A RESOLUTION stating the Seattle City Council’s opposition to the Keystone XL Pipeline, and requesting the Department of Finance and Administrative Services to investigate ways to establish contracting criteria to prioritize the City’s goals to avoid contracting with financial institutions that provide it with project-level loans or other financial services.
Please read the first agenda item into the record. The report of the full council agenda item one Resolution 317 40 stating the city Seattle City Council's opposition to Keystone XL Pipeline and requesting the Department of Finance and Administrative Services to investigate waste to service contracting criteria to prioritize the city's goals. To avoid contracting with financial institutions are provided with project level loans or other financial services. Okay, let me sort of quarterback as through the first I'll relinquish the Florida Councilmember Swamp that I believe you have an amendment you would like to start off with was a substitution of Virgin. So you could walk us through that. So Council Councilmember, you have the floor. Thank you, President. Harold. I should I. Sorry. In terms of procedure, should I first move? Yeah. Why don't we do that? And then. We'll. Okay. And then. Yeah, and then I'll, I'd like to make a few introductory comments before I move resolution 31740. Okay. Second has been second to Councilman Johnson. I will talk to a substitute in a second. So I'm sorry. Where you moving this? Where you. Where you amending it? I have an amendment as well. So you actually moved the bill, so it's in place and now we can start amending it so you can do the introduction. That was. Exactly. Amendment second. Very good. Thank you. On Friday, March 24, the same day that he failed to repeal the Affordable Care Act because of a revolt nationwide, Trump announced that his administration was issuing the federal permit to build the Keystone XL pipeline, which would transport tar sands crude oil from Canada across the U.S. for refinement. Tar sands are by far the most environmentally destructive source of crude oil. If it is extracted and used, it will massively accelerate the climate change that is already leading to catastrophe for so many people around the world, including rising sea levels, floods, storms, wildfires and droughts. In February, Seattle passed a strong ordinance to divest from Wells Fargo and establish socially responsible financial policies. Today, I believe we should think in accordance with that ordinance and recognize there is absolutely nothing socially responsible about the Keystone XL pipeline. Tens of thousands of activists have joined the movement against the Keystone XL and have organized demonstrations and peaceful, direct actions. In November of 2011, the Obama administration temporarily backed down from Kiev XL, but that was only after repeated protest actions and is amendment actually came just days after its announcement and I think it was a capitulation on his part came just days after more than 10,000 people encircled the White House protesting the project. And, as Carlinville incorrectly stated in public comment. That protest that encircled the White House helped kick start the climate justice movement. But at the same time that day, Naomi Klein, who was part of that protest, also correctly credited the Occupy Wall Street movement with helping jumpstart the Keystone XL movement. And this shows us that the strategy of building movements works. This was the second major action against the project organized by Bill McKibben through Oregon Tar Sands Action. And I'm happy to say Bill McKibben just tweeted in support of our resolution here. And today those very same activists have been joined by thousands more young people and are asking Seattle City Council to join their movement to block the Keystone XL pipeline and make it clear to the financial institutions TransCanada will try to get loans from that. The key Xcel Project is toxic. It is toxic to the environment. It is toxic to indigenous communities. It is toxic to all human beings. And we are building a movement that will make it toxic to any financial institution that makes the mistake of investing in it. Resolutions are not legally binding like ordinances are. But financial institutions know that a resolution like this, which if the resolution clearly stated Seattle's intent is not an empty threat because we did it, we passed an ordinance with divesting Wells Fargo, and that action inspired activists around the country to push for their cities and towns to do the same. And the purpose of this resolution is the same. We don't believe that with by the resolution itself, we will have conquered the oil industry. But we are doing it with the purpose of building a movement around the nation. As a matter of fact, as we vote on this resolution today. Right now, a committee of the Los Angeles City Council is discussing divesting the city of Los Angeles from Wells Fargo. These are real results that come from building movements. And I have some comments later about amendments that were referred to in the public comment, the amendment from Councilmember Herbold. But right now, I just want to make sure that everybody understands there are some technical and clarifying amendments from Councilmember Suarez that I don't think are going to be controversial and that have been incorporated into our version two of my resolution. So I move to amend Resolution 31740, substituting version two for version 1/2. Okay. Is the amendment advanced by councilman want subsequent version two for version one has been made in second. Any further comments about that amendment? That particular amendment? All those in favor of that amendment. Vote i. I opposed. The ayes have it. So we have a new substitute version. I am aware of a possible other amendment and now would be the appropriate time to talk about that. Councilmember Herbold. Thank you. I moved to amend a resolution 31740 by amending Section two and adding the mayor's concurrence in the be it resolve clause and the signature block. The amendment clarifies that the resolution is connected to existing city policies, courts language regarding social investment policies that the Council adopted in February as part of the legislation that ended the city's relationship with Wells Fargo and adopted fair business practices for all contracts. The resolution itself, as as it is currently written, requests FASB to, quote, investigate ways to establish contracting criteria. But the count the council cannot obligate a department to do that by request. With this amendment, we have the mayor's concurring language, which means it will have executive branch support and greater likelihood that the work that the council is asking be done actually be done. So if ultimately we are interested in making sure that our banking practices reflect our values, we actually need the executive to do this work specifically that the that FASB investigate ways to establishing concrete contracting criteria that prioritize the city's goals of avoiding contracting for banking services to the city of Seattle with financial institutions that provide financial services to trans Trans-Canada. In addition, it was mentioned before that my office had done research on the eligibility of banking institutions to bid for Seattle's services in the future. There are 63 banks that the Public Deposit Protection Commission has authorized to provide banking services to governments within Washington State. The research that my office did said of those 63 banks and total only ten, according to I'm sorry, 11 according to the criteria and are S.W. 5958 would be eligible to bid on the city's services . You take that number 11 down to ten with the action that the council took recently with Wells Fargo. And those are those are banks that might be eligible to bid for Seattle's services. We don't know for certain that they are, because we have still other banking criteria that we are currently asking the the the executive to make sure that of the ten remaining banks. What number of those banks would fulfill the city's banking criteria? One in particular that is I feel very important is that we can only accept. Bids. From financial institutions that have received received a rating of outstanding in their most recent Community Reinvestment Act. In the review done by the by the Fed and the Committee Reinvestment Act is the the the obligation that financial institutions have to reinvest in low income neighborhoods and avoid practices like redlining. So this is another standard that these ten banks that we've already identified have not yet been measured against. And so, again, we need to know we have an obligation to to our employees to be able to to pay them. And we need a bank in order to pay them. And so we need to really work collaboratively with the executive in identifying which banking institutions can can really reflect our values. And I think the amendment allows us to do so. Thank you. COUNCILMEMBER I'll just to be. Earlier you describe the amendment and you made the motion as their second on Councilmember Herbold motion. Okay, I got a second on the record. Further discussion. Council member Sawant. Thank you, President Herald. This amendment changes the language that says, quote, The Seattle City Council does not support doing business with financial institutions that invest in Keystone XL pipeline, unquote. With what I believe is watered down language that says that we are code. That said, the city code, the Seattle City Council is concerned about doing business with financial institutions so its changing does not support to concerned about. I want to be clear, as an elected representative for my own opinion, I do not support doing business with financial institutions that invest in Keystone XL pipeline. And if council members do not support, then that's the resolution that we should vote on and we should not be afraid to say so. Councilmembers who are supporting this amendment are worried that if the Council unambiguously states its intent to not want to do business with financial institutions invested in the Keystone XL pipeline, that the banks will be afraid to apply to be the bank of the city. But I would like to quote Ali Khan, an author of Seattle, who eloquently said, Scaring the banks is exactly the point. Yeah. And I think that. At this moment, elected representatives throughout the nation have a political and moral obligation to clearly oppose investment in such destructive projects. At the very least, we have to do basic things to move to a different situation. We have to if if there are no banks existing that will qualify, then we have to fight to set up a public bank. We have to. We have to fight to lift the state ban on banking with credit unions. And as a matter of fact, there was a legislation that passed with a big majority in the state House, but then got defeated in the Republican controlled Senate, which just happened recently. And that also shows that we have to continue building a movement. We can't rely on the on either of the two big business parties because they are both bought out by the oil lobby. And and the purpose of this resolution is to continue building this that movement. But I believe that we have to go even farther than that, even farther than doing basic measures. We're not moving this resolution, myself and our movement. We are not moving this resolution with the illusion that just this resolution is capable of making Seattle an island of purity in the context of global capitalism. We know that's not going to happen. But as our planet is on the verge of climate catastrophe, history is calling on us to show courage to imagine a different kind of world. We have to change the world. But changing the world requires building mass movements globally. And this resolution, in my view, is in service of building those movements. And. In that in that in mind, I think the intent of the resolution should be stated clearly, not with less unambiguous language. So I intend to vote no on this amendment. I also want everyone here to know that the mayor has informed us that he will only support this resolution, concur with this resolution if we watered down the language in that way. I. I do not believe. I do not believe that it is worded for our movement to water it down. His concurrence as word, watering it down. And our movement should be questioning why is the mayor of Seattle only willing to support the resolution on those terms? And why isn't he supporting the resolution at all costs? And I also want to be clear, though, regardless of whether this amendment passes and I think it's going to pass, we should be clear that the main substance of this resolution is what our movement demanded against Keystone XL. It does state, in writing, the city's opposition against Keystone. Opposition to Keystone XL. And that we in the movement will not accept a bank invested in Keystone XL, and that our movement needs to hold the city accountable to act in the spirit of this resolution when the new fees go out. Any further comments on the amendment on the floor comes from Johnson. You know, I just want to speak to a couple of brief things. I think, you know, as council members, one knows I come out of the environmental movement. I spent a dozen years fighting for public transit in Washington state. Transportation is the number one source of our greenhouse gas emissions in Washington. And so everything we can do to get people out of their cars into public transit is a win for our environment. I started off my volunteer and career as a 12 year old volunteering for Earth Day 20 back in 1990. I fundamentally believe that one of the most pressing issues for us as a city, as a state and as a nation is the threat, real threat of climate change. But I have to balance that and my role and responsibility as a legislator to the 10,000 employees that work here at the city of Seattle and ensure that as we move forward with the important policy statement that we're making today, which is that we don't want to do business with banks that are funding this pipeline, that we actually also have real options for writing those 10,000 employees paychecks every two weeks. And because we don't yet have a municipal banking option and because we don't yet have the state that has given us the authority to work with local credit unions. I feel it is important for us to balance that fiduciary responsibility to our 10,000 employees alongside our commitments to environmental stewardship. So I'll be voting yes for Councilmember Herbold amendment. I don't think that it waters down the resolution. I think we still get the strong point across, and I still think we do our job being fiduciary responsible to those 10,000 employees. I will consider worse. Thank you. First of all, I want to thank council members who want and. We've been working on this on this resolution and the hard work that she put in. And I also want to thank Councilmember Herbold. And just on a more personal note, being enrolled member of the Blackfeet nation, I think I'm the only person in this room that has practiced law and represented tribes. For over 30 years. In which I sat and was on the banks of the Discord and the Pearl River. I was there when we took over Cascadia for the. Tribe, and I was there and we took over for Lawton, and I did all that before I went to college. I also represented the lower elder oil tribe in the removal of the dams. I was also chaired and was lead counsel I'm sorry. Second counsel on. U.S. Washington to protect tribes treaty rights and what was now eventually called the bold decision bolt, too. So I know a little bit about this. I'm supporting Councilmember Herbert's amendment because and I don't believe it waters. It down is because I think that we are moving. In the right direction and by having this amendment and making sure we do it right. And you all were here when we pushed really hard on the Wells Fargo piece. We haven't let up on that. Our intent is the same. We're moving forward. My goal always is. Is that we do it right. That we withstand legal scrutiny. That we continue to. Look at the laws that we already have. In socially responsible banking. And I say this. This is me speaking personally as a native woman, as a Latina, as a mother, a member of a tribe and representing tribes. I think I'm also the only one in this room who has had cases that went up to the United States Supreme Court and that were upheld. So I do know what I'm talking about. This does not water it down. It says we are on the right track and. We're moving forward. We just can't have that is a person of color. Native people didn't get the right to vote till 1924. We know how to wade into it. Right. And that's what I want to do. I don't want to feel that because some people here may there's some disagreement that we're anti. Anti the environment or we're pro oil or we're all capitalist, industrial, awful people. We're just trying to do it right. So it withstands the scrutiny. The integrity and reflects the values. Of the citizens and the employees of Seattle. And that's what we will continue to do. That is why. I want to thank Councilmember Gonzales as well. That is why we have. Called this a welcoming city. That is why we call this a constitutional city, because we want these things to up to be able to withstand the law and anyone else that comes at us. And so for that reason, I'm going to support Councilmember Herbert's amendment right. I would make a few comments on the amendment. And as I informed Councilmember Herbold. I wasn't and I'm not supporting her amendment for a few reasons. I do appreciate you bringing the amendment forward and in certainly discussing issues with the mayor to make sure he concurs, to give a lot more meat as we hopefully try to get some national attention on this issue. When I look at the language that of this paragraph that it says, the Seattle City Council does not support doing business with financial institutions that invest in Keystone. And as Councilmember Swan said, at least for me, that's a true statement that when you look at what we say earlier than that, we , the City Council, opposes the construction of the Keystone XL pipeline that we are urging federal and state regulatory agencies to reject or revoke permit requests for Trans Canada for the construction of the project. We're coming out sort of hard hitting and I like that and I believe that. And I think if the word city council was not in there and it said the city does not support, it may have different ramifications, but this this one is us. And as I go forward and look at the proposed language, it talked it I think it smartly tries to allow us to align our policies with our charter and our ongoing business practices, our financial policies. But that language to me is a little almost scary when we say that we will. Let me just read it. The city shall seek opportunities to conduct business with institutions that, by their charter and ongoing business practices, seek to benefit the common good. And reason I say that's a little scary is that banks could almost just buy anything by saying that their charter and their business practices are for the common good. In this particular project, on the Keystone project, I think they could say the common good is to compete in a global market with oil and lower practices. And so there's always sort of this common good that I think based on that ambiguity, could pretty much justify the behaviors of lending institutions. I think all of us in this room remember that in 2008 there was a huge bailout in this financial, industrial, financial lending, as huge as about $700 billion. And even Wells Fargo, as an example, received about $25 billion of that bailout. They've actually pay that money back. But since then, there's been trillions of dollars in similar kinds of bailout programs. Wells Fargo has received close to $160 billion of that. And so these lending institutions, very powerful, often rely on government help. And now I think that as we move forward in politics, in the national and local scene, this is the opportunity to do business with those who are trying to advance our social values. And so I think it should be. It. It should be as as hard hitting as possible. I might have said something different 15 years ago or so when I was 20. I was in 2015. But I just believe in terms of activism that if we're going to be totally honest and transparent, that there is a serious grassroots activism happening in this country and they are saying some very profound things. And we look at particular the banking lending institution with the bailouts, with Wells Fargo's example, paying 1.2 billion for some fraudulent practices, that we have an opportunity to see something very strong. So for that, it's just an amendment. For those reasons, I don't support the amendment. So Councilmember Herbold certainly would give you the opportunity to make some closing comments on your amendment. If you choose not to, I'll go ahead and call the vote on the amendment, which, like any words, were good or very good. Okay. It's been moved in second to pass Councilmember Herbert's amendment. All those in favor, please say I and raise your hand. I oppose. Say no and raise your hand. No. Okay. So the amendment passes. The amendment does pass. So 6 to 2. And now we have a an amended piece of legislation. Councilmember Swan, I believe you're the primary sponsor of the resolution. Would you like to say some more words? Sure. Thank you, President Harrell. Thank you for taking the great stand on the language of the resolution. And also, I think we should all be clear that regardless of that amendment passing, it is still a very strong move for a major city in the United States to take a stand against the Keystone XL pipeline, and that ultimately, even if the stronger language had passed, it does come down to how strongly we build our movement, because we cannot rely on elected officials to break their ties from the oil lobby. And I don't mean necessarily just this body. You know, nationwide, the oil lobby has its tentacles really deep. And so the only way we will actually succeed is to keep building this movement and build it into a fighting militant, nonviolent movement. And I think that we this resolution will be a big step towards that. But we have to keep fighting. Well, thank you. Any further comments on the resolution? Council Member O'Brien Thank you. Council Member Swan, I want to thank you for your work on this. Members of the public specifically 350 Board. Thank you so much for your ongoing passion around ensuring that Seattle continues to be a leader on these fights. The science is clear. We know that most of the known fossil fuels that we've identified need to stay in the ground if we're going to prevent catastrophic climate change. We also heard today from folks who acknowledge that they drove here because that was the choice that we have today. I know that we don't have an affordable city, so a lot of folks have to live far away from city hall. I know we don't have the public transit system that we want to have. We need to reimagine and reinvent our economy so that we do not have to rely on those fossil fuels to be able to thrive so that we don't have to make a choice between do we have a bank? But doing business with a bank that is completely against our values are not being bankable, and we can do that. This resolution today builds on a number of pieces of work that we've done here in Seattle that have helped change the dynamic worldwide. And I know that banks are listening and are aware that the public is scrutinizing their work at a higher level than ever. But it's not going to be reliant just on the major banks of Wall Street to change their ways, because that is not going to get us what we want. We need to find local banks, publicly owned banks, credit unions, nonprofit banks that we can work with and not just banks. We need a whole industry. I want to be here in the near future where folks say, I was able to walk to City Hall to protest because there was affordable housing near City Hall. I was able to ride reliable, affordable public transit from where I choose to live, or I drove here in my 100% electric car, which uses 100% carbon neutral electricity here in the city of Seattle. The work to be done is this resolution today, which, of course I will be supporting, but it's also in the coming months. I've spoken with the folks at the city who are in charge of facilitating our banking decisions. And there's since the Wells Fargo action, I've had a number of meetings with them, including a conversation today. And I can guarantee you that they are under no illusion that we need to find new banking partners. That's not going to be easy to do. As you heard Councilmember Herbold talk through some of the state regulations. But I also believe we absolutely can do it. And we're going to need your partnership in the coming months to do whatever it takes to find business partners, whether it be banks or otherwise, that we can invest all our money in as we move forward that are consistent with our values. Thank you to your leadership, to making us make these decisions. Let's get the rest of the country to follow our steps. Any other. Councilmember O'Brien stood up on that one. So we knew that was going to be powerful. Thank you, Kasper. On behalf of my colleagues, like to say any more words before we vote. Okay. Okay. This is very exciting for us. So all those in favor of adopting the resolution as amended, vote i. I. Those opposed vote no. The motion carries, the resolutions dropped and chair will gladly sign it. Thank you. All right. Thank you. Jackson City Council leader Fran. We appreciate mayor today. Yeah, we are now going to the mayor's office. Ask. He supports fossil fuel divestment. The city's pension fund has raised. Please call the next agenda item. Agenda item two. Because I'm native. That's right. It's my water. You could buy it back for me. Your water that we are drinking? Yeah. That's about one one 8 to 930 to senior general manager of Seattle Public Utilities. You name the price of. The Contract with Waste Management of Washington Corporation for Waste Disposal and Transportation Services and many Ordinance 125207, which adopted the 2017 budget, changing appropriations for Seattle Public Utilities and ratifying confirming certain prior acts. The committee recommends that the full council pass the bill as amended with the Divine Report. Councilmembers Swanson O'Brien favor and Councilmember Harrell opposed. We're I'd ask that you take the conversations outside, please. Thank you very much. Well, Councilmember Herbold will give it a minute or two. Just more like sat down and did. Thank you very much. We're going to keep going here. No knock on doors.