Petition of Acorn Development LLC for the vacation of the alley in Block 21, Sarah A. Bell’s Second Addition to the City of Seattle, bounded by Bell Street, 7th Avenue, Blanchard Street, and 8th Avenue.
The report, the full council agenda item number one clerk file 314278. Petition of ACORN Development LLC for the vacation of the Alien BLOCK 21 Sarah Abel Second Edition to the City of Seattle, bounded by Bell Street, Seventh Avenue, Blanchard Street and Eighth Avenue, held December 14th, 2015. Councilmember Burgess. Councilmember. Councilmember Gonzales. I'm sorry. Thank you. So this is this is related to the revocation of block 21. The Transportation Committee recommended approval of the vacation of the alley in block 21. So I think the way that the order goes is that we will consider first the amendment that is being made to the Transportation Committee's recommendation for approval of the allocation. That amendment is being made by myself, Council member Burgess and Councilmember Herbold, and then secondarily will take up the recommendation of the Transportation Committee as amended if the amendment passes. I think I'm accurate on that in terms of process. So by way of background, the full council took up this particular the Transportation Committee recommendation at its hearing on December 14th, 2015. At that time, council members Liccardo O'Brien, Sawant and myself raised concerns about the need for a condition as part of the Clark file that would serve to protect free speech activities should the vacation be granted . And as a result of that, the full council voted to hold over this particular item to today's hearing of the full council, and it is before us at this particular point in time. Now, over the past several weeks, I've worked with Councilmember Burgess and subsequently with Councilmember Herbold to draft some language that that would address those free speech concerns that were brought up in our full council, our last full council hearing before we went to recess. And I believe that this amendment addresses those concerns as related to the free speech of members of the public who seek to access that public, private property. And I, I want to say thank you to all of the advocates, both from SEIU Local six and from Transit Riders Union and others who have come and talked to city council members in the intervening weeks and who have come today to provide testimony on their concerns around Amazon's practices and want to want to at least iterate on my part that I, as a labor lawyer, as somebody who worked ten years on protecting and championing and advocating on behalf of only workers against corporate interests, I hear your concerns and I hope that we can move forward on this city council to address those concerns in a forum where we have the latitude to be able to really take on those particular issues. So the amendment before us is in everybody's packets. And the amendment includes just by way of background, it includes a few different changes. It will include a paragraph in what's known to be the property, sort of let me get this. The the PDA, which is a property use and development agreement, will include a condition in this allocation. Should it be granted that the areas that are open and accessible to the public must be open and accessible for 24 hours a day, with temporary closures permitted only for reasons such as maintenance, safety or private functions, free speech activities that will be fully protected with this particular amendment. If approved, free speech activities include things like handling, signature gathering, holding signs, all without obstructing access to the space, the building or other adjacent amenity features, and without unreasonably interfering with the enjoyment of the space by others shall be allowed within these public benefit features while engaged and allowed activities. Members of the public may not be asked to leave for any reason other than conduct that unreasonably interferes with the enjoyment of the space by others. That is the actual language that will be imposed as part of a condition of the PDA if this amendment passes. Another aspect of this is that it creates both a signage requirement and which which would have to be not only reviewed, but approved by Ascot Street vacations. That sign will advise people who are making use of the property knowledge with their rights around free speech activities. The last piece of this is that there is now included a a provision that will allow the city to seek enforcement against Amazon. If if those free if there is a claim that the free speech condition has been violated, then there will be a mechanism to create to do enforcement and make sure that folks rights are being upheld in that regard. So that is by way of briefing the amendments that are being proposed by myself, Councilmember Burgess and Councilmember Herbold. And I'll hand it off to my co-sponsors to add remarks. I'd Second Amendment. Okay, it's been moved and second to amend council bill. The clerk filed 314278. Are there any further comments on the amendment? If not, we do. Councilmember Herbold. Thank you. I just want to thank Councilmembers Gonzales and Burgess for including the my two requests, one being the addition of the hours of open access, and secondly, the enforcement the enforcement mechanisms already in the language. But you flipped it so we could also make sure that the signage is provided. I've been active in developing the city's POPS program. Privately owned public spaces, and providing signage for these spaces is really, really important if you want to see. Good active use of. Them. Thank you. Thank you for those comments. Are there any other comments on the amendments? If not? Sorry. Sorry. Councilmember O'Brien. It's early in the year. Council President Harrell. Should we be standing or sitting when we're making comments? So the rules changed? Oh, no. Standing is optional. No. Let's look. We look that. Through. We slip that through. I think people should stand. But I did support the change. So that some standing is kind of like the exclamation point. Yes, that's right. Yeah. You do it with emphasis here, so don't overdo it. Okay. Councilmember O'Brien. Thank you. So I want to thank the the folks that worked up this amendment. As folks know, this was a point of contention at full council at the last meeting of 2015, excuse me. And one of the reasons why I wasn't ready to support it. And I think the this language addresses a lot of the concerns around First Amendment rights. My preference has been to refer this back to committee because I don't think there was just full discussion in committee. But that said, I will support this. I want to I want to just re-emphasize that I have experienced security guards approaching me when when I had a sign on Amazon Plaza, and I'd spoken to that a few times before. Also, over the holiday break, I was forwarded a Twitter post by a local news reporter who was approached by an Amazon security guard, which she speculated was an Amazon security guard asking her to leave or if she had permission to be there. And so I think it's really important that Amazon commits to making sure that security officers are properly trained when regards to respect the rights the public has on these spaces. And I look forward to having that dialog with Amazon as we move forward to respect the rights of of Seattle's residents and workers. I have some other comments I'll make on the underlying bill after this amendment moves forward, but I will support this. Thank you. Are there any other comments on the amendment hearing then? The clerk filed 314278 has been moved. And second, in terms of the amendment. All those in favor say I. I oppose. The ayes have it. Would you like additional comments on the underlying. Clifton. I have. Just one. Councilmember. Thank you. I want to say special thanks to those in the neighborhood in District seven from Belltown and the Bell Street Corridor, that what this particular space will do is to help us connect what we're now calling Moai to market. And it will be a pedestrian corridor for people to be able to walk in. An expanded lovely green space at this particular parcel will be part of it. But I want to say thank you to those that were involved. This is 30,000 square feet of public open space and it had the enthusiastic and unanimous support of our Downtown Design Review Board. And I support this as well as being your District seven council. Thank you. If there are no Councilmember Johnson. Thank you. I just wanted to also express my support for the underlying legislation today. As the public may know, there are two options set in front of this body right now in terms of the what Amazon has filed with the city for its master use permit. The approval of the allocation, I think is the best possible built environment choice for our residents. Not only does it offer a better pedestrian environment, but also contributes financially to that pedestrian environment, as well as generating over $8 million towards affordable housing here in the city. I want to say thank you to my colleagues who offered an amendment around the privately owned public spaces. I, too, have been booted out of a privately owned public space just for being on the phone because I didn't have a badge. So we need to make sure that we're doing what we can to make sure that these are, I think, appropriate leave monitored and that the security folks are really well trained on what can and is allowed in a privately owned public space. I think it's really important for us to understand the public benefits associated with vacations. We don't currently have the authority, as I understand it, to enter into the sorts of benefits that have been put forward by some organizations. But I hope that we can go back as a committee and as a council and take a look at some of the opportunities moving forward over the next couple of months. Thank you. Thank you. Councilmember Johnson, are there any other comments any my colleagues would like to make on the amendment? Clark filed 314278. Councilmember O'Brien. Thank you and thank you, Councilmember Johnson, for that segway into what I'm about to say, because I do want to take a minute to just step back and both acknowledge that from an urban design perspective, a lot of great work. Obviously, a unanimous decision by the Design Commission speaks highly of the design elements. We heard a few folks comment today from the broader community about the design elements that they like. And I would agree that those design elements are very strong for this project. But the issue of, you know, how the public has some say in what private design happens is somewhat limited. And when we are selling public right of way is one of the opportunities, we have to have some influence over how that moves forward. And I want to just be explicit with the public and future applicants that this council takes that role very seriously. And I think that it's a we're at a point now where the guidelines and standards that we've been following historically, well, they may have been appropriate in the past. It's time for us to revisit those and see what's appropriate going forward. Today is a very different world than it was 20 years ago or even five years ago, and that work has started during the budget process. Last year the Council asked our staff to do to gather data on on street vacations and early vacations over the last 20 years. And we expect to hear back from Massdot sometime in the next couple of months to see what are the types of public benefits we've received in the past and then also have the conversation about what are the types of public benefits we think the public is looking for going forward within the legal constraints that we have to operate in. I also want to just take a second to talk about an ongoing labor dispute that's happening at Amazon and how disappointed I am that a company like Amazon that has created so much wealth for some folks in the community is also contributing to a race to a race to the bottom for its contracted security workers. Specifically, I'm going to call out the Amazon subcontractors, security, industrial specialists. Some folks during public comment highlighted them. This is the kind of company that the way they're behaving now should have no place in Seattle. SARS has at least 15 individual complaints filed against them for numerous violations of Seattle's paid sick leave and safe time. Law workers have been suspended and even fired for taking sick leave. When the Seattle Office for Civil Rights, the Seattle Office for Civil Rights has reached a settlement agreement with SIAC for these violations. But my understanding is SARS has still not complied with all the terms of those settlements. SARS has also had numerous federal labor law complaints against them, for which they recently settled with the National Labor Relations Board. It's the type of company that for actually frankly, for for a company like Amazon that is such a high profile and such a successful business in our community. And someone that I think all of us want to be pointing to is the example of what Seattle businesses do. I think Amazon can do better when they hold their subcontractors accountable. And frankly, it's been appalling to me that they've continued to absolve themselves the responsibility and say that this is merely on SARS. Folks have said that Amazon, while driving incredible growth and wealth in Seattle, has also been playing an instrumental role well and has played an integral role in Lifting City out of the Great Recession. It has also pointed to as a symbol that has caused displacement and drive. Not the cost of housing and forcing and growing income inequality we face. There's an opportunity here, I think, to demonstrate how a city that's becoming a city of tech workers can also be one that supports those that serve them their coffee and manage their office buildings. That's why I think it's more important than ever that we carefully think about the future of public benefits that are provided for street and alley vacations and for any deal that results in public property or ride away becoming privatized. I want to just I see some Amazon folks, some representatives in the room to commit to you that I won't be part of the conversations going forward. I, I believe that our interests are actually aligned here. And I hope that we can continue to work towards solutions that meet all of our needs and take steps for Amazon to really demonstrate to our community that they are going to be a high road employer for all workers and not just the Walmart in the sky. Thanks. Thank you. Councilmember Bryan, councilmember suarez. Thank you. Good afternoon. My name is deborah ward and I represent district five. First of all, I want. To thank council member Herbert Burgess and Gonzales for the amendments that they made and the good work that they did in addressing the First Amendment issues. I am new, but I did have an opportunity to go back and look at the public benefits and what we look at when we make a determination about street vacations. I think it's important to keep in mind that the city acts as a trustee. For the public in the public good. And that the public benefit we receive should outweigh the benefit that the petitioner receives. I'm not pointing to any particular company right now, and I want to thank the people that have spoken to Councilmember. Salant and O'Bryant. That we need to go back and look at 2009. And what we laid out is what the issues about what a public benefit is and what it brings to a community and the world is a lot different now in 2006 than it was in 2009. And I think we need to revisit that. Certainly business does time or does business in real time, and I think the government should do business in real time. And I look forward to working with the community, the business community, and certainly with my fellow. Council members on public public. Benefits and what they mean to our community. Thank you. Thank you. Councilmember where's Councilmember Sawant? Thank you, President Harrell. I, I have talked to guns to members. My staff have talked to a gun to members. And one of the points that has been made. Frequently is that, well, if we want to change the public benefit process, then we should change it and then apply the law, not hold Amazon accountable to a law that isn't in place at this moment, as if, you know, somehow this is going to be grossly unfair to Amazon. I wanted to say that it's not totally I mean, that there is some truth to that, but it is not totally accurate to say that Amazon has dutifully gone through the whole process. And as Governor O'Brien explained, you know, there were there's a there's a very clear rationale for taking this back to committee. Part of the process that every petitioner has to go through is for the council, this body, elected body, to vote on such an allegation. This is part of the process. But as I see it, this is not a rubber stamping. It shouldn't be. At least that's what I think. This is the only this part of the process where the council comes into action is the only accountability, democratic accountability that working people can have over big business. Council members can talk about changing the process, but the reality is that that that is only meaningful if elected officials are willing to vote against such an early vacation for the moment or send it back to committee. As Councilmember O'Brien said, that was our preference, and I would still prefer that even if the request is coming from a powerful business. I don't think it will be sufficient. Even as far as the free speech is concerned, free speech concerns are are, you know, are the topic. I supported the amendment and just do things. Thank former council member Lekota, who brought forward the former incarnation of that amendment that we just passed. I don't think I support that, but I don't think it will be sufficient to address the concerns of free speech and also concerns of workers. Amazon has outsourced a security guard to a company and has gone tomorrow and said to security industry specialists or ISIS to try and avoid them by letting them have their democratic right to a union. It makes it easier to oppress workers in this way if you contract it out so you can just wash your hands of it. But we know SARS has shamelessly flouted Seattle's basic labor law. They did not give safe and sick leave. They have engaged in routine intimidation and even firings when one woman worker demanded her rights. As I has responded by publishing her children's medical records online, that's an example of intimidation. And Amazon is willfully turning a blind eye to this problem. They have refused to respond to these concerns, and I know that they have refused to respond because I was with workers at a demonstration when they had a letter to present to Jeff Bezos. He refused to meet with us. And I think they didn't know that they are the workers at a councilmember with them. And they made us all go on the street in the rain, even leaving their foyer, public foyer. Many elected officials think one can represent both the needs of workers and. Big business, but you cannot. This is a live example of where you have to pick a side and consumers are choosing to pick a side one way or another. And it's. Disingenuous to pretend that this is all just fair and square. We have a society that has a significant wealth and power differentials, so it is not neutral. This process is not neutral. It's not supposed to be neutral. And I know elected officials have said and will continue to say a lot about workers. But let's be clear, unless we use our position on issues like this one on bills like this one to hold big business accountable, then it is just words. At the end of the day, I'm sorry. Then they're just words. And because Amazon.com didn't want to be bothered with a delay until members, many of whom have accepted corporate donations and have a long track record of standing up for corporations against workers interests, I have indicated a willingness to give Amazon a smooth passage. I have no divided loyalties. I support workers. And if council members are not willing to send this back to the Transportation Committee to be properly discussed, and I do intend to vote no on this allegation. But my first choice would have been to send us back to committee. And I wanted to thank Councilmember O'Brien for politically leading that that part up last year. And that would have been a good opportunity for the council to do its job, to provide the space, to discuss with the community, the workers and Amazon, and find a real solution to the concerns. Then Amazon could have had its Ali vacation, but in a way that protects the public. However, council members have made it clear that they will not support that. So I cannot support this allegation that does not protect the interests of regular workers. Thank you, Councilmember, so much. So we have in front of us Councilmember Herbold, please. Thank you. So. One point to remind folks, if you don't remember in 2014, this council actually wrote a letter to Jeff Bezos. And to my to my knowledge, we haven't received a response. And it is it was a letter designed to deal with just these issues. I did speak to two Amazon representatives last week. They informed me that they had performed an audit of Cece's employment practices. And I at that point asked whether or not we could see or have a review of that audit so we could judge for ourselves the compliance with the city's labor laws. I think that's the appropriate place to have this conversation is within the context of our enforcement mechanisms. We have just the the previous years council passed legislation to explicitly give the Office of Civil Rights, the Division of the Labor Standards Office, the ability to do proactive enforcement of our labor laws. I think we need to work really closely with that office in identifying industries and particular employers where we have seen a history of problems. And I would really be interested in bringing that conversation on how to roll out that proactive element of this office. To my knowledge, are the Office of Labor Standards is not doing proactive enforcement at this point. And I think we need to talk about how to roll that out, how to engage with the community and identifying industries and particular employers that we want to see that proactive enforcement for. Thank you. Thank you for those comments, Councilmember Herbold. Okay. So we have an amended or a condition court file 314278. Are there any other comments that any of my colleagues would like to make of this first agenda item of 20, I might add. Hearing no comments. Those in favor of granting the petition as a condition to vote i. I. Those opposed vote. No. No. Okay. The motion carries and the petition is granted as conditions. Okay. Next, we'll have, I guess, items two, three and four read together for convenience agenda items.