY, SO THE MONEY IS
ALLOCATED IN THIS GENERAL WAY
AT THE BEGINNING OF THE
STRATEGIC PLANNING PROCESS, BUT
THEN THEY RECEIVE PROPOSALS AND
WORK WITH PARTNERS TO USE THESE
FUNDS IN THE MANNER THAT IS
LAID OUT HERE TO SUPPORT THE
WORK OF THE COMMISSION, SO YOU
WON'T GET SPECIFIC PROJECTS AT
THIS STAGE TIED TO THESE
AMOUNTS OF MONEY.
>> I THINK WHAT COUNCILMEMBER
JUAREZ IS ASKING, AND I THINK
WE COULD PROBABLY GET THIS,
AND WHO HAD YOUR ROLE BEFORE?
IF ONLY --
>> SCOTT POWELL.
>> THERE IS A CHANGE.
KATE HAS ONLY BEEN IN THIS ROLE
FOR SIX MONTHS.
I DO THINK WE COULD PROBABLY GO
BACK AND SAY IF THOSE
ALLOCATIONS ARE CONSISTENT WITH
WHAT HAS BEEN IN THE PAST, DID
THE $1 MILLION, OR THEREABOUTS,
FROM THE LAST FIVE YEAR CYCLE,
HOW WERE THOSE MONIES USED?
I THINK THAT'S REALLY WHAT
YOU'RE ASKING
>> YEAH, THANK YOU.
ONLY BECAUSE EVEN IF IT'S JUST
A PIE CHART.
EVEN IF IT'S JUST A PIE CHART.
I JUST -- THAT'S JUST HELPFUL.
KNOWING WHO THE BOARD MEMBERS
ARE, WHO'S MAKING THE DECISIONS,
AND THEN HOW THAT ALIGNS WITH
HOW WE ARE HANDLING
ENVIRONMENTAL AND WATERSHED
ISSUES AT THIS TABLE.
>> I THINK THE OUTCOMES ARE
WHAT YOU ARE LOOKING FOR.
>> I DON'T KNOW BECAUSE IT
DOESN'T TELL ME.
IT JUST SAYS WE NEED $4
MILLION, AND THIS IS WHAT WE
DOING.
I HAVE NO BACK STORY, OR
NARRATIVE IN WHICH TO SAY YOU
SPENT THIS MONEY IN EDUCATION.
HERE IS A PIE CHART FOR 40% WENT
TO CLIMATE CHANGE.
I DON'T KNOW.
THAT'S MY POINT.
>> DO YOU THINK WE COULD PUT
TOGETHER A PIE CHART FROM THE
FIVE YEARS AGO?
IT MAY NOT BE FULLY COMPLETE,
BUT SOMETHING THAT KIND OF
SHOWS BASED ON THE AMOUNT OF
THE 2014 BUDGET, HOW HAVE THOSE
FUNDS BEEN SPENT, ROUGHLY?
>> YES, WE CAN.
THERE SHOULD HAVE BEEN AN
ANNUAL REPORT.
I'M NOT SURE WHO ENDS UP
RECEIVING THE ANNUAL REPORT.
DID COUNCIL RECEIVE THE ANNUAL
REPORT THAT DESCRIBES WHAT THE
BUDGET WAS SENT ON THE PAST
YEAR?
>> WE WON'T READ THE ANNUAL
REPORT BUT I WILL LOOK AT A PIE
CHART.
>> WE WILL GET TO A PIE CHART
TOGETHER WITH THE LIST OF THE
MAYOR APPOINTEES FROM THE U.S.
SIDE AND WAS THERE A THIRD ITEM?
I THINK THE PIE CHART WILL TALK
ABOUT OUTCOMES BECAUSE OF ITS
IN THE SAME KIND OF AUKETT, THE
UNALLOCATED FUNDS SHOULD SHOW
IN A MORE DESCRIPTIVE WAY.
>> I THINK WHERE COUNCILMEMBER
JUAREZ IS GOING, BECAUSE WE
REALLY LOVE THE HISTORY.
THAT'S GREAT, BUT IF WE'RE
SPENDING THIS MONEY, WHAT'S
GETTING IMPROVED?
AND ALSO, THERE SEVEN FUNDING
PROJECTS.
I DON'T KNOW IF THERE USED TO
BE SIX, EIGHT OR 10.
IF THIS IS AN EXPANSION, DID
YOU ADD MORE?
>> ISN'T IT SEVEN?
>> THESE ARE PROGRAM AREAS THAT
HAD HISTORICALLY.
>> IF THEY ARE PROGRAM AREAS
THEY HAVE HAD HISTORICALLY,
MAYBE THERE ARE OTHER ISSUES WE
WOULD LIKE TO SEE ADDRESSED OR
AS YOU SAID, A NEW BUCKET, OR
SOMETHING INSTEAD OF WE'VE BEEN
USING THESE SEVEN SUBJECTS FOR
THE LAST 18 YEARS.
>> CAN I CONFIRM ALSO, THE
AMOUNT OF MONEY WE ARE TALKING
ABOUT HERE, THESE ARE NOT CITY
DOLLARS.
>> THAT'S CORRECT.
>> THAT WE DO HAVE JURISDICTION
OVER APPROVING THE BUDGET?
>> THE TREATY PROVIDED THAT
B.C.
AND THE CITY COUNCIL WOULD
REVIEW AND APPROVE THESE
BUDGETS.
>> OKAY.
I THINK COUNCILMEMBER JUAREZ'S
POINT IS WELL TAKEN.
I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO SEE THE
ANNUAL REPORT, EVEN THOUGH WE
MAY NOT READ THE WHOLE THING.
A PIE CHART, I THINK WOULD BE A
NICE COMPARISON TO ITEM NUMBER
FIVE, SO WE CAN KIND OF DO THE
APPLES TO APPLES, AND THEN MY
STAFF IS COMING UP RIGHT NOW
WITH THE APPOINTEE LIST, SO WE
SHOULD BE ABLE TO SEE THAT.
IT'S JUST A QUESTION ON TIMING.
IF WE DON'T TAKE ACTION TODAY,
IS THERE TIME IF WE HAD TWO
MORE WEEKS TO LOOK AT THIS, IF
WE PUT THIS UP FOR VOTE ON
APRIL 4, OUR NEXT COMMITTEE
MEETING, HOW WOULD THAT TIMING
WORK OUT?
>> THE END OF THE FISCAL YEAR
FOR THE COMMISSION IS THE END
OF THIS MONTH.
SO WE WOULD NEED APPROVAL BY
THE END OF THE MONTH FOR THE
PARTNERS TO BEGIN THE WORK THAT
THEY NEED TO START THEIR FISCAL
YEAR ON APRIL 1.
>> WHAT MIGHT BE HELPFUL FOR
KATE IS JUST TO SHARE SOME
INFORMATION ABOUT HOW THIS
BUDGET IS FUNDED BY THE PARTNERS
UNDER THE TREATY.
CAN YOU DO THAT?
>> YES.
UDER THE TREATY, THIS ISN'T A
DECISION THAT WE MAKE EVERY
YEAR.
THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WAS
ESTABLISHED IN 1984.
SEATTLE CITY LIGHT CONTRIBUTES
MONEY INTO THE ENDOWMENT FUND.
THIS PAST YEAR, ABOUT $130,000,
I BELIEVE.
THERE IS A FORMULA ASSOCIATED
WITH THAT WHICH I WOULD NEED
SOMEONE TO COME EXPLAIN.
THE B.C.
SIDE ALSO CONTRIBUTES TO THE
FUND.
THERE IS ABOUT $11 MILLION IN
THIS FUND.
IT'S KEPT IN A BANK IN CANADA.
THE PRINCIPAL IS NOT TAPPED
INTO FOR EXPENDITURES TOWARD
SUPPORTING THE WORK OF THE
COMMISSION.
IT COMES OFF OF THE INTEREST
GAINED.
THE FUND IS DONE VERY WELL.
IT HAS BEEN MANAGED WELL BY THE
BANK.
I THINK WE ARE AT ABOUT 6%
INTEREST RATE RIGHT NOW ON THE
FUND.
THIS IS ALL INTEREST FROM THAT
ENDOWMENT FUND THAT WAS
ESTABLISHED IN 1984, IN B.C.
AND SEATTLE CONTRIBUTED AS I
DESCRIBED EACH YEAR.
>> JUST HYPOTHETICAL WHAT IF WE
VOTED NO?
>> WE HAVEN'T SEEN THAT HAPPEN
SINCE THE TIME THIS STARTED, SO
I CAN'T EXPLAIN ABOUT THE
DETAILS OF WHAT THE
IMPLICATIONS WOULD BE TO THE
COMMISSION'S WORK IF SEATTLE
STEPPED OUT AND SAID NO.
>> I DON'T KNOW, AND I THINK
PROBABLY WHAT WE NEED TO TAKE A
LOOK AT IS SOME OF THE
QUESTIONS YOU'VE ASKED, MAYBE
GET COVERED IN THE AGREEMENT,
THE TREATY ITSELF.
IN TERMS OF THE DISCUSSION THAT
THE APPROVING BODIES HAVE OVER
HOW FUNDS ARE DISTRIBUTED OR
USED, AS WELL AS KIND OF WHAT
HAPPENS IF THE BUDGET ISN'T
APPROVED BY MARCH 31, I AM
GUESSING THOSE ARE PROBABLY THE
ITEMS COVERED IN THE TREATY.
I THINK WE PROBABLY NEED TO GO
BACK AND TAKE A LOOK AT THAT.
WE CAN ALSO PROVIDE THAT
INFORMATION.
I'M NOT SURE.
THE FUNDING FROM A CITY LIGHT
PERSPECTIVE, WHICH YOU ALREADY
APPROVED THE OF THE CITY LIGHT
BUDGET PROCESS WAS THIS
$135,000.
YOU WOULD HAVE APPROVED A 10
YEAR BUDGET.
IT'S NOT A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT
OF FUNDS.
I DON'T BELIEVE IT'S INTENDED
BY ANY MEANS TO BE A RUBBER
STAMPING EXERCISE, BUT IT'S NOT
A FUNDING DECISION YOU'RE
MAKING TODAY BECAUSE THE
FUNDING HAPPENS SEPARATELY AND
IT'S BY THIS EXISTING, LONG-
STANDING AGREEMENT.
>> WHY DO YOU NEED OUR APPROVAL
THEN?
>> IT'S PART OF THE TREATY
PROCESS?
WE WERE TALKING ABOUT IT ON THE
WAY OVER HERE.
I WAS HEARING WHEN I WORKED AT
E WEBB, THERE WAS A THING LIKE
THAT THAT HAD TO DO WITH TROJAN
NUCLEAR PLANT AND EVERY YEAR,
THE COUNCIL HAD TO APPROVE A
BUDGET AND GET THERE WERE NO
FISCAL IMPACT FOR THE UTILITY.
IT WAS ALWAYS YOU KNOW SOMEHOW
A RELIC, BUT I THINK IT IS
WORTH DIGGING INTO AND
UNDERSTANDING WHAT IS THE
AUTHORITY THAT WE HAVE TO HELP
úDIRECT FUNDS, PARTICULARLY AS
THINGS CHANGE.
I'M JUST MAKING THIS UP, BUT
I'M GUESSING THAT THE
AUTHORITIES IN THE APPOINTMENT
OF THE EIGHT PEOPLE, NOT IN THE
PARTICULARS, SO THOSE EIGHT
FOLKS THAT ARE APPOINTED BY THE
MAYOR, AND I ASSUME COME
THROUGH THIS BODY, AND I DON'T
KNOW IF THERE IS A
CONFIRMATION, OKAY SO THE EIGHT
PEOPLE THAT ARE APPOINTED BY
THE MAYOR ARE SETTING THE
FUNDING PRIORITIES FOR THE SEEK
SEEC TOGETHER WITH THEIR B.C.
COUNTERPARTS.
THAT WOULD BE MY ASSUMPTION.
>> I HAVE TWO FOLLOW UP
QUESTIONS.
I CAN'T REMEMBER THE TITLE, BUT
WE HAD THE SAME ISSUE COME UP
AND I WANT TO SAY IT'S THE
CLEAN AIR COMMISSION SOMETHING
SOMETHING THAT THE MAYOR SITS
ON OR HAS AN APPOINTEE THAT
MAKES DECISIONS, WHEN WE ARE
LOOKING AT THE NATURAL GAS
PLANT IN TACOMA ON THE TIE
FLAT.
THAT CAME UP ABOUT WHO'S ON THE
COMMISSION, WHO REPRESENT THE
CITY OF SEATTLE, WHOSE MAKING
THE DECISIONS ABOUT PUTTING THE
PLANT THERE, WHO MAKES THE
DECISIONS, WHERE DO WE GET THE
MONEY, WHO DECIDES THAT, SO WE
FOUND ALL THAT STUFF OUT.
I THINK I'M KIND OF GOING DOWN
THE SAME RABBIT HOLE HERE, BUT
THE OTHER ISSUE IS I AM
GUESSING THERE ARE OTHER CITIES
AND MUNICIPALITIES, PARTIES,
AND SIGNATORIES TO THIS TREATY,
IN WHICH THEY WOULD HAVE TO BE
SEEKING THE SAME MUNICIPAL
APPROVAL, NO?
>> I DON'T BELIEVE SO.
THE THING THAT'S REALLY
INTERESTING ABOUT THIS TREATY
IS IT IS PINNED ON THE ROSS DAM
NOT GOING HIGHER.
WHEN WE WERE NEGOTIATING, THE
CITY OF SEATTLE, CITY LIGHTS
SAID WE NEED THIS POWER.
IF WE DON'T RAISE THE DAM, HOW
ARE WE GOING TO GET THERE?
I DON'T MEAN TO SOUND FLIPPANT
BUT THAT'S A TON OF WORK, RIGHT?
THE IDEA WAS B.C.
POWER CAN PROVIDE THAT KIND OF
HYDRO.
WE WILL HAVE AT AN APPROPRIATE
RATE CONSISTENT THROUGH TIME.
AND A PERCENTAGE OF THE POWER
CITY LIGHT WILL PURCHASE FROM
B.C.
HYDRO NO MORE THAN A CERTAIN
AMOUNT PER YEAR WILL BE SET
ASIDE.
THERE IS A LITTLE BIT OF MONEY
SUPPLEMENTED EACH YEAR.
SO THE THING THAT STICKS THIS
WHOLE THING TOGETHER IS THE
THIRD PARTIES INVOLVED WHICH IS
B.C.
HYDRO, WHICH IS A CROWN
OPERATION, AND THE CITY OF
SEATTLE BECAUSE CITY LIGHTS IS
PART OF THE CITY OF SEATTLE.
THOSE OF THE PARTIES APPROVING
THIS BUDGET BECAUSE THEY'VE GOT
A STAKE IN THIS THING.
I THINK THE COMMISSION IS SET
UP.
PLEASE, CORRECT ME IF I AM
BEING TOO GENERAL.
THE COMMISSION AND THE FUND IS
SET UP TO SAY THIS WAS ALL
ABOUT THE ENVIRONMENT, RIGHT?
WE OUGHT TO HAVE SOME SAY IN
THE BUDGET.
OUT TO HAVE SOME SAY APPOINTING
THOSE FOLKS.
>> I MIGHT POINT OUT, THE
TREATY IS BETWEEN THE U.S. AND
CANADA, SIGNED BY THE PRESIDENT
OF THE UNITED STATES.
THE AGREEMENT IS TIED TO THE
TREATY.
IT'S A PIECE OF THE TREATY.
AND DESIGNED BY THE CITY OF
SEATTLE.
AND THE PREMIER OF BRITISH
COLUMBIA.
>> LET ME STOP YOU THERE.
I GET THAT.
>> NOT OTHER CITIES.
>> I GOT THAT.
I KNOW WHAT A TREATY IS BEING A
NATIVE AMERICAN, REPRESENTING
TRIBES FOR 30 YEARS.
I GET THAT.
WHAT I AM GETTING IS I FEEL
LIKE THEN WHY ARE WE BOTHERING
IF IT DOESN'T MATTER?
IF THEY'RE GOING TO DO IT
ANYWAY, DON'T KNOW WHAT THE
DEADLINE IS FOR?
>> IT'S REQUIRED BY THE TREATY.
THAT THE BUDGET FRAMEWORK BE
APPROVED BY THE B.C.
GOVERNMENT AND BY THE SEATTLE
CITY COUNCIL.
>> WHAT I'M SAYING BACK IS
THERE ARE NO CONSEQUENCES.
I DON'T CARE WHAT THE TREATY
SAYS.
THERE ARE NO CONSEQUENCES IF WE
DON'T.
THAT'S MY POINT.
NOTHING IS GOING TO HAPPEN.
>> THE AGREEMENT IS SILENT ON
THAT PIECE.
IF SOMEONE DOESN'T APPROVE ON
WHAT HAPPENS.
>> I THINK THE MOST APPROPRIATE
THING FOR ME TO DO IS TAKE
RESPONSIBILITY FOR NOT HAVING
ANTICIPATED THAT QUESTION.
LET ME DIG INTO THAT.
I WILL WORK WITH CITY LIGHT AND
FIND A WAY TO ANSWER THAT
QUESTION.
MY GUESS IS IT HASN'T HAPPENED
YET AND PROBABLY THE RESPONSE
OF THE COMMISSION OF THIS
COUNCIL SAID WE DON'T HAVE
ENOUGH INFORMATION, WE DON'T
LIKE IT, THEY WOULD HAVE TO
TAKE ANOTHER CRACK AT IT.
I THINK PRACTICALLY SPEAKING, I
DON'T THINK THEY WOULD FORGE
AHEAD BECAUSE THERE HASN'T
HAPPENED.
WE CAN LOOK AT THE AGREEMENT
ITSELF AND SEE WHAT IT SAYS.
AND I DO ANYTHING, IS THIS AN
AGREEMENT THAT BUILDS IN A
FORMAL STEP, OR IS THERE
SOMETHING MORE MEANINGFUL?
AND WE CAN ANSWER SOME OF THE
OTHER QUESTIONS YOU BROUGHT UP.
FOR EVERYBODY HERE, I AM SORRY
THAT I DIDN'T ANTICIPATE THOSE
THINGS TO HELP PROPEL THIS
CONVERSATION FORWARD.
>> THAT'S OKAY.
>> I JUST WANT TO UNDERSCORE I
THINK COUNCILMEMBER JUAREZ'S
POINTS ARE WELL TAKEN.
FOR EXAMPLE, WE KNOW IT IS
PART OF OUR PROCESS HERE, AS
THE COMMITTEE THAT HAS
OVERSIGHT OVER SEATTLE CITY
LIGHT TO LOOK AT YOUR STRATEGIC
PLAN AND YOUR SPENDING PLAN FOR
FIVE YEARS, BUT WE ALSO KNOW WE
HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO ASK
QUESTIONS, ADD THINGS TO THAT,
YOU KNOW, PROVIDE OUR INPUT AND
IDEALLY A DIRECTION IF THERE IS
SOMETHING WE SEE THAT LOOKS
LIKE IT MIGHT BE MISSING AN
ELEMENT.
I GET THAT WE ARE NOT THE FULL
PURSE STRING HOLDERS ON THIS,
BUT GIVEN THAT WE DO HAVE SOME
ELEMENT OF OVERSIGHT, IT
APPEARS, IT WOULD BE HELPFUL TO
HAVE A BETTER UNDERSTANDING OF
WHAT RESPONSIBILITIES THIS BODY
DOES HAVE. I ACTUALLY DON'T
REMEMBER GETTING BRIEFED ON
THIS LAST YEAR.
>> IT WAS FIVE YEARS AGO.
>> SO WE ONLY GET BRIEFED --
BUT WE DON'T HAVE AN ANNUAL
BRIEFING?
>> NO.
YOU ARE TO RECEIVE AN ANNUAL
REPORT EVERY YEAR FROM THE
COMMISSION.
PRODUCED BY THE COMMISSION.
>> AND I AM HEARING IN AN
ONGOING WAY, YOU WOULD PROBABLY
LIKE TO HAVE A BRIEFING ON THE
REPORT BUT WE CAN'T TYPE THAT
UP LATER.
>> THAT SOUNDS GOOD.
I WANT TO PROVIDE FOR THE
COMMITTEE, AT LEAST THE PHOTOS
PROVIDED ON THE LINK THAT YOU
PROVIDED.
I CAN GUESS WHERE WE ARE GOING
TO SEE A GLARING GAP IN THE
TYPE OF REPRESENTATION THAT WE
WOULD DESIRE TO SEE ON SUCH A
FORWARD.
FIRST OF ALL, WE SHOULD NOTE
THERE APPEARS TO BE AT LEAST
ONE COMMISSIONER THAT IS VACANT
ON THE U.S. SIDE.
ON BOTH SIDES.
THIS ONE JUST HAS A MISSING
SIGNATURE.
ONE MISSING ON THE CANADIAN
SIDE, AS WELL.
I THINK TO COUNCILMEMBER
JUAREZ'S POINT, WHAT WE DON'T
SEE IS SPECIFICALLY NATIVE
AMERICAN REPRESENTATION.
WE DON'T SEE COMMUNITIES OF
COLOR WELL REPRESENTED.
IT LOOKS LIKE AT LEAST ON THE
CANADIAN SIDE, WE SEE A FEW
MORE WOMEN ACTUALLY EQUAL
BALANCED BETWEEN WOMEN AND MEN,
GENDER BALANCE, BUT I THINK
THIS IS SOMETHING, NOW THAT IT
HAS BEEN PUT ON OUR RADAR,
WE'RE DEFINITELY GOING TO WANT
TO KNOW MORE ABOUT THE
EXPIRATION OF THE TERMS, THE
REQUIREMENTS FOR THESE
POSITIONS, AND POTENTIALLY, I
WOULD SUGGEST WORKING WITH THE
MAYOR'S OFFICE ON THIS FINAL
APPOINTMENT SPOT.
>> I WANT TO BE ON THEIR PICK
>> I WOULD LOVE FOR YOU TO BE
ON THEIR PICK
>> JUST KIDDING.
WE DON'T EVEN KNOW WHERE THEY
ARE FROM.
>> WHAT DOES THE COMMITTEE
DESIRE HERE?
I UNDERSTAND YOUR FISCAL YEAR
ENDS ON 4-1. I AM WONDERING IF
THERE IS A HUGE DIFFERENCE
BETWEEN A 1 AND 4 DATE? IF
THERE ISN'T A THREE-DAY CRISIS
THAT IS CREATED BY US WAITING,
I AM WONDERING WHAT THE
COMMITTEE DESIRES.
>> HERE IS WHAT I AM THINKING.
I WANT THE ANSWERS TO ALL THESE
QUESTIONS, BUT I THINK EVEN
WHEN WE HAVE THOSE ANSWERS TO
THE QUESTIONS, WE ARE GOING TO
MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS . MAYBE,
WHAT WE COULD DO JUST TO MAKE
SURE THAT SEATTLE CITY LIGHT
CAN MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS IS
WE CAN MOVE THE RESOLUTION
FORWARD, BUT WITH THE
UNDERSTANDING THAT WE ARE GOING
TO WANT TO REPORT BACK.
WITH THAT MAKE SENSE?
BECAUSE RATHER THAN BRINGING
THIS UP AND GOING THROUGH ALL
THE ELEMENTS AGAIN NEXT TIME,
IT'S A RESOLUTION.
WE ARE NOT PASSING AN ORDINANCE.
AS YOU SAY, WE ARE NOT
BUDGETIG ADDITIONAL FUNDS.
I WOULD JUST SUGGEST THAT WE
MOVE FORWARD TODAY.
AND WE HAVE A LOT OF QUESTIONS
THAT WE HAVE MADE CLEAR.
>> I AGREE.
>> I AM COMFORTABLE WITH THAT.
I'M SURE THAT WOULD MAKE YOUR
LIFE EASIER THE NEXT 10 DAYS.
>> I DON'T WANT TO VIOLATE
INTERNATIONAL LAW.
>> I WAS THINKING ABOUT THE
COLUMBIA RIVER TREATY.
I WAS LIKE OH NO, NOT ANOTHER
ONE.
>> WE APPRECIATE YOUR
INDULGENCE AND YOUR RESPONSE TO
OUR QUESTIONS.
WE LOOK FORWARD TO GETTING MORE
INFORMATION FROM YOU AND I
THINK WE WILL BE FOLLOWING UP
WITH THE EXECUTIVE ABOUT THE
FINAL APPOINTMENT AND EXPIRING
TERMS BUT ANY ADDITIONAL
INFORMATION WOULD BE GREAT.
WITH YOUR APPROVAL, I MOVE THE
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDS PASSAGE OF
RESOLUTION 31 872 ON THE 2023
BUDGET FOR THE SKAGIT ENDOWMENT
COMMISSION SELLING AN EASEMENT
TO SNOHOMISH COUNTY.
THAT IS NOT PART OF THIS.
>> 2023.
2019 THROUGH 2023.
>> SECOND.
>> SKAGIT AND BURNELL COUNCIL
AND ALMOND.
I DON'T THINK WE WANT TO SELL
ANY SIDEWALK USED TO THE
SOUTHWEST SKAGIT COUNTY.
>> [ LAUGHTER ]
>> LET ME SAY THAT AGAIN FOR
THE RECORD SO THERE'S NO
CONFUSION.
I MOVE THE COMMITTEE RECOMMENDS
PASSAGE OF RESOLUTION 31872 ON
THE 2019-2023 BUDGET FOR THE
SKAGIT ENVIRONMENTAL ENDOWMENT
COMMISSION.
ARE THERE ANY FURTHER COMMENTS?
THOSE IN FAVOR RECOMMENDING
PASSAGE OF 31872, RAISE YOUR
HAND.
NO OPPOSED?
PASSES UNANIMOUSLY.
THANK YOU SO MUCH.
WE ARE GOING TO MOVE THIS
MOTION FORWARD TO THE FULL
COUNCIL ON MARCH 25 AT 2:00
P.M.
APPRECIATE ALL YOUR ANSWERS TO
THE QUESTIONS.
>> THANK YOU.
>> ANY LAST COMMENTS FOR THE
GOOD OF THE ORDER?
>> I'VE GOT ONE.
OKAY.
JUST WANT TO FLAG FOR FOLKS ARE
AMAZING SEATTLE CHANNEL VIEWING
FOLKS, TODAY WE HAVE THE
HOUSING DEVELOPMENT ANTI-
DISPLACEMENT STRATEGIES
DISCUSSION.
I LIKE TO CALL THIS MHA NOW
WHAT?
WE ARE CELEBRATING THIS WEEK.
IT PASSED ON MONDAY.
HERE WE ARE ON THURSDAY NOT
SKIPPING A BEAT.
WE ARE SAYING THAT WAS THE TIP
OF THE ICEBERG.
WE WANT MORE COMMUNITY-ORIENTED
DEVELOPMENT, CHILD CARE
CENTERS, SENIOR SENATORS, AND
COMMUNITY CULTURAL CENTERS.
WE WANT OPEN SPACES, AND WE WANT
THE CITY DOWN THROUGH THE
COMMUNITY LENS.
THAT'S BEEN REALLY CRITICAL FOR
THE EQUITABLE DEVELOPMENT
INITIATIVE EFFORTS.
WE WANT TO BRAYED THE FUNDING
WITH THE OFFICE OF HOUSING
FUNDING SO WE CAN CREATE MORE
MIXED-USE CENTERS, AND WE WANT
TO MAKE SURE WE ARE CREATING
AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND NOT
DISPLACING FOLKS.
IT'S A LARGER CONVERSATION
ABOUT THE RIGHT INGREDIENTS, I
KEEP SAYING.
THE RIGHT INGREDIENTS TO THE
CAKE WE ARE TRYING TO BAKE.
MHA WAS ONE OF THEM.
TENANT PROTECTIONS IS JUST ONE.
INSURING PEOPLE HAVE A PLACE TO
GO BACK TO IF DEVELOPMENT IS
OCCURRING.
THAT'S JUST ONE ELEMENT.
WE ARE TALKING ABOUT COMMUNITY-
ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT AND
GETTING FUNDING TO THE HANDS OF
ORGANIZATIONS WHO ARE REALLY
FOCUSED ON CREATING AFFORDABLE
HOUSING AND HOUSING THOSE WHO
MIGHT BE AT RISK OF
DISPLACEMENT NOT ONLY IN THIS
CONVERSATION BUT AGAIN IN
FUTURE CONVERSATIONS THROUGH THE
PLAN COMING UP THIS YEAR, AND
OUR DISPOSITION IMPLEMENTATION
STRATEGIES BUILDING OFF LAST
YEAR'S EFFORTS.
IT'S A LUNCH AND LEARN.
I WILL HAVE BAGELS, CREAM
CHEESE, COFFEE, AND I KNOW THAT
SOUNDS LIKE A BREAKFAST LUNCH
AND LEARN.
LET'S CONSIDER IT BRUNCH AND
LEARN.
OUR NEXT MEETING APRIL 4, AS I
MENTIONED.
WE WILL HAVE FOLKS TALKING AGAIN
ABOUT THE MISSION OF 124.
THIS IS TODAY AT NOON.
IN 40 MINUTES, FOLKS CAN COME
AND I'M SORRY, THE NEXT MEETING
WILL BE ON APRIL 4, AND WE WILL
TALK ABOUT 124.
BY THAT TIME, WE SHOULD HAVE A
BINDER FOR YOU ABOUT THE
EXPECTED TIMELINE.
FOR OUR COUNCIL COLLEAGUES,
THANK YOU TO COUNCILMEMBER
HERBOLD AND COUNCILMEMBER
GONZALEZ FOR HER INTEREST IN
THIS, AND WORKING WITH OUR
OFFICE ON TIMELINES AND NEXT
STEPS.
WE EXPECT TO HAVE A FULL
COMMITTEE.
WITHOUT THAT, COMMITTEE IS
ADJOURNED.
THANK YOU SO MUCH.
>> THANK YOU, EVERYBODY.