Thread by @andrew_ace_agh

Welcome to your council livetweet thread! This is #AceReporting as always, welcoming you back to the main event. As always tips are appreciated!

Venmo: houstonace
CashApp: $Archstar

Today's tips are going towards my health ins, and A/D meds b/c it's still a thing in a pandemic.

Reminder that the vote on overriding the veto is currently not on the docket today, HOWEVER I am assuming most comments in the first 20 minutes will be related to the Mayor's veto of the amended 2020 budget.

And that is where we start today!

#SeattleProtests #SeaCouncil

And now we have an amendment to the introduction and referral calendar, for two bills not provided by 5pm last Friday. The first amendment 119878, is approval to enter a collective bargaining agreement between the City and the local machinists union.

Amendment is approved! And now 119879, an execution to create a regional emergency radio authority and creating a non-profit to be able to manage this.

(seems like there's been movement of this interlocal agreement and now they need a place to house it)

The one notable vote we will have is related to the scooter share pilot, so expect comments related from that as well.

And now we start Public Comment, starting with today's agenda (separate from general PC)

First is Ms. @BrittneyBush!

Scooter share - in support of the pilot, particularly as an alternative to car-polluting trips. Also noting concerns around barring scooters from riding on the sidewalk where insufficient bike infra. exists as well as biased policing of users.

Second comment is in favor of scooter share along with comments related to sweeps in Cal Anderson and use of pepper spray by SPD at yesterday's protest.

Third comment is related to surveillance (item 8 on the agenda) and an impact report that was due on September 1st. It seems like there's conflict between the working group around this (community members) and staff working on this.

Comment calling about Fare Share legislation and asking for modifications to the legislation to increase pay for drivers. (can't follow where on the agenda this is discussed.)

Next comment related to land use seems to be a misunderstanding around how the design review extension legislation works, which specifically exempts publicly subsidized projects from having to go through design review during the pandemic.

Not that we don't have a housing crisis.

Another comment in favor of fare pay, explaining the challenges of her family as her and her husband both drive.

(Honestly curious about this and how drivers are being impacted during the COVID crisis. I'm assuming ridership is down and could also see hazard pay provided.)

Another comment about the omnibus land and discusses the amendment which seems to be tied to the Talaris process explicitly. I believe @sharethecities knows more, but it seems like a group is interested in preserving Talaris as a park.

Another comment in support of fare pay.

Shout out to the Driver's union for organizing this; another caller commenting in support of fare pay.

Another comment in favor of scooter share from a potential local provider, Wheels.

(link provided for info only, not an endorsement)
takewheels.com

Another driver speaking in support of fare pay.

Another comment in support of fare pay.

(did U/L change their prices recently?)

And now @JHop_Seattle, aka Mr. Lime!

Speaking in favor of scooter share and talking about the benefits of scooter share. Even a little shout out to Auckland (b/c lord knows the kiwis are beating us on climate protection)

And now @WilsonKatieB, representing the Transit Rider's Union (which everyone should join), speaking in favor of the scooter share. Noting some concerns around access (providing a lower fare) as well as interactions with wheelchairs and other mobility devices (access).

Another driver speaking in favor of fare share and explaining the costs all drivers incurred that are not covered by U/L.

Another comment in favor of Pedersen's amendment related to landmarks approval.

(Honestly I've yet to hear anyone make a plausible case for preserving Talaris outside of local neighbors using it as their personal park even though Laurelhurst already has a private park)

Another comment in favor of Pedersen's amendment and then another comment asking for the police accountability system to be revised, saying "it has failed."

Another comment in favor of Pedersen's amendment. It seems like a larger discussion around the shift of conditional approvals of potential landmark sites needs further discussion. (I know, I know - #SeattleProcess)

And a comment in condemnation of the police after yesterday's display of force against protesters while (strangely) playing the song "Save a Horse, Ride a Cowboy."

Yeah, SPD has interesting choices in music.

Two more comments in favor of the scooter share, one noting the potential reduction in drivers going through South Park / Georgetown which has increased air pollution there due to the closure of the West Seattle bridge.

MBAKS representative speaking against the revised street use fees, which are increased from before.

(full disclosure, I have not read the fee list)

Another speaking speaking on behalf of the Fare Share Coalition, speaking in favor of raising pay for drivers.

Current comment is from a member of SPGA (Seattle Police Guild Accountability), noting that many groups and judges spoke against the current contract and want to be involved in the negotiations of the new contract. The current contract ends at the end of 2020.

Current commentor speaking out against SPD's actions yesterday at the Labor Day protest, calling them "absolutely infuriating."

(it was pretty bad, to say the absolute least.)

Alright! So we are now done with comments and moving to payment of bills.

All passed, so now we are getting into confirmation of appointments, starting with "Reappointment of Dwane Chappelle as Director of Education for the Department of Education and Early Learning, for a term to January 1, 2024"

and with these I'm going to use the RR.

(lots of very positive comments about the Director)

(there are so many appointments today omg)

"Education is life itself" v good quote

"I want to thank Mayor Durkan-"

Ok we are block grouping these appointments, 01609 through 01613, all for the

Families, Education, Preschool and Promise Levy Oversight Committee

(I want to say this is the tax levy Mayor Durkan was trying to take credit for by moving money around a few weeks ago)

All approved!

Now on the appointment of 01614, Emmanuel Dolo, to the Seattle Immigrant and Refugee Commission.

Approved!

And now the request from Seattle IT Department for a six month extension for the filling of a Surveillance Impact Report, which is approved unanimously. (COVID impacts, you know)

Ok and now three re-appointments to the Seattle School Traffic Safety Committee, which pass unanimously.

Ok, and now we have appointments to the Seattle Design Commission including the chair. These are all mayoral appointments, and the nominated chair (Brianna S. Holan) was nominated unanimously by the commission.

For anyone who doesn't know about the Design Commission:

"The Seattle Design Commission advises the Mayor, City Council, and City departments on the design of capital improvements and other projects and policies that shape Seattle's public realm."

seattle.gov/designcommissi…

All commissioners have been approved, so NOW we are going into the Land Use Omnibus Bill—roughly annual amendments to the code. It's mostly technical, but every now and then something else pop ups with it.

There's a substitute with a few edits, namely bike parking access.

And now the fun part of Robert's Rules. We are first voting on whether to adopt the substitute to be heard, *then* we will go into amendments (Pedersen), and then there is a vote on the bill as amended.

(Things you learn from student government. 🤓)

Substitute is adopted and now we are getting into Pedersen's amendment.

The question is now whether or not the amendment can be heard if its the exact amendment that failed in a vote before. It has to be different.

CM Strauss is stating he will vote against the amendment and is stating that it would not weaken the authority of the Landmarks board as they already do not have authority over uses of a site. Any proposed physical changes to the structure still have to go through the board.

(is anyone feeling like a lot of these concerned call ins with a bunch of concerned homeowners over what is a misunderstanding?)

So the change is a clarification that SDCI also has authority to change the use on a site and not simply for a building. In essence, where does SDCI approval start/stop.

CM Herbold discussing the past of how the omnibus bill and how it is intended to only cover technical amendments, and anything larger and related to policy should be a separate bill.

CM Herbold is seeing this as a policy change.

There's definitely a good discussion around what it means to preserve a site versus a building, but it's a question of "is this a policy or technical amendment"

(Still curious if this amendment can even be heard today. I'm assuming it is technically a different amendment from the previous land use meeting, but I can't confirm that off the top of my head.)

#PointOfOrder

CM Lewis aligning himself in favor of Pedersen's amendment.

CM Mosqueda now making clear that this only covers single-family zoned land and does not change the authority of any group or board.

(notable that the youngest member of council is arguably one of the most conservative)

(it all seems to be centering around the Talaris site)

From my perspective it makes complete sense to extend the authority of a change of use from just a bldg to include the site. Imagine putting a restaurant in an old house. You could not edit anything outside (adding even an uncovered patios) without having to go through Landmarks.

Which, when any type of normal change of use happens, it is an extension of what is permitted across the entire site.

Does that make sense?

(Also good to know that a larger policy change would not be under the omnibus bill)

4 in favor, 5 opposed. The amendment fails!

Final vote:

8-1, Pedersen opposes.

Pedersen currently:

Ok, now going into the bill that will allow UW to maintain their current five skyways. It's essentially a renewal of their agreement, however an amendment has been included to ensure the skyways will conform with ADA requirements.

Passes unanimously!

Now getting into the street and sidewalk fee schedule.

tldr: increases cost of construction (it also impacts street closure fees related to sidewalk and street cafes)

CM Mosqueda asking questions around the permitting related to street closures - both extensions and potentially making some permanent.

(dropping hints around super blocks)

To @CMTMosqueda, we say: yes please!

CM Strauss saying that this is a temporary way to address concerns around COVID but that he will advocate for some of these becoming permanent.

Maybe the CM wants to look into 15 minute neighborhoods. 👀

Seems like Central Staff had a presentation with MBAKS (Master Builders Assoc. King + Snohomish County) and they had no comments before. Granted the bill could've changed in that time.

Either way, the bill passes unanimously!

Item 20/26 - Scooter Share!

Update: we're hearing Items 20 and 22 together as they are both related to scooter share:

so item 20 amends the code as to include scooters as an allowed use in the right of way and item 22 is related to the parameters of the pilot program.

CM Strauss now providing the context for these two bills. Same discussion: some CMs want to do this already and others are concerned about people suing the city b/c of injuries.

CM Herbold getting annoyed that she has not had enough time to review the legislation in detail, however is willing to vote for this now.

CM Herbold stressing concerns about crowding on trails.

(Maybe...we need more space for people...?)

Pedersen is now pontificating.

(meme break)

"I am really excited about this legislation," -CM Mosqueda. You can hear the smile in her voice, it's awesome.

(thank the lord for CMs who want to actively improve the city)

CM Mosqueda thanking Rep. Nicole Macri (D-43 Pos. 1) for her work in sponsoring the state bill that allows this to happen.

#GoTeam

CM Lewis now speaking in support of scooter share, noting his safety concerns are similar to his concerns for those who (like himself) rely on biking to get across the city and notes how the focus on structures for SOV (read: car) accommodation create problems for other modes.

"I also want to Herbold-"

(a last minute amendment?)

[CM Strauss misspoke]

Council President Gonzalez now bringing us home.

(we still have one more bill and three appointments)

Agenda Item 20 passes unanimously!

(this allows scooters on streets)

Now onto Item 21, which allows the creation of a budget bucket for the West Seattle Bridge (boo)

The interfund loan is for $70MM that will be paid back in 2021 through bonds.

Includes money for monitoring and analysis on the high bridge as well as improvements to the low bridge, which is needed for freight and buses. Also some money for impacts of traffic through south end.

General comments about the importance of the bridge for the region. And now the vote!

Passes unanimously, 9-0.

Ok, now into bill #2 of scooter share. Going straight to the vote.

8-1, Pedersen the only vote against.

We got scooter share, y'all!

Now into the next council bill, which creates an account for Seattle Public Utilities to be able to accept gifts that will help provide relief for low-income customers.

Overall in support (of course) just wishing we had more money to help people (as always).

Bill passes unanimously!

And now the appointment of three individuals to the Seattle Pedestrian Advisory Board.

And all the Advisory Board appointments have passed!

And council is adjourned; I'll be back on tomorrow morning to cover land use as it seems like there is quite a bit happening.