%C1
.
>>> TODAY IS THURSDAY MARCH 4TH
AND THE TIME IS 9:31 A.M.
I AM THE CHAIR OF THE
COMMITTEE.
COUNCIL MEMBER SAWANT.
WILLAL CLERK CALL THE ROLL?
>> COUNCIL MEMBER SAWANT.
>>>
>> PRESENT.
>> COUNCIL MEMBER MORALES?
PRESENT.
>> PEDERSON?
HERE.
>> LEWIS?
HERE.
>> JUAREZ?
>> THANK YOU, TED AND THANK YOU
COUNCIL MEMBERS FOR BEING HERE.
IN TODAY'S COMMITTEE, WE WILL
CONTINUE THE DISCUSSION WE
STARTED AT OUR PREVIOUS
COMMITTEE, ABOUT EVICTIONS IN
SEATTLE.
THE NEED TO EXTEND THE
MORATORIUM ON EVICTIONS, THE
IMPORTANCE OF LEGAL
REPRESENTATION FOR PEOPLE
FACING EVICTION AND THE PROBLEM
OF DEFAULT EVICTIONS.
WE HAVE, FOR POSSIBLE VOTE.
THE RIGHT TO COUNCIL
LEGISLATION FROM MY OFFICE AND
FROM RENTERS' RIGHTS ADVOCATES
WHICH GUARANTEES ANY RENTER HAS
THE RIGHT TO A LAWYER
REGARDLESS OF ABILITY TO PAY.
THANK YOU SO MUCH TO COUNCIL
MEMBER LEWIS, WHO HAS CO-
RESPONSE SORED THE LEGISLATION.
THROUGH EFFORTS FROM MY OFFICE
IN COORDINATION WITH THE
PEOPLE'S BUDGET AND ACTIVISTS,
WE HAVE ONE CITY LEVEL FUNDING
FOR DEFENSE ATTORNEYS SUCH AS
THROUGH THE HOUSING PROJECT.
THE RIGHT TO COUNCIL
LEGISLATION WOULD COMMIT THE
CITY OF SEATTLE TO CONTRACTING
FOR ALL THE LEGAL
REPRESENTATION THAT IS NEEDED,
SUCH THAT ATTORNEYS FROM
ORGANIZATION LIKE THE HOUSING
JUSTICE PROJECT CAN DEFEND
EVERY RENTER FACING EVICTION
WHO NEEDS HELP.
BEFORE THE PANDEMIC, ABOUT 1200
RENTERS IN SEATTLE FACED
EVICTION EVERY YEAR.
EVEN DURING THE PANDEMIC, WITH
THE MORATORIUMS IN PLACE,
LANDLORDS HAVE FILED MORE THAN
300 EVICTION CASES WITH THE
COURTS, AS THEY ARE EXPLOITING
LOOPHOLES IN THE MORATORIUMS.
AND WITHOUT THIS WE CAN EXPECT
A TSUNAMI OF EVICTIONS, ONCE
THE CITY AND STATE MORATORIUMS
EXPIRE, AS RENTERS WILL STILL
BE STRUGGLING UNDER THE DOUBLE
BLOWS OF THE CAPITALIST
RECESSION AND THE COVID-19
HEALTH CRISIS AND WILL BE
BURDENED WITH DEBT.
WE KNOW THAT'S VISION DESTROY
CITIES, WRECK HOUSEHOLDS AND
EVEN KILL.
THE 2018 REPORT LOSING HOME THE
HUMAN COST OF EVICTION IN
SEATTLE, FOUND 87.5% OF ALL
TENANTS WHO ARE EVICTED END UP
HOLES HOMELESS.
IN OUR STUDY OFEE VICKS, THE
AUTHOR OF THE REPORT THE
SEATTLE WOMEN'S COMMISSION ASK
THE KING COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION
FOUND SOME TENANTS DIED SHORTLY
AFTER BEING EVICTED.
WE ALSO KNOW FROM DATA THE
HOUSING JUSTICE PROJECT STAFF
WILL BE PRESENTING SHORTLY MANY
EVICTIONS OCCUR BECAUSE TENANTS
DON'T SHOW UP IN COURT.
THESE ARE CALLED DEFAULT
EVICTIONS.
IT WOULD BE PREPOSTEROUS FOR
THIN TO CLAIM THIS IS BECAUSE
TENANTS DON'T CARE ABOUT BEING
EVICTED.
RATHER NOT AWARE OF THEIR
RIGHTS, THEY ARE BULLIED BY
THEIR CORPORATE LANDLORDS AND
ARE LED TO BELIEVE THAT AN E
VISION IS INEVITABLE, THAT THEY
DIDN'T DO ANYTHING TO FIND
AGAINST IT OR THEY ARE DAUNTED
BY A CODE SYSTEM.
SOMETIMES THEY GIVE YOU.
SOMETIMES TENANTS ARE
PREOCCUPIED WITH HEALTHCARE
CHALLENGES OR BUSY WITH
MULTIPLE JOBS AND CHILDCARE AND
HAVE DIFFICULTY MAKING A COURT
TATE.
I WOULD URGE COUNCIL MEMBERS
WHO ARE MEMBERS OF THIS
RENTERS' RIGHTS COMMITTEE AND
THE FULL CITY COUNCIL TO PASS
THIS BILL WITHOUT WATERING IT
DOWN WITH LOOPHOLES, WHICH I'M
HUR OUR PANELISTS ARE GOING TO
BE TALKING ABOUT, SPECIFICALLY
WHY WE DON'T WANT THE LOOPHOLE
AND WHY IT DOESN'T WORK.
AFTER THE COUNCIL PASSES THIS
RIGHT TO COUNCIL LEGISLATION
THE CITY COUNCIL MUST, THERE IS
TWO WORDS DOWN AND COUNSEL.
RIGHT TO COUNSEL WE MEAN LEGAL
COUNSEL, NOT AS IN A COMMITTEE
COUNCIL.
THE CITY MUST TAKE UP TO
MINIMIZE IF NOT COMPLETELY DO
AWAY WITH DEPROVISIONS, BUT
PROVIDING RENTERS BE FULLY
INFORMED OF THEIR RIGHTS AND
RIGHT TO REPRESENTATION BEFORE
ANY PROCEEDING BEGINS.
THIS INCLUDES IMPOSING
NOTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS ON
LANDLORDS AND FUNDING OUTREACH
AND EDUCATION SO TENANTS KNOW
WHAT THEIR RIGHTS ARE,
INCLUDING THEIR RIGHT TO LEGAL
REPRESENTATION.
I ALSO WANT TO ADD A NOTE ABOUT
WHO WE ARE TALKING ABOUT, WHEN
WE TALK ABOUT LANDLORDS WHO ARE
EVICTING.
WE HEAR MORE FROM OUR PANEL ON
THIS, BUT SUFFICE IT TO SAY IT
IS NOT STRUGGLING MOM AND POP
LANDLORDS WHO ARE THE MOST
EVICTING LAND HEARD.
DISPROPORTIONATELY THE
LANDLORDS SHOWING UP IN COURT
TIME AND AGAIN SEEK TO EVICT
TENANTS IN SEATTLE AND KING
COUNTY ARE THE BIG, CORPORATE
LANDLORDS.
BIG, REGIONAL, NATIONAL AND
EVEN GLOBAL REAL ESTATE
MANAGEMENT CUPS, WHICH MAKE
PROFITS FOR MILLIONAIRES AND
BILLIONAIRES AT THE EXPENSE OF
WORKING CLASS RENTERS AND WHO
HAVE UNLIMITED RESOURCES TO
HIRE ATTORNEYS AND OTHER LEGAL
RESOURCES.
ALSO OF COURSE I'LL MENTION
THAT TENANTS IN PUBLICLY OWNED
HOUSING ALSO, UNFORTUNATELY,
ARE OFTEN VICTIMS OF EVICTIONS.
BUT IN MY VIEW THAT ONLY ADDS
MORE EVIDENCE AS TO WHY WE NEED
THIS KIND OF COUNCIL
LEGISLATION AND WHY WE NEED TO
ADDRESS THE EVICTIONS.
THE AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES
UNION FOUND THAT NATIONALLY,
90% OF LANDLORDS ARE
REPRESENTED IN EVICTION COURT,
WHILE ONLY 10% OF TENANTS ARE.
CAN YOU IMAGINE?
AS A STRUGGLING TENANT FACING
EVICTION PERHAPS BECAUSE YOU
JUST LOST YOUR LOW WAGE JOB,
GOING UP AGAINST THE LIKES OF
ATTORNEYS FROM GOODMAN REAL
ESTATE?
A GLOBAL ENTERPRISE WITH $2.5
BILLION OF WORTH REAL ESTATE,
THAT IS BILLION WITH A B, IN
MANAGED ASSETS.
AND THE NUMBER ONE EVICTING
LANDLORD IN OUR CITY.
IMAGINE BEING A LONE TENANT
GOING UP AGAINST A MULTI-
BILLION DOLLARS ENTERPRISE.
OUR RIGHT TO CONFRONT TATION
WILL GIVE THESE TENANTS A
FIGHTING CHANCE IN COURT WHEN
THEY HAVE TO GO UP AGAINST
THESE GREEDY CORPORATE
LANDLORD.
WE ALSO KNOW WE NEED TO DO MORE
THAN WIN THE RIGHT OF EVERY
TENANT TO BE REPRESENTED IN
COURT.
WE HAVE TO STOP EVICTIONS FROM
BEING FILED IN THE FIRST PLACE.
THAT IS WHY MY OFFICE LAUNCHED
A PETITION DEMANDING MAYOR
DURKAN AND GOVERNOR INSLEE
REVIEW THE MORATORIUMS FOR
RENTERS, SMALL BUSINESSES AND
NONPROFITS THROUGH 2021.
WE KNOW THIS UNPRECEDENTED
ECONOMIC CRISIS FOR WORKING
PEOPLE WILL EXTEND AT LEAST
THROUGH THE END OF THIS YEAR,
AND AS SEATTLE AND STATE PUBLIC
HEALTH EXPERTS HAVE RECENTLY
REPORTED THE PUBLIC HEALTH
CRISIS THE ORIGINAL BASIS FOR
THE EMERGENCY DECLARATIONS LAST
MARCH ALSO WILL EXTEND AT LEAST
TO THE END OF THIS YEAR, EVEN
WITH THE BEST PRO SECTIONS FROM
STATE HEALTH OFFICIALS.
I THINK IT IS OBVIOUS TO SAY
TENANTS ROOTS LEGISLATION IS
WILDLY POPULAR WITH RENT
TENANTS, WHO AS YOU KNOW,
CONSTITUTE ABOUT HALF OF ALL
RESIDENT IN OUR CITY.
APPLIES TO ALL THE DISTRICT
COUNCIL MEMBERS AND THE CITY
WHILE COUNCIL MEMBERS AND
RENTERS WILL SOON BE IN THE
CLEAR MAJORITY.
BUT COMMIT FEE MEMBERS SHOULD
KNOW THAT SMALL LANDLORDS HAVE
ALSO BE SPEAK UP IN SUPPORT OF
TENANTS'S RIGHTS.
ONE WROTE TO US SAYING I AM A
LANDLORD AND RENTAL PROPERTY
OWNER.
I SUPPORT THESE PROTECTIONS FOR
PEOPLE RENT PROGRESS ME OR FROM
ANYBODY ELSE.
MONEY SHOULD NOT RANK HIGHER IN
EXPERIENCE THAN PEOPLE'S HEALTH
AND SAFETY AT ANY TIME, BUT
ESPECIALLY DURING A PUBLIC
HEALTH CRISIS.
AND EVAN FROM WEST SEATTLE,
RESPONDING TO OUR CALL TO
EXTEND THE EVICTION MORATORIUM,
WROTE I AM A SEATTLE HOMEOWNER
WHO RENTS OUT A PORTION OF MY
HOME AND I SUPPORT EXTENDING
THE RENT MORATORIUM.
IT IS IMMORAL TO KICK OUT
RENTERS DURING A PANDEMIC WHEN
SO MANY ARE LOSING THEIR JOB
DUE TO NO FAULT OF THEIR OWN.
I AM APPRECIATIVE OF THE SMALL
LANDLORDS WHO HAVE WRITTEN IN
SUPPORT OF TENANTS'S RIGHTS IN
OUR CITY.
THE RIGHT TO COUNCIL WILL
HOPEFULLY BE THE FIRST IN A
SERIES OF LEGISLATION THAT THIS
COMMITTEE WILL DISCUSS IN THE
SPRING AND COMING SUMMER.
>>> IN TODAY'S COMMITTEE WE
WILL START WITH DISCUSSING THE
COMMUNITY PANEL, INCLUDING
RENTERS AND EXPERTS ABOUT THE
RIGHT TO COUNCIL AND ALSO ABOUT
FUTURE LEGISLATION THAT WILL BE
NEEDED.
AS I SAID, ONE OF THE KEY
PROBLEMS IS DEFAULT EVICTIONS,
WHICH I WILL SORT OF GO OVER A
LITTLE BIT AS AN INTRODUCTION.
WHEN WE COME TO THE PANEL, AND
AFTER THE PANEL, WE WILL HEAR
FROM CITY COUNCIL STAFF ABOUT
THE RIGHT TO COUNCIL LIENALES
SLICE OR A POSSIBLE VOTE AND
FINALLY THE COMMITTEE WILL VOTE
ON FOUR REAPPOINTMENT TO THE
SEATTLE RENTERS' COMMISSION.
BEFORE WE BEGIN WE HAVE PUBLIC
COMMENT AND I WILL BE READING
THE NAMES OF EACH PERSON WHO
HAS SIGNED UP FOR PUBLIC
COMMENT, AND EVERYBODY WHO
SIGNED UP SHOULD PLEASE NOTE
THAT WE HAVE A MINUTE FOR EACH
OF YOU.
WE HAVE 30 PEOPLE SIGNED UP FOR
PUBLIC COMMENT, SO JUST WANTED
TO MAKE SURE EVERYBODY IS
HEARD.
SO RATHER THAN THE USUAL TWO
MINUTES, WE'LL GO WITH ONE
MINUTE.
TED IF YOU ARE READY, I WOULD
LIKE TO CALL THE FIRST NAME.
WE HAVE DANIEL KAVANAUGH.
>> HI, MY NAME IS DAN, I'M A
RENTTER IN THE CENTRAL
DISTRICT, AND A CONSTITUENT IN
DISTRICT THREE.
I WANTED TO URGE THE COUNCIL
MEMBERS YOU KNOW THAT WE REALLY
NEED TO PASS CHALLENGE
LEGISLATION FOR RIGHT TO A
PUBLIC COUNSEL FOR RENTERS
FACING EVICTION.
I LIVE 27th AND CHERRY A BLOCK
AWAY FROM THE GAS FIRE THE
OTHER DAY AND A LOT OF MY
NEIGHBORS, WHO YOU KNOW I HAVE
TALKED TO HAVE LOST THEIR JOBS
AND HAVE RENT BUILDING UP.
THEY UNDERSTAND WHEN THE
EVICTION MORATORIUM IS LIFTED,
THAT IS GOING TO.
DO CRASHING DOWN ON THEM IF WE
DON'T HAVE SOME OTHER KIND OF
PROTECTION.
A LOT OF LANDLORDS ALREADY HAVE
BEEN EXPLOITING LOOPHOLES IN
THE LAW, AND YOU KNOW, IN
CITIES WHERE THE RIGHT TO
COUNSEL HAS BEEN PASSED,
EVICTIONS HAVE GONE DOWN
SIGNIFICANTLY.
WE NEED THE STRONGEST POSSIBLE
VERSION OF THIS BILL.
>> THANK YOU, DAN.
NEXT WE HAVE ANGIE GERALD,
FOLLOWED BY BRETT WALLER.
ANGIE, GO AHEAD.
>> HI, MY NAME IS ANGIE AND MY
HUSBAND AND I HAVE BEEN SMALL
LANDLORDS IN DISTRICT 6 SIX
2003.
WE RENT TWO SINGLE FAMILY
HOUSE.
A LITTLE OVER A YEAR AGO I MET
WITH COUNCIL MEMBER SAWANT'S
STAFF.
COLLECTIVELY, PEOPLE LIKE US
OFFER A DIG CAN'T PORTION OF
THE REMAINING NATURAL
AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN THE CITY.
I'M SPEAKING TODAY TO CONFIRM
OUR CONCERNS ARE PLAYING OUT
AND CITY COUNCIL'S ACTIONS ARE
GREATLY INTENSIFYING THE
FLEEING OF SMALL LANDLORD FROM
THE SEATTLE MARKET.
WITH GREATER POLARIZATION
BETWEEN HAVES AND HAVE KNOTS.
SEATTLE'S CURRENT AND PROPOSED
POLICIES HAVE CREATED MASSIVELY
INCREASED RISK FOR SMALL
HOUSING PROVIDERS.
MANY PEOPLE ARE SELLING THEIR
SEATTLE RENTAL PROPERTIES WHO
NEVER INTENDED TO.
IT IS POSSIBLE TO FOCUS ON
IMPROVING STABILITY WHILE
AVOIDING EXTREMISM AND
UNINTENDED IMPACTS.
THE CITY CITY COUNCIL HAS NOT
COLLABORATED WITH LITTLE
LANDLORDS.
THE DATABASE HAS ALL OUR
CONTACT INFO IF YOU WANT TO
WORK WITH THE LITTLE GUYS IN
PREVENTING EVICTIONS AND
CULTIVATING AN INCREASE NOT
FURTHER DWINDLING OF INTEN
DENTALLY OWNED HOUSING.
>>> BRETT WALLER FOLLOWED BY
GRACE SON VAN LARS DALE.
>> GOOD MORNING THIS IS BRETT
WALLER.
WE ARE SUPPORTIVE OF ACCESS TO
COUNSEL BUT WANT TO RAISE THE
CONSTITUTIONAL GIFT OF PUBLIC
FUNDS AS IT RELATES TO THE
CURRENT LANGUAGE OF THE BILL.
I'M HAPPY TO TALK WITH ANY
COUNCIL MEMBERS ON THE
COMMITTEE ABOUT THIS ISSUE AND
OUR SUPPORTED ACCESS TO
COUNSEL.
THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU.
NEXT WE HAVE GRAYSON, FOLLOWED
BY BLYTHE,.
>>> I'M GRAYSON IN THE CENTRAL
DISTRICT IN SUPPORT OF
GUARANTEEING THE RIGHT TO LEGAL
COUNSEL FOR RENTERS.
IT WOULD STRIKE A BLOW AGAINST
LANDLORD INTIMIDATION WHICH IS
RAMPANT WHERE A THIRD OF ADULTS
HAVE HAD TO USE THEIR SAVINGS
OR RETIREMENT TO PAY THEIR
BILLS IN THE LAST YEAR.
WE CAN AGREE THIS IS NEEDED.
SO I WANT TO EMPHASIZE IT
SHOULD BE PASSED WITHOUT AN
EXPIRATION DATE.
I THINK THE SUGGESTION OF AN
EXPIRATION DATE IS INSIDIOUS,
GIVEN EVICTIONS DON'T HAVE AN
EXPIRATION DATE.
AND GUARANTEEING REPRESENTATION
WHERE DEFENDANTS COULD HAVE
LIVES RUINED IS A BASIC FEATURE
OF DECEMBER MOCK CRASSRY.
A RIGHT TO COUNSEL WITH AN
EXPIRATION DATE IS A RIGHT AT
ALL.
COUNCILWOMAN SAWANT THANK YOU,
EVERY COUNCIL MEMBER HE SHOULD
VOTE YES ON IT.
>>> THANK YOU.
BLYTHE NEXT AND JACOB SHEER AND
AFTER THAT JORDAN TWIN.
GO AHEAD, BLYTHE.
>> I AM A RENTER IN MOUNT BAKER
AND CALLING IN SUPPORT OF RIGHT
TO OWN FOR RENTERS FACING
EVICTION NOW AND AFTER THE
PANDEMIC IS OVER.
THE VAST MAJORITY END UP
HOMELESS AND SOME DIE.
EVICTIONS FORCE CHILDREN TO
GIVE UP THEIR SCHOOLS AND
FRIENDS, WHICH IS A CONCERN
GIVEN AMONG TENANTS IN EVICTION
COURT THOSE WITH CHILDREN ARE
SIGNIFICANTLY LIKELY MORE
LIKELY TO BE EVICTED THAN THOSE
WITHOUT.
ACCORDING TO THE ACLU, BLACK
REPRESENTERS IN WASHINGTON
STATE HAD EVICTIONS FILED
AGAINST THEM AT MORE THAN TWICE
THE RATE OF WHITE RENTERS, WITH
BLACK WOMEN FACING THE HIGHEST
RISK.
THE CITY COUNCIL'S BLACK LIVES
MATTER MOVEMENT WHILE NOT DOING
ANYTHING TO PROTECT BLACK
RENTERS.
I URGE YES TO COUNCIL MEMBER'S
SAWANT'S LEGISLATION.
THANK YOU.
>>> THANK YOU.
OUR NEXT SPEAKER IS JACOB AND
THEN FOLLOWED BY JOHN QUINN AND
MARGO STEWART.
>> GO AHEAD JACOB.
>> JACOB, YOU'LL NEED TO HIT
STAR 6 TO UNMUTE.
.
>> SPEAK ON BEHALF OF REAL
TRANSIT.
OUR LOW INCOME HOUSING VENDORS,
WITH THE LEGISLATION TO PROVIDE
ALL SEATTLE TENANTS WITH THE
RIGHT TO LEGAL COUNSEL WHEN
FACED WITH EVICTION.
THIS BEING THE NEED TO
INSTITUTE A EVICTION MORATORIUM
THROUGH 2021.
THROUGH AT LEAST THE END OF THE
YEAR, RECOGNIZING COVID-19 AND
THE ECONOMIC DEVASTATION WILL
CONTINUE TO IMPACT SEATTLE AND
IN PARTICULAR ITS MOST
VULNERABLE COMMUNITIES FOR THE
FORESEEABLE FUTURE.
WE NEED TO MEET THIS CRISIS
HEAD ON.
THIS IS NOT THE TIME FOR HALF
SOLUTIONS.
WE NEED TO MEET THE NEEDS OF
YOUR THOUSANDS OF CONSTITUENTS.
ENSURE A RIGHT TO COUNSEL AND
MORATORIUM TO THE END OF 2021.
>>> THANK YOU.
>>> JOHN QUINN FOLLOWED BY MAR
GO STEWART AND EVA METS.
GO AHEAD JORDAN.
>> CAN YOU HEAR ME?
>> YES.
>> HI, MY NAME IS JORDAN QUINN.
I'MRY DENTER IN DISTRICT TWO, A
MEMBER OF SOCIALIST ALTERNATIVE
AND URGING THE COMMITTEE TO
PASS AND NOT WATER DOWN COUNCIL
MEMBER SAWANT'S LEGITIMATE
SLICE TO BE GUARANTEED A RIGHT
TO LEGAL COUNSEL.
I THINK COUNCIL MEMBER SAWANT
FOR PUTTING FORWARD THE
LEGISLATION.
WE NEED TO EXTEND THE
MORATORIUM THROUGH THE END OF
THE YEAR.
RIGHT NOW THE MORATORIUM IS UP
AT THE END OF THE MONTH.
IF THAT COMES DUE, BIG PROPERTY
MANAGEMENT COMPANIES ARE GOING
TO GO ON THE OFFENSIVE TO KICK
OUT RENTERS, DESPITE THE
ONGOING PANDEMIC.
ALREADY, 300 EVICTIONS HAVE
BEEN CARRIED OUT WHILE THE
MORATORIUM HAS BEEN IN EFFECT.
BIG LANDLORDS AND NOT SMALL
ONES.
ANYONE IN THIS POSITION
DESERVES TO HAVE A LAWYER, JUST
LIKE THE LANDLORD EVICTING
THEM.
IT IS ALSO CRUCIAL ANY RIGHT TO
COUNSEL NOT BE AWAY.
IN SAN FRANCISCO THE RIGHT TO
COUNSEL IS GUARANTEED WITHOUT
ANY MEANS TESTING.
AND SHOWS OVERWHELMINGLY THESE
ARE LOW INCOME PEOPLE ALREADY
THE MEANS TEST IS BUILT IN.
WELL OFF PEOPLE AREN'T GETTING
THESE EVICTION NOTICES.
IT IS CRUCIAL THE COMMITTEE
APASS THIS LEGISLATION OUT OF
COMMITTEE.
>>> THANK YOU, WE HAVE MARGO
AND AFTER THAT, EVA METS AND
MATTHEW SMITH.
GO AHEAD, MARGO.
>> MY NAME IS MAR GO.
I'M A RENTTER IN DISTRICT 3.
FOR TENANTS FACING EVICTION,
AND I URGE THE COMMITTEE TO
APROVE THIS WITHOUT LOOPHOLE.
WE KNOW IN MAJORITY OF CASES
THE EVICTIONS ARE FILED WITH
THE BULLYING OR HARASSING
TENANTS INTO LEAVING AND
UNFORTUNATELY, THIS IS USUALLY
CONDUCT ASSESSFUL BECAUSE ROW
INCOME TENANTS AREN'T AWARE OF
THE RESOURCES AVAILABLE OR
SIMPLY DON'T HAVE TIME TO FULLY
TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THEM.
THIS WOULD BE A HUGE BOONE TO
THESE PEOPLE AND OTHERS OTHERS
SAID THESE ARE PREDOMINANTLY
COMING FROM BIG CORPORATE
LANDLORDS DRAWING IN PROFITS
DURING THE PANDEMIC WHILE
TENANTS ARE STRUGGLING TO MAKE
ENDS MEET.
I THINK IT IS WORTH NOTING THAT
THE RIGHT TO COUNSEL IS A
CRUCIAL MEASURE, BUT IT SHOULD
REMAIN IN PLACE AFTER, BECAUSE
WE CAN'T FORGET SEATTLE WAS THE
EPICENTER OF A HOUSING CRISIS
BEFORE COVID-19 HIT.
EVICTIONS ARE STILL BEING
SERVED AND NO DOUBT THERE WILL
BE A DELUGE OF HIM AFTER IT
ENDS, ON FINANCIALLY BURDENED
TEN.
IT WON'T STOP BEING AN ISSUE.
THE RIGHT TO COUNSEL WON'T STOP
BEING NECESSARY TO KEEP PEOPLE
HOUSED.
>>> THANK YOU, EVA METS AND
MATTHEW SMITH AND ALICIA LEWIS.
GO AHEAD, EVA.
>>> MY NAME IS EVA AND I'M A
RENTTER IN DISTRICT TWO.
I THINK THE CITY COUNCIL NEEDS
TO VOTE YES ON THE LEGISLATION
AND SUPPORT LEGAL
REPRESENTATION FOR ALL TENANTS
FACING EVICTIONS.
SOME POLITICIANS WORRY ABOUT
THE OPPORTUNITY COST OF THE
CITY PAYING FUNDS FOR RENTERS
TO HAVE ATTORNEYS AND I THINK
IT WOULD BE INEXCUSABLE FOR
POLITICIANS SAY THE MOST
VULNERABLE AND LOW INCOME
COMMUNITY MEMBERS SHOULD NOT
GET THIS BASIC ASSISTANCE.
I GREW UP IN BALTIMORE, WHERE
THE EVICTION CRISIS IS EVEN
WORSE THAN HEAR.
AND A 2020 STUDY FOUND
INVESTING $5.7 MILLION INTO THE
RIGHT TO COUNSEL LEGISLATION
WOULD SAVE BALTIMORE AND
MARYLAND $35.6 MILLION IN
EMERGENCY SHELTER, HEALTHCARE,
CHILDCARE AND OTHER COSTS.
SO IF YOU WANT TO JUST LOOK AT
THE NUMBERS PREVENTING THE
EVICTIONS THAT HAPPEN EVERY
YEAR IN SEATTLE AND KING
COUNTY, WOULD SAVE THE STATE
MILLIONS OF DOLLARS.
WE NEED THIS LEGISLATION NOW.
WE ALSO NEED TO EXTEND THE
EVICTION MORATORIUM THROUGH AT
LEAST THE END OF 2021.
>> THANK YOU.
WE HAVE MATTHEW SMITH FOLLOWED
BY ALICIA LEWIS AND ADEN THAT
ARE DON'T.
GO AHEAD, MATTHEW.
>> IS MATTHEW SMITH THERE?
>> HE APPEARS TO BE UNMUTED AND
SHOULD BE ABLE TO SPEAK.
>> ALICIA WILL NEED TO HIT STAR
6 TO UNMEGAWATT.
.
>> HI, MY NAME IS ALICIA LEWIS.
I'M A RENTTER FROM DISTRICT 3
AND A MEMBER OF SOCIALIST
ALTERNATIVE.
I SUPPORT THE LEGISLATION
GUARANTEEING RENTERS THE RIGHT
TO COUNSEL AND I BELIEVE THIS
IS LODGE OVERDUE.
SEATTLE HAS BEEN IN A BIG
DEVELOPER FUELED HOUSING CRISIS
FOR DECADES CAN SKYROCKETING
RENT AND NOW WITH THIS
RECESSION THAT CRISIS HAS
EXPLODED.
EACH WITH EVICTION MORATORIUMS
IN PLACE MORE THAN 300 SEATTLE
TENANTS HAVE BEEN SERVED WITH
EVICTION PAPERS AND WHEN THE
MORATORIUM EXPIRES, RENTERS ARE
GOING TO BE BURDEN WITH DEBT
AND ONSLAUGHT OF EVICTIONS.
THAT IS WHY WE NEED TO FIGHT
FOR THE RIGHT TO COUNSEL NOW TO
EXTEND THE CURRENT MORATORIUMS,
AT LEAST THROUGH THE END OF THE
YEAR, AND EVEN WHEN THE
PANDEMIC ENDS, WE CANNOT AFFORD
TO RETURN TO BUSINESS AS USUAL,
WHICH, IN REALITY, WAS ALREADY
A DAILY HARDSHIP FOR WORKING
PEOPLE AND THAT IS WHY THIS
LEGISLATION
NEEDS TO BE PASSED WITH NO
ISSUES.
THE SYSTEM HAS PROVEN ITSELF
INCAPABLE OF PROVIDING FOR THE
BASIC NEEDS OF HUMANITY FROM
HOUSING TO HEALTHCARE, TO
PREVENTING CLIMATE CATASTROPHE.
WE NEED TO STRENGTHEN RENTERS
RIGHTS NOW TO GROW THE MOVEMENT
TO MASSIVELY EXPAND PUBLIC
AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND
CHALLENGE THE CAPITAL SYSTEM
ITSELF.
THANK YOU.
>>> THANK YOU, IS MATTHEW SMITH
HERE?
>>> HELLO.
MATTHEW, WE CAN HEAR YOU.
GOOD.
>>> GREAT, MY NAME IS MATTHEW
SMITH A REASONER IN DISTRICT
TWO.
I URGE COUNCIL TO VOTE IN FAVOR
OF THE RIGHT TO COUNSEL
LEGISLATION WITHOUT ANY
MEASURES TO WATER DOWN WHAT I
THINK IS A BASIC RIGHT FOR
RENTERS TO DEFEND THEMSELVES IN
COURT FROM PREDATORY CORPORATE
LANDLORDS.
WE ARE FACING DOWN AN E VISION
CRISIS ON TOP OF A PREEXISTING
CRISIS IN SEATTLE AND THESE ARE
PREDOMINANTLY BIG LANDLORDS
DRIVING THE EVICTION TRACE
CRISIS.
THE REPORT SHOWS IT IS
COMPANIES LIKE GOODMAN REAL
ESTATE.
ACCESS PROPERTY MANAGEMENT, WHO
ARE DRIVING THIS.
THEY HAVE MILLIONS AND MILLIONS
OF DOLLARS TO THROW INTO LEGAL
BATTLES, AND WE WILL BE UNABLE
TO SOLVE THE HOUSING PROBLEMS
IN SEATTLE UNTIL WE CHANGE THE
FUNDAMENTAL BALANCE OF POWER
BETWEEN RENT ENTERS BIG
CORPORATE LANDLORDS.
THE RIGHT TO COUNCIL
LEGISLATION IS ONE SMALL STEP.
I THINK A BASIC AND FUNDAMENTAL
STEP IN GIVING RENTERS A FATING
CHANCE IN COURT.
I URGE YOU TO PASS IT WITHOUT
LOOPHOLES.
THANK YOU FOR THE TIME.
>>> THANK YOU, ADEN, APOLOGIZE
IF I'M MISPRONOUNCING, AND
AFTER ADEN, ZOE AND HANNAH.
>> GOOD MORNING, MY NAME IS
ADEN.
I'M A RETIRED SENIOR CITIZEN
THAT HAS BEEN RENTING FROM A
REPUTABLE MOM AND POP LANDLORD
FOR MANY YEARS.
THEY STRIVE TO PROVIDE A
HEALTHY, SAFE AND AFFORDABLE
RESIDENCE.
AS THE CITY COUNCIL CONTINUES
TO PASS LAWS THAT HOBBLE MOM
AND POP LANDLORDS, AND FORCE
THEM TOEN OCCUR INCREASED
EXPENSES, MORE MOM AND POP
LANDLORDS ARE SELLING THEIR
PROPERTIES AND SAFE AND
AFFORDABLE RENTALS ARE
COMING OFF THE MARKET.
THESE PROPERTIES ARE REFERRED
TO OWNER OCCUPIED OR THEY WILL
BE SOLD TO A DEVELOPER, WHO
WILL
BUILD MORE EXPENSIVE TOWNHOMES.
NONPROFIT HOUSING PROVIDERS
UNDER THE SAME FAIR HOUSING
LANDLORD TENANTS UMBRELLA.
I HAVEN'T HEARD ONE WORD FROM
ANY OF THEM ABOUT THIS PROPOSED
LEGISLATION.
THIS PROPOSED LEGISLATION DOES
NOT HELP TO MAINTAIN THE SUPPLY
OF SAFE AND AFFORDABLE RENTAL
UNITS ACROSS THE CITY.
IT WILL COMPOUND THE PROBLEM.
THIS LEGISLATION WILL TURN INTO
ANOTHER WRECKING BALL COMING
DOWN THE TURNPIKE.
.
>>> THANK YOU.
WE HAVE ZOE FOLLOWED BY HANNAH,
AND THEN HANNAH SWANSON.
GO AHEAD, ZOE?
>> GOOD MORNING, MY NAME IS SO
WII AIMER.
I'M A RESIDENT OF DISTRICT 4.
THE COMMITTEE SUSTAINABILITY
AND RENTERS RIGHTS MUST VOTE
YES ON THE PROPOSAL TO FUND
LEGAL REPRESENTATION FOR
RENTERS FACING EVICTION.
ACCORDING TO A 2017 KING COUNTY
BAR ASSOCIATION REPORT, IN
SEATTLE, WOMEN AND PEOPLE OF
COLOR BEAR THE BRUNT OF
ECONOMIC INSECURITY, WHICH
MAKES THEM DISPROPORTIONATELY
AT RISK FOR EVICTION.
AS WE STAND AGAINST THE
VIOLENCE AND BRUTALITY PEOPLE
FACE FROM THE POLICE, WE MUST
STAND AGAINST THE
DISPROPORTIONATE BRUTALITY THEY
FACE AT THE HANDS OF HUGE
CORPORATE LANDLORDS.
SMALL LANDLORDS WILL HAVE
CONCERNS JUST AS HAD CONCERNS
ON THE $15 MINIMUM WAGE, AND
WHICH BIDEN HAS SHAMEFULLY
FAILED TO PASS FEDERALLY.
THE $15 MINIMUM WAGE SUCCEEDED
IN SEATTLE AND THE EVICTION
MORATORIUM FOR RENTERS AND
LEGAL REPRESENTATION ARE ALL
POSSIBLE AS WELL, WITHOUT
JEOPARDIZING SMALL HOME HORNS
WHO RENT TO TENANTS.
THE VAST MAJORITY OF EVICTIONS
COME FROM HUGE CORPORATE RAND
LOWER.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.
>>> THANK YOU.
WE HAVE HANNAH, AND HANNAH, AND
THEN ARIANA.
>> GO AHEAD.
>> I'M A RENTER IN DISTRICT 3.
I'M COOLING TO URGE THE COUNCIL
TO VOTE YES ON THE LEGISLATION
TO GIVE TENANTS RIGHT TO
COUNSEL.
THE BOTTOM LINE IS THAT'S VICKS
ARE AN ACT OF VIOLENCE AND
SERIOUSLY UP END OUR COMMUNITY.
EVERY TENANT FACING EVICTIONS
NEEDS A LAWYER.
TIME AND TIME AGAIN LANDLORDS
HAVE LEGAL REPRESENTATION AND
TENANTS DO NOT.
IN CITIES THAT HAVE RIGHT TO
COUNSEL LEGISLATION EVICTION
RIGHTS HAVE PLUMMETED.
AS MANY SAID THE REALITY IS BIG
LANDLORDS ARE BY FAR THE ONES
CARRYING OUT EVICTIONS.
THIS LEGISLATION IS NOT
TARGETING MOM AND POP
LANDLORDS.
WE ARE TALKING ABOUT PROPERTY
MANAGEMENT CORPORATIONS.
THESE ARE LANDLORDS WHO OFTEN
FILE EVICTION PAPERS JUST TO
BULLY RENTERS INTO LEAVING,
JUST TO TURN A PROFIT.
HOUSING SHOULD NOT BE ABOUT
PROFIT.
EVEN WITH EVICTION MORATORIUMS,
LANDLORDS ARE STILL FINDING
LOOPHOLES.
WE URGENTLY NEED RIGHT TO
COUNSEL WITH NO MEANS TESTING
SO STRUGGLING SMALL BUSINESSES
CAN HAVE A CHANCE TO STAND UP
IF COURT.
>>> THANK YOU, WE HAVE HANNAH
SWANSON AND ARIANA AND SARAH.
GO AHEAD HANNAH.
>>
>>> I THINK I MAY HAVE DISABLED
TALKING FOR MISS SWANSON.
ACCIDENTALLY.
>> OKAY.
WE'LL WAIT FOR HANNAH TO COME
BACK.
>> THERE WE GO.
>>> HI, MY NAME IS HANNAH
SWANSON.
I WORK AT SWANSON'S SHOE REPAIR
IN D4.
I WANT TO SURGE CITY COUNCIL TO
SUPPORT THE RIGHT TO COUNSEL
LEGISLATION WITHOUT TESTING
REPRESENTATION WHEN FACING THE
VIOLENCE OF EVICTION IS A BASIC
RIGHT ALL TENANTS SHOULD HAVE.
LIKE AN HAPPEN THAT SAID BEFORE
ME A RIGHT TO COUNSEL IS NOT A
THREAT TO MOM AND POP LANDLORDS
AND WILL REDUCE EVICTIONS AND
DETER PREDATORY CORPORATE
LANDLORDS FOR FILING FOR
EVICTION IN THE FIRST PLACE.
EE VICKS FALL ON OUR MOST
VULNERABLE AND REPRESSED
COMMUNITIES IN SEATTLE WITH A
DEVASTATING AMOUNT OF FOLK IN
OUR CITY, WE MUST TAKE EVERY
MEASURE TO KEEP PEOPLE HOUSED.
PLEASE ALSO CONTINUE TO
PRESSURE MAYOR DURKAN AND
GOVERNOR INSLEE TO EXTEND THE
MORATORIUM THROUGH 2021 AND
PUSH FOR TRULY PROGRESSIVE
REVENUE LIKE TAXING THE WEALTHY
TO BUILD AFFORDABLE HOUSING
INFRASTRUCTURE WE SO BADLY NEED
IN THE CITY.
>>> THANK YOU.
WE HAVE ARIANA, FOLLOWED BY
SARAH AND BRYCE.
GO AHEAD.
>>> I AM HERE TO WEIGH IN ON
THE FISCAL IRRESPONSIBILITY OF
NOT PROVIDING THE RIGHT TO
COUNSEL.
THE RIGHT TO COUNSEL HAS BEEN
DEMONSTRATED TO KEEP AS MANY AS
86% OF THOSE WHO FACE EVICTIONS
HOUSED.
THE AVERAGE COST OF HAVING A
CHANCE TO DEFEND YOUR HOME IN
COURT IS $600 PER HOUSEHOLD.
THAT IS $600 TO KEEP FAMILIES
HOUSED, $600 TO PREVENT THE
RELOCATION OF CHILDREN, $600 TO
SAVE LIVES.
AS THE CDC HAS TOLD US, WE CAN
EXPECT A COVID-19 DEATH FOR
EVERY 60 EVICTED IF THE
EVICTION RATE HITS 1%.
AT LEAST A QUARTER WILL BE
EVICTED INTO THE STREETS.
THE AVERAGE PERSON LIVING ON
THE STREETS HAS FOUR ER ROOM
VISITS A YEAR, AVERAGING OVER
$2000 AVISIT.
THIS PROGRAM PAYS FOR ITSELF.
IT WILL ALWAYS BE LESS COSTLY
TO MITIGATE A DISASTER THAN TO
DEAL WITH THE FALLOUT OF ONE.
THE RIGHT TO COUNSEL IS A SOUND
POLICY THAT SAVES LIVES.
THANK YOU.
HAVE A GOOD DAY.
>>> THANK YOU.
WE HAVE BRYCE AND BARBARA
FINNEY.
GO AHEAD, SARAH.
>> HI, MY NAME IS SARAH AND I
AM A RENTTER IN CAPITOL HILL
AND I'M HERE TO URGE THE
COUNCIL TO SPORE THE RIGHT TO
COUNSEL LEGISLATION.
TENANTS FACING EVICTION DESERVE
THE RIGHT TO REPRESENT NATION.
LANDLORDS ESPECIALLY CORPORATE
LANDLORDS CAN AFFORD LEGAL AID,
WHILE ACCORDING TO THE ACLU THE
WORKING PEOPLE LANDLORDS ARE
EVICTING CAN ONLY AFFORD
COUNSEL 10% OF THE TIME.
WITH MILLIONS UNEMPLOYED DUE TO
THE PANDEMIC, RENTERS ARE
COLLECTING DEBT AS THEY TRY TO
PAY BASIC BILLS.
MILLIONS OF PEOPLE HAVE ONLY
ABOUT $1000 IN SAVINGS, MEANING
THESE FOLKS ARE LIVING PAYCHECK
TO PAYCHECK.
IF A TENANT CAN'T AFFORD TO PAY
THEIR RENT IN THIS ESPECIALLY
TOUGH TIME, THEY CERTAINLY
CAN'T AFFORD LEGAL AID ON TOP
OF BEING EVICTED.
AND WITHOUT THE PROMISED
STIMULUS CHECKS TO SUPPLEMENT
UNEMPLOYED RENTERS IN THE
EVICTION MORATORIUM THIS WILL
MANY HUNDREDS MORE WILL BE AT
RISK OF EVICTION IN THE MONTHS
AHEAD.
ON TOP OF ALL THIS, WE
ABSOLUTELY NEED TO EXTEND THE
EVICTION MORATORIUM UNTIL AT
LEAST 2021.
THANK YOU.
>>> THANK YOU, BRYCE HACK ANY
AND THEN BARBARA FINNEY AND
ALVIN.
GO AHEAD BRYCE.
>> LEGAL HELP FOR RENTERS IN
THE SEATTLE AREA IS INCREDIBLY
IMPORTANT.
MY FIRST DEFAULT EVICTION WAS
AN INFORMAL EVICTION FROM MY
MOM AND POP LANDLORD IN THE
MIDDLE OF THE PANDEMIC IN
OCTOBER.
THAT USED THREATENING TACTICS
AND INTIMIDATION TO REMOVE ME
AS A RENTER.
I FELT COMPLETELY HELPLESS.
AFTER RECEIVING TEXTS TELLING
ME I MUST BE OUT BY THE END OF
METROPLEX MONTH.
THINGS LIKE WE HAVE A SHOWING
THIS AFTERNOON UNLESS YOU WANT
TO LOSE $1000 OF YOUR DEPOSIT,
PLEASE BE COP GIVE.
A DEPOSIT HE INEVITABLELY KEPT
ANY WAYS, LEAVING PEOPLE
WITHOUT LEGAL REPRESENTATION IN
THE MIDDLE OF A PANDEMIC IN
HOUSING MARKETS LIKE THIS
LEAVES PEOPLE LIKE ME
VULNERABLE.
ULTIMATELY HOMELES,
DISCONNECTED WITH NO SAVINGS
NOW, LIVING IN AN UNINSULATED
GARAGE ALL WINTER.
MIND YOU, THIS WAS ALL WHILE
WORKING FULL-TIME AND WILLING
TO PAY FOR RENT.
PLEASE, PLEASE SUPPORT RENTERS
WITH LEGAL REPRESENTATION.
WE REALLY NEED YOUR HELP.
THANK YOU.
>>> THANK YOU.
AFTER BARBARA FINNEY, ALVIN AND
THEN MARIA.
GO AHEAD BARBARA.
>> HELLO MY NAME IS BARBARA.
I'MRY RETIRED RN AND A
HOMEOWNER IN DISTRICT 5 WHERE
THE MAJORITY OF RESIDENCE ARE
RENTERS.
THANK TO COUNCIL MEMBER SAWANT
FOR HOLDING THIS MEETING AND
CHAMPIONING THIS VITAL AND
LIFESAVING LEGISLATION.
EVERY HOME EVICTION IS AN ACT
OF VIOLENCE.
EVICTIONS RIP APART LIVES, PUSH
FAMILIES OUT OF THEIR
COMMUNITIES, AND FORCE CHILDREN
TO GIVE UP THEIR SCHOOLS AND
FRIENDS, DRIVE PEOPLE INTO
DESTITUTION AND DESPERATION.
ALSO AN E VISION TEARS THE
FABRIC OF THE COMMUNITY WHERE
IT HAPPENS.
EVICTIONS FALL
DISPROPORTIONATELY ON WOMEN AND
PEOPLE OF COLOR.
AND THE VAST MAJORITY OF KING
COUNTY RESIDENTS WHO ARE
EVICTED END UP HOMELESS AND
SOME EVEN DIE AS ANESS
CONSEQUENCE, ACCORDING TO THE
REPORT LOSING HOME.
PLEAS EXTEND THE EVICTION
MORATORIUM TO 2021, AND GIVE
THE RIGHT TO COUNSEL FOR
RENTERS FACING EVICTION WITHOUT
ANY MEANS TESTING.
THANK YOU.
>>> THANK YOU.
AFTER ALVIN, WE WILL HAVE MARIA
AND THEN MINDY.
GO AHEAD, ALVIN.
>> [CAPTIONER HAS LOST AUDIO]
>> ALVIN, WE CAN'T HEAR YOU
VERY WELL.
CAN YOU SPEAK UP PLEASE?
>> SORRY.
I WOULD VOICE MY SUPPORT TO THE
RIGHT TO COUNSEL BILL.
I THINK THIS IS ESSENTIAL FOR
OUR PROTECTION THAT SHOULD
EXIST EVEN BEFORE COVID-19 BUT
ESPECIALLY NOW AND CONSIDERING
THE MORATORIUM IS ENDING, IT
SHOULD BE EXTENDED INTO THE END
OF NEXT YEAR.
FINDING LOOPHOLES AND WITH
GREATER PROTECTIONS AND THIS IS
YOU KNOW, A FIGHT AGAINST
CORPORATE LANDLORDS LIKE
GOLDMAN.
THESE CORPORATIONS HAVE BEEN
RESPONSIBLE FOR THE MAJORITY OF
EVICTIONS FILED AND RENTERS
NEED LEGAL COUNSEL TO GO UP
AGAINST THESE GIANT
CORPORATIONS WHICH CAN AFFORD
LEGAL REPRESENTATIONS.
OVER 90% OF LANDLORDS HAVING
REPRESENTATION AND 10% OF
RENTERS DON'T.
AND EVICTIONS ARE ALREADY USED
TO BULLY AND HARASS RENTERS
WOULD AT THETER LANDLORDS FROM
DOING SO.
AND IN CITIES LIKE SAN
FRANCISCO, WHERE THIS RIGHT IS
GUARANTEED, YOU SEE THAT'S
VISION HAVE GONE DOWN.
AND I WANT TO VOICE AGAINST ANY
WATERING DOWN OF THE BILL.
>>> THANK YOU, MARIA AND MINDY
LEE, FOLLOWED BY BRUCE.
GO AHEAD MARIA.
>> GOOD MORNING COUNCIL
MEMBERS.
THANK YOU FOR HELPING KEEP OUR
NEIGHBORS HOUSED.
MY NAME IS MARIA.
I WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON
SUSTAINABILITY AND CLIMATE.
KING COUNTY IS NOW CURRENTLY
ADOPTING THEIR STRATEGIC
CLIMATE ACTION PLAN AND IT
EXCLUDES AIRCRAFT EMISSIONS.
PLANES FRY OVER BEACON HILL
EVERY 90 SECONDS AND SEATAC IS
PLANNING TO INCREASE SERVICE BY
40% FOR AIRPLANE TAKEOFFS AND
LANDINGS AND WE ARE NOT
ELIGIBLE FOR MITIGATION.
THE POLLUTION EFFECTS ARE
RESPIRATORY, CARDIO, SLEEP AND
MENTAL HEALTH.
WE ARE A COMMUNITY INNOCENT OF
REFUGEES OF 32,000 PEOPLE.
WE ARE ASKING TO AMEND KING
COUNTY'S ACTION LAB PLAN TO
INCLUDE THE AIRCRAFT EMISSIONS
IN THE GREENHOUSE GAS TARGETS,
INCLUDE BEACON HILL WORTH WITH
THE PUGET SOUND CLEAN AIR,
REHAB COUNCIL TO ADD AIRCRAFT
TRANSPORTATION.
I WILL SEND THIS LETTER TO YOU.
THANK YOU, STAY SAFE AND PLEASE
CONTINUE TO BE COURAGEOUS.
>>> THANK YOU.
ABSOLUTELY, WE WILL BE TALKING
ABOUT THE SUSTAINABILITY ISSUES
IN THE COMING COMMITTEE
MEETINGS THAT WERE SCHEDULED
FOR MARCH AND APRIL.
>>> WE HAVE MINDY LEE FOLLOWED
BY BRUCE AND THEN DUSTIN RAY.
GO AHEAD, MINDY.
>> SORRY, MINDY IS NOT PRESENT,
SO WE'LL GO WITH BRUCE AND THEN
DUSTIN RAY.
>> BRUCE, YOU'LL HAVE TO HIT
STAR 6 TO UNMUTE YOURSELF.
>>
>>> MAYBE LET'S GO TO DUSTIN.
DUSTIN RAY AND THEN WE'LL COME
BACK TO BRUCE.
GO AHEAD, DUSTIN.
>>> GOOD MORNING, COUNCIL CHAIR
AND MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE.
I'M DUSTIN RAY.
RIGHT NOW I'M HOMELESS AND
STAYING AT TENT CITY THREE.
THE REASON I'M HOMELESS IS THE
RENT IN SEATTLE IS TOO HIGH.
I HAVE RENTED SEVERAL TIMES BUT
IT IS ALMOST IMPOSSIBLE WHEN
YOU HAVE A LOW INCOME.
EXTENDING THE RENT MORATORIUM
AND COUNCIL LEGISLATION BECAUSE
SEATTLE MIGHT THROW OUT ANOTHER
5000 RESIDENTS ON THE STREET
AND THAT WOULD BE ABSURD.
TENANTS SHOULD NOT BE SUBJECTED
TO HOMELESSNESS.
IT ISN'T ALWAYS SAFE.
LOTS OF PEOPLE GET SICK AND
CAN'T WORK WHILE HOMELESS AND
WHAT IS MORE IMPORTANT IS
HOMELESS PEOPLE FIND IT HARDER
FOR EVERYONE THERE WILL BE MORE
COMPETITION FOR RESOURCES,
THERE WILL BE A LOT MORE PEOPLE
IN TENTS AND PUBLIC PLACES.
THAT IS WHY A LONG MORATORIUM
ON EVICTIONS IS GOOD.
IT WILL HELP US FIND A HUMANE
ALTERNATIVE.
THANK YOU FOR LISTENING.
>>> THANK YOU.
TO INFORM EVERYONE.
MINDY AND BRUCE ARE SHOWN AS
NOT PRESENT FOR NOW.
MACARTHUR AND KAREN AND
BENJAMIN.
>> GO AHEAD, EMILY.
>> MY NAME IS EMILY.
I'M A RENTER IN DISTRICT 2. AND
I'M URGING ALL COMMITTEE
MEMBERS TO PASS THIS
LEGISLATION IMMEDIATELY.
WE HAVE SEEN THAT THERE IS A
PRECEDENT AND THAT THAT
PRECEDENT WORKS.
EVICTIONS HAVE DROPPED
DRAMATICALLY.
THAT IS WHAT WE NEED TO BE
AIMING FOR.
AND THE IDEA THERE NEED TO BE
SOME SORT OF BUILT IN END DATE
IS ABSOLUTELY ABSURD.
THE ONLY CONNOTATION IN WHICH I
COULD THINK YOU COULD EVEN
BEGIN TO FATHOM AN END DATE IS
WHEN WE HAVE FULL AVAILABILITY
OF SOCIAL HOUSING AND ZERO
HOMELESSNESS IN THE CITY.
AND EVEN THEN THE BASIC RIGHT
OF HAVING THE ABILITY TO DEFEND
YOURSELF IN A COURT OF LAW,
WHEN YOU ARE BEING EVICTED IS
NOT SOMETHING THAT NEEDS SOME
SORT OF COUNTDOWN CLOCK ON IT.
>>> AND FURTHER CONCERNS ABOUT
SMALL LANDLORD, I WOULD LIKE TO
ADD THAT A COUPLE OF US WANT
LEADING THE WAY NOT JUST
CANCELED RENT BUT CANCELING
MORTGAGES FOR SMALL LANDLORDS.
I HEARD EARLIER A SPEAKER FROM
THE MULTI FAMILY HOUSING
ASSOCIATION, I WOULD LIKE TO
REITERATE HE IS A MEMBER OF A
NOTORIOUS LOBBYING FIRM FOR BIG
LANDLORDS AND AS MENTIONED THEY
ARE THE ONES THAT ARE EVICTING
AND THAT IS WHY THEY ARE TRYING
TO SHOW CONCERNS OR DOUBT THIS
LEGISLATION IS NECESSARY.
>>> THANK YOU.
WE HAVE KAREN GRAM BLING AND
BENJAMIN IS SHOWN AS NOT
PRESENT SO MICHAEL.
KAREN?
>> YES, THIS IS KAREN GRAM
BLING.
>> GO AHEAD.
>> I'M A RESIDENT OF PINE HOUSE
VILLAGE, WHICH HAS BEEN A
LIFESAVER FOR ME BUT NOT
EVERYBODY IS GOING TO BE SO
FORTUNATE.
AS A FORMERLY FINANCIALLY WELL
OFF WOMAN WITH A MASTERS DEGREE
I NEVER EXPECTED TO BE
HOMELESS.
BUT I AM.
AND PROVIDED LEGAL COUNSEL THE
CITY CAN EXPECT TO HAVE FAR
MORE PROBLEMS WITH A TSUNAMI OF
UNHOUSED VOTERS AND THE
RIPPLING CHAIN REACTION THE
CITY ALREADY STRUGGLES TO DEAL
WITH.
AN OUNCE OF PREVENTION IS WORTH
A POUND OF CURE.
APPRECIATE THE EFFORTS COUNCIL
MEMBERS WANT AND OTHERS ARE
MAKING.
>>> THANK YOU.
SO UNLESS OTHER PEOPLE ARE
SHOWING UP AS NONPRESENT SHOW
UP, OUR LAST TWO SPEAKERS WILL
BE MICHAEL AND SONIA.
GO AHEAD, MICHAEL.
>> MY NAME IS MICHAEL, I AM A
RENTER IN DISTRICT 3 AND
CALLING IN SUPPORT OF THE
LEGISLATION FOR RIGHT TO
COUNSEL AND TO EXTEND THE
MORATORIUM PAST THE
END OF THE YEAR.
ONCE THE PANDEMIC SUBSIDES
THESE PROBLEMS WILL STILL BE
HERE AND CURRENTLY WE ARE
FAVORING CORPORATE LANDLORDS
OVER WORKING CLASS RENTERS AND
PEOPLE IN OUR COMMUNITY AND
CITY.
THANK YOU.
>>> THANK YOU, GO AHEAD, SONIA.
>> HI, I'M SONIA.
AND AS A SMALL LANDLORD, I
SUPPORT COUNSEL MEMBER'S
SAWANT'S LEGISLATION AND URGE
THE COUNCIL TO VOTE YES.
I HAVE WORKED WITH TENANTS TO
ENSURE NO ONE HAS BEEN EVICTED
IN THIS PANDEMIC, REALLY EVER.
THESE ARE HOMES AND TWO OF OUR
TENANTS ARE ACTUALLY THERE FOR
30 YEARS.
BUT NOT EVERYONE IS IN MY
POSITION, SO IT IS CRUCIAL THAT
THE PETITION TO EXTEND THE
EVICTIONS MORATORIUMS AND FROM
COUNCIL MEMBER SAWANT'S OFFICE
CLEARLY STATES STRUGGLING SMALL
BUSINESSES SHOULD ALSO BE
PROTECTED DURING COVID-19.
WHEN THE CHEESECAKE FACTORY
ANNOUNCED THEY WOULDN'T PAY
RENT THEY GOT A $200 MILLION
INVESTMENT.
NO EVICTION.
THEY WORKED IT OUT.
INSTEAD OF NICKEL AND DIMING
THE REST OF US, MAKE BIG
BUSINESS PAY FOR THIS.
INSTEAD OF GUARANTEEING THE
RIGHT TO COUNSEL, IT JUST MEANS
THE EVICTED TENANT ALSO GETS A
LAWYER, WHICH THE SMALL
LANDLORD DOESN'T PAY FOR.
I FAIL TO SEE HOW ALLOWING A
RIGHT WILL CAUSE SMALL
LANDLORDS TO SELL THEIR
PROPERTIES.
IF YOU ARE STRUGGLING, YOU NEED
TO GET INVOLVED IN OUR MOVEMENT
SO WE CAN CANCEL RENT AND
MORTGAGE.
>>> THANK YOU.
THAT WAS THE LAST OF OUR
SPEAKERS WHO WERE PRESENT, I'M
NOT SEEING ANY CHANGE.
SO I WILL CLOSE PUBLIC COMMENT
FOR NOW AND WE WILL MOVE TO OUR
FIRST AGENDA ITEM IN THE
COMMITTEE.
WHICH IS THE COMMUNITY PANEL BY
FIRST THANKING ALL THE PEOPLE
WHO SPOKE IN PUBLIC COMMENT.
I REALLY APPRECIATE THAT.
OUR FIRST ITEM IS THE COMMUNITY
PANEL TO DISCUSS EVICTIONS.
COULD OUR PRESENTERS PLEASE
INTRODUCE YOURSELVES WITH ONE
OR TWO SENTENCES FOR THE RECORD
AND THEN WE WILL START THE
PRESENTATION?
>>
HOW ABOUT WE START WITH THE
HOUSING JUSTICE PROJECT
PRESENTERS?
>> THIS IS EVAN WINTER.
FROM THE MANAGING CONCERN OF
THE HOUSING JUSTICE PROJECT.
I'LL LET MOLLY AND AMY
INTRODUCE THEMSELVES.
>> MY NAME IS MOLLY I AM THE
DATA PROGRAM MANAGER AT THE
HOUSING JUSTICE PROJECT.
>> AND I AM AMY, SHE HER
PRONOUNS, WITH THE HOUSING
JUSTICE PROJECT.
>> I'LL JUST CALL THE NAMES OF
THE OTHER PANELISTS.
OTHERWISE EVERYBODY IS WAITING
FOR EVERYBODY ELSE.
ELLEN, GIVE US A SENTENCE OF
INTRODUCTION.
>> I'M LEGAL LIEN NOVA.
>> KATE?
>> THANKS FOR HAVING HE MA.
I'M KATE REUBEN THE EXECUTIVE
DIRECTOR OF THE SEATTLE AND MY
PRONOUNS ARE SHE HER.
>> PAIGE?
>> HI, I AM PAIGE OWENS, I AM A
REAL CHANGE VENDOR AND REAL
CHANGE ADVOCACY INTERN AND MY
PRONOUNS ARE SHE HER.
>> VIOLET?
>> HI, I'M VIOLET THE EXECUTIVE
DIRECTOR OF THE TENANT'S UNION.
>> AND LEAH?
>> THANKS FOR HAVING ME.
SHE HER PRONOUNS.
I AM A RENTER IN CAPITOL HILL
AND AN ORGANIZER OF THE TAX
AMAZON MOVEMENT.
>>> I BELIEVE THE HOUSING
JUSTICE PROJECT FOLKS WILL BE
DOING THEIR PRESENTATION FIRST
IF I'M RIGHT ABOUT THAT, GO
AHEAD.
>> MOLLY AND AMY, IF YOU WANT
TO START.
>> LET ME SHARE MY SCREEN.
>>> SO AS WE SAID, MY NAME IS
MOLLY GOFF.
AND JOINING ME IN THIS
PRESENTATION WILL BE AMY A
SOCIAL WORKER OF
HJPREPONDERANCE.
P. OUR PRESENTATION TODAY IS
ABOUT SEATTLE EVICTION FILINGS
IN 2019.
THANK YOU FOR HAVING US.
WE ARE EXCITED TO BE HERE AND
AMY, DO YOU WANT TO START?
>> YES, THANKS MOLLY.
OKAY.
SO FIRST WE HAVE AS AN OVERVIEW
OF THE EVICTIONS FILED IN
SEATTLE IN 2019, THERE WERE
JUST UNDER 1200 EVICTIONS
FILED.
AND THIS NUMBER INCLUDES THE
FORMAL EVICTIONS THAT WERE
FILED IN THE COURT.
FIRST TABLE SHOWS THE PRIMARILY
BASIS FOR THESE EVICTIONS, THE
VAST MAJORITY WERE BASED ON
NONPAYMENT OF RENTAL AT 86%.
AFTER THAT THE NEXT MOST
FREQUENT BASIS WERE LEASE
VIOLATIONS, WHICH MADE UP ABOUT
8% OF EVICTIONS.
THE OTHER TABLE SHOWS THE
BREAKDOWN OF EVICTION FILINGS
BY RACE, COMPARED TO RACIAL
DEMOGRAPHICS IN SEATTLE
OVERALL.
THE RACE DEMOGRAPHICS FOR THE
EVICTION FILINGS ARE ESTIMATES
FROM THE MODEL THE SAME MODEL
USED IN THE 2018 LOSING HOME
REPORT.
BLACK TENANTS WERE
OVERREPRESENTED IN EVICTION
FILINGS AT 28% COMPARED TO 8.3%
IN THE OVERALL SEATTLE
POPULATION.
>>> ALL RIGHT.
SO THIS NEXT SLIDE IS THE TOP
10 PLAINTIFFS WE WERE SEEING IN
THE 2018 EVICTION FILINGS.
FOR OUR DATA ANALYSIS THE
PLAINTIFF WITH HIS RECORDED IN
THE SAME MANNER IT WAS LISTED
ON THE COMPLAIN.
THIS MEANS THE GRAPH IS SHOWING
THE NUMBER OF FILINGS FOR
SPECIFIC BUILDINGS FOR PROPERTY
MANAGEMENT COMPANIES, BUT NOT
NECESSARILY ALL THE PROPERTIES
IN SEATTLE.
SO FOR EXAMPLE, YOU CAN SEE
THAT GR EDOWNTOWNER IS NUMBER
ONE ANDEN DORFF IS NUMBER SIX.
ON THE GRAPH BOTH BUILDINGS ARE
OWNED BY THE GOODMAN REAL
ESTATE AND ARE LISTED ON THE GR
EWEBSITE BUT SHOWING AS TWO
SEPARATE COLUMNS ON THIS GRAPH.
SO KNOWING THAT, WE NEEDED A
SECOND ANALYSIS.
WHEN THE BUILDING SPECIFIC
INFORMATION IS REMOVED FROM THE
PLAINTIFF NAME, IN TOTAL THE GR
EFILINGS IN SEATTLE RISE TO 74.
SO STILL NUMBER ONE AND THAT IS
INCLUDING THERE'S GR
EBUILDINGS.
AND THRIVE COMMUNITIES
INCORPORATED, WHICH IS ANOTHER
COMMERCIAL ENTITY COMES IN AT
NUMBER THREE, WITH 29 FILINGS.
HOWEVER, LOOKING BACK AT THE
GRAPH AS IS RIGHT NOW, THE MOST
COMMON BASIS FOR THESE TOP 10
PLAINTIFFS, FOR THE EVICTION
FILINGS WAS NONPAYMENT OF RENT
AT 83.5%.
THE SECOND WAS LEASE VIOLATIONS
AT 13.5%.
ANOTHER NOTABLE THING FOR BOTH
OF THE GR EBUILDINGS.
DOWNTOWNER, THEIR FILINGS
COMBINED WERE 97% ABOUT
NONPAYMENT OF RENT.
YOU KNOW, KIND OF CONTINUING
THAT SAME TREND, ANOTHER THING
TO NOTE IS THAT THE SECOND TWO
PLAINTIFFS ON THIS GRAPH,
SEATTLE HOUSING AUTHORITY AND
CAPITOL HILL HOUSING, THESE
BOTH REPRESENT MULTIPLE
PROPERTIES WHILE GR E,
DOWNTOWNER, WHICH IS NUMBER ONE
IS JUST A SINGLE BUILDING.
AND LASTLY, ANOTHER THING TO
NOTE IS THAT ALL OF THE TOP 10
PLAINTIFFS YOU CAN SEE THERE
ARE NO INDIVIDUAL LANDLORDS IN
THIS LIST.
>>> NEXT WE HAVE DATA FOR BOTH
THE DEFAULT RATE AND THE
HOUSING JUSTICE PROJECT SUCCESS
RATE IN KEEPING TENANTS HOUSED.
THIS IS BASED ON SEATTLE
EVICTIONS FILED IN SEPTEMBER
AND OCTOBER OF 2019.
IN THIS TIME PERIOD OF 6%
DEFAULTED EITHER BY FAILING TO
RESPOND TO THE EVICTIONS
SUMMONS, FAILING TO APPEAR AT
THEIR HEARING OR BY VIOLATING A
PREVIOUSLY ENTERED STIPULATION.
IN THE SAME TIME PERIOD THE
HOUSING JUSTICE PROJECT HAD A
53.3% YOU CAN ASSESS RATE IN
KEEPING A TENANT HOUSED WHEN
INVOLVED IN AN E VISION CASE.
WHEN BOTH HJ.P., AND HOME BASED
FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAM
WERE INVOLVED THE TENANCY WAS
SAVED 84.6% OF THE TIME.
WITHOUT HJ.P., TENANTS REM356
ANDA HOUSE 97.7% OF THE TIME.
SO BASED ON THIS DATA WE CAN
ESTIMATE HOW MANY HOUSEHOLDS
COULD AVOID CONVICTION WITH THE
RIGHT TO COUNSEL.
SEATTLE HAS APPROXIMATELY 1200
FILED EVICTIONS CASES EACH
YEAR.
OF THESE, WE ESTIMATE BETWEEN
48 TO 66% WILL DEFAULT, WHICH
IS BETWEEN 576 AND 792
HOUSEHOLDS.
IF THESE HOUSEHOLDS HAVE BEEN
ABLE TO ACCESS LEGAL SERVICES,
WITH HJ.P., SUCCESS RATE OF
53%, AN ADDITIONAL 307 TO 422
COULD AVOID EVICTION EACH YEAR.
WITH THE ADDED BENEFIT OF
FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE,
CONSIDERING HJ.P.'S AND HOPE
BASIS SUCCESS RATE OF 84% WE
ESTIMATE AN ADDITIONAL 487 TO
670 HOUSEHOLDS COULD AVOID
EVICTION EACH YEAR.
THAT MEANS TESTING COULD
DETRIMENTALLY IMPACT THESE
ESTIMATES, BECAUSE IT WOULD
SERVE AS A BARRIER TO TENANTS
BEING ABLE TO ACT AS THESE
SERVICES.
.
>>> OH, SORRY.
THOSE ARE ALL THE SLIDES YOU
HAD, RIGHT?
>> YES.
THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU SO MUCH.
I HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS TO
ASK ABOUT THIS.
BUT I WANTED TO OPEN IT UP FOR
OTHER COUNCIL MEMBERS.
COMMITTEE MEMBERS, IF YOU HAVE
QUESTIONS PLEAS EITHER SPEAK UP
AND I'LL CALL ON YOU OR USE THE
RAISED HAND IN THE ZOOM FEATURE
IN ZOOM, EITHER WAY.
TO QUESTION THESE PRESENTERS.
I DON'T SEE ANY COUNCIL MEMBERS
WANTING TO SPEAK AT THIS
MOMENT.
BUT ANYTIME, PLEASE LET ME
KNOW.
I WAS WONDERING ONE IS
OBVIOUSLY, AGAIN THIS IS NO
SURPRISE, BECAUSE WE HAVE SEEN
THE DATA BEFORE.
BUT I WAS JUST WONDERING WHAT
YOUR THOUGHTS WERE ON THIS.
WHY DO WE SEE THE BLACK
COMMUNITY, OUR AFRICAN-AMERICAN
COMMUNITY BEING IMPACTED SO
MUCH BY EVICTION?
AT FOUR TIMES MORE THAN FOUR
TIMES THE RATE, COMPARED TO
OTHERS, FOR EXAMPLE?
WHAT IS YOUR VIEW, FROM HAVING
EXPERIENCE OF LEGALLY DEFENDING
YOU KNOW, CLIENTS OR FACING
EVICTIONS, WHAT DO YOU THINK IS
GOING ON HERE?
NEEDLESS TO SAY IT IS REALLY
STUNNING.
AND CLEARLY, IT MAKES IT A
RACIAL JUSTICE ISSUE AS WELL.
>> I THINK THERE IS A GOOD
QUESTION AND THERE IS A REALLY
LOT TO TALK ABOUT THERE.
NUMBER ONE, A LOT OF PEOPLE ARE
AWARE THAT THERE ARE THOSE WHO
OWN HOMES AND THOSE WHO DON'T.
AND OFTENTIMES THAT LINE IS
SEPARATED BY RACE.
SO IN KING COUNTY, WHILE 70% OF
BLACK RESIDENTS RELY ON RENTAL
HOUSING AS THEIR PRIMARY
RESIDENTS COMPARED TO 30% OF
WHITE RESIDENTS WHO RELY ON
HOUSING, I THINK ARE FROM
GENERATIONS AND YEARS AND YEARS
AND YEARS OF RACIAL DISPARITIES
AND SORT OF RACIST POLICIES, WE
HAVE BASICALLY CREATED A SYSTEM
WHERE A LOT OF BLACK HOUSEHOLDS
HAVE TO RELY ON RENTAL HOUSING.
WHEREAS A LOT OF WHITE
HOUSEHOLDS ARE ABLE TO OWN
HOMES.
SO WHEN WE TALK ABOUT RENTER
POLICIES, WE ARE EFFECTIVELY
TALKING ABOUT PROTECTING BLACK
AND LATIN GROUPS.
FRANKLY WHEN YOU HEAR THE
THINGS ABOUT PROBLEMATIC, THEY
THINK WE ALL HAVE THIS IMAGE IN
OUR HEAD.
BUT A LOT OF BIG PROBLEMS THE
PEOPLE WHO REASON ARE FRANKLY
BLACK HOUSEHOLDS.
THAT IS WHY RENTAL PRO TECHS
ARE A RACIAL JUSTICE ISSUE.
JUST UNDER STATE LAW, IF YOU
FALL BEHIND ON YOUR RENT, YOU
HAVE DAYS TO PAY UP.
ON YOUR MORTGAGE YOU HAVE 190
DAYS.
WE HAVE PRIORITIZED ONE TYPE OF
HOUSING OVER THE OTHER.
ONE IS USED BY BLACK VERSUS ONE
THAT IS USED BY WHITE.
THE SHORT OF IT IS, A LOT OF
RENTERS HAVE TO RELY ON HOUSING
ARE MORE LIKELY TO BE EVICTED.
TO BE MORE VULNERABLE INVOLVING
THE FACT THAT MOST EVICTIONS
HAPPEN FOR A MONTH OR LESS IN
RENT.
IT IS USUALLY BECAUSE OF ONE
TEMPORARY UNEMPLOYMENT ISSUE,
ONE MEDICAL EMERGENCY, ONE
DEATH IN THE FAMILY THAT BRINGS
IT TO BEAR.
THE INCOME INEQUALITY
INSTABILITY IN OUR SYSTEM AND
THE RACIAL DIVISION IT HAS
DEFINITELY SHOWS UP IN THE DATA
WE HAVE SEEN.
>> THANK YOU.
THAT WAS VERY, VERY USEFUL TO
HEAR.
AND YEAH, AS YOU SAID, IT IS
VERY MUCH COMES DOWN TO WHO
ENDS UP RENTING.
AND I THINK THAT IS NOT ONLY
IMPORTANT, AS YOU SAID, IN
TERMS OF LOOKING AT IT, LOOKING
AT HOW IT FALLS ALONG RACIAL
LINES, BUT ALSO, GIVEN THE FACT
THAT IF YOU LOOK AT IT FROM THE
YOUNGER GENERATION, MORE AND
MORE OF A PROPORTION OF THE
YOUNGER GENERATION IS GOING TO
BE RENTING JUST BECAUSE THEY
SIMPLY, WE ARE NOT SEEING THE
ECONOMY REPLICATE THOSE MIDDLE
CLASS STANDARDS OF LIVING THAT
MAYBE OUR PARENTS HAD.
SO I THINK THIS QUESTION.
RENTERS RIGHT IN GENERAL AND
THE RIGHT TO COUNCIL REALLY
COMES INTO PLAY AND I
APPRECIATE YOU SAYING THAT IT
IS DOG WHISTLING WHEN WE SAY,
I'M NOT SURE I REMEMBER EXACTLY
WHAT WE SAID.
BUT RENTERS ARE BAD ACTORS OR
SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
THE OTHER, ANOTHER QUESTION IS,
WHAT IS THE AVERAGE COST OF
REPRESENTING A TENANT?
AND IF WE COULD CONTRAST THAT
WITH THE TAPES OF COSTS AND SO
THAT THE WHOLE AREA OF COSTS
THAT THE CITY AND COUNTY IN
TERMS OF COSTS, ARE PAID BY
TAXPAYER REVENUES, THAT THE
CITY AND COUNTY WOULD ENCOURAGE
PEOPLE, EVERY TIME PEOPLE ARE
EVICTED, I KNOW ARIANA
MENTIONED THAT.
>> TO TALK ABOUT THAT, HOW THAT
GOES INTO ALSO IN TERMS OF
FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY, KIND OF
ARGUMENT THAT ARIANA WAS
TALKING ABOUT.
>> I THINK THAT IS A GOOD
QUESTION.
IT IS HARD TO GIVE YOU A SOLID
NUMBER.
WE HAVE BEEN TRYING TO.
BUT I WOULD SAY PROBABLY ON
AVERAGE OUR SERVICES COST $300
TO $500 PER HOUSEHOLD WE HELP.
HOUSEHOLD IS MULTIPLE
INDIVIDUALS.
THERE IS A LOT OF DIFFERENT
ESTIMATES OUT THERE, DIFFERENT
REPORTS, DEPENDING ON THE ONES
YOU SEE.
IF SOMEBODY BECOMES HOMELESS,
IT COSTS ANYWHERE FROM TENS TO
HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF
DOLLARS FOR THAT INDIVIDUAL TO
BE HOMELESS.
BUT TO HAVE THE HOMELESSNESS
SYSTEM COMPARED TO $300 TO $500
TO KEEP THEM OUT OF IT, I THINK
THE MATH IS SIMPLE.
WHEN WE RUN A RENTAL SYSTEMS
POGUE AT UNITED WAY CALLED HOME
DAYS.
OUR AVERAGE AIMED TENDS TO BE
$1500 OR $2000 TO $3000.
THAT IS NOT A LOT OF MONEY.
AGAIN, EVEN WHEN YOU ADD THAT
FACTOR INTO THE RENTAL
ASSISTANCE FEES, THE SMALL
AMOUNT IT COSTS FOR LEGAL
SERVICE PROVIDER OR LIKE AMY
WHO IS ALSO A SOCIAL WORKER TO
BE ABLE TO HELP SOMEBODY STAY
HOUSED.
THE MATH AGAIN ON THAT $10,000
VERSUS $3000 TO $4000, TO KEEP
THE RENTAL AID, AND KEEP THE
FAMILY HOUSED AND MAKE SURE
THEIR RIGHTS ARE ENFORCED AND
KEPT, I THINK THE MATH IS
SIMPLE.
WE REALLY CAN'T AFFORD TO HAVE
A LOT OF PEOPLE LOSE THEIR
HOUSING.
AND I THINK THE OTHER THING,
TOO, ABOUT THE NUMBERS THEY
PROJECTED, ON AVERAGE 1200
FILED EVICTIONS EVERY YEAR OR
1200 HOUSEHOLDS THAT FACE
EVICTION IN SEATTLE EVERY YEAR
AND THAT IS A LOWER NUMBER.
WE DON'T KNOW HOW MANY PEOPLE
ARE GETTING NOTICES WE DON'T
HAVE RECORDS OF.
BUT IT ALSO DOESN'T TAKE A LOT
FOR THAT TO HAVE A REALLY HUGE
IMPACT ON THE HOMELESS
POPULATION.
THERE IS ONLY 11,000
INDIVIDUALS BASED ON THE TIME
COUNT HOMELESS IN KING COUNTY.
SO IF YOU HAD JUST A COUPLE
THOUSAND HOUSEHOLDS BEING
EVICTED, YOU ARE GOING TO
OVERWHELM THE HOMELESSNESS
RESPONSE SYSTEM THAT IS
STRUGGLING, EVEN AS WE ALL
KNOW, RIGHT NOW.
>> RIGHT.
ABSOLUTELY.
I THINK THAT CONNECTION BETWEEN
PREVENTING EVICTIONS AND THE
BURDEN ON THE HOMELESSNESS
FUNDS WHICH ARE ALREADY TOO
LIMITED IS A VERY IMPORTANT
POINT.
AND I THINK THE PRESENT NATION
THE HOUSING JUSTICE PROJECT AND
THE SORT OF NATIONWIDE LOOK
THAT WE HAVE BEEN ABLE TO TAKE,
THANKS TO YOU AND JOHN, AND OUR
LAST COMMITTEE ALSO SHOWED THE
REALLY INTERESTING NUMBERS IN
BALTIMORE, WHICH WAS QUOTED BY
ONE OF THE PEOPLE IN PUBLIC
COMMENT THAT IN THE 2020 STUDY,
FOUND THAT INVESTING $5.7
MILLION IN RIGHT TO COUNSEL
LEGISLATION WOULD SAVE
BALTIMORE AND MARYLAND $35.6
MILLION IN EMERGENCY SHELTER
HEALTHCARE AND CHILDCARE.
I THINK THAT IS SORT OF
IMPORTANT AND ON THE OTHER
SIDE, YOU HAVE ALL THE TAXPAYER
MONEY SPENT ON THE KING COUNTY
SHERIFF, CARRYING OUT THE
EVICTION, ALL THE MONEY TO RUN
THE EVICTION COURT.
SO I REALLY APPRECIATE THAT.
AND THEN NOW, WE HAVE A
QUESTION FROM COUNCILWOMAN
MORALITIES, PLEASE GO AHEAD.
>> THANK YOU.
THANKS TO EVERYONE WHO IS
PRESENTING TODAY.
AND COUNCIL MEMBER SAWANT, YOU
BASICALLY COVERED WHAT I WAS
GOING TO SAY.
IN ADDITION TO THE COST OF
HAVING FOLKS ENTER INTO THE
HOMELESS SYSTEM WE HAVE THE
HEALTH OUTCOMES THAT RESULT
FROM PEOPLE BECOMING HOMELESS,
THEIR ENTRY INTO THE CRIMINAL
LEGAL SYSTEM, KIDS, SCHOOL
ABSENCE AND THE IMPACT THAT HAS
ON A FAMILY SO YOU KNOW, THE
FIGURE FROM BOSTON DOESN'T
SURPRISE ME AND
WHEN YOU ACCOUNT FOR ALL OF THE
WAYS IN WHICH A FAMILY MIGHT BE
IMPACTED, IT IS HUGE.
YEAH.
>> YEAH, ABSOLUTELY.
REALLY APPRECIATE THAT COUNCIL
MEN MORALES, BRINGING IN THE
COSTS THAT ARE NOT
TRADITIONALLY COUNTED IN TERMS
OF DOLLARS.
WHAT IS THE IMPACT ON A CHILD
WHOSE COMMUNITY OF FRIEND AND
SCHOOL IS UPROOTED, WHO MISSES
SCHOOL DAYS, ALL OF THAT.
I MEAN THOSE ARE THINGS YOU
CANNOT PUT A PRICE TAG ON.
AND THAT IS VERY IMPORTANT TO
TAKE INTO ACCOUNT AS TO ON BY,
AS A CITY COUNCIL, WE NEED TO
PASS THESE BASIC RENTERS RIGHTS
LAWS.
I'M NOT SEEING ANY OTHER
COUNCIL MEMBER?
>> GO AHEAD.
COUNCIL MEMBER LEWIS.
>> GUYS, I WANTED TO JUMP IN ON
THAT POINT.
I APPRECIATE EDMOND'S
RECITATION OF ALL THE BENEFITS
TO CASELOAD AND OTHER PLACES,
WHEN YOU MAKE THESE
INVESTMENTS.
AND LEGAL REPRESENTATION.
SO I THINK THIS IS MORE OF A
QUESTION FOR OUR CENTRAL STAFF.
I WONDER, IS THERE A WAY WE
COULD TRY TO QUANTIFY, BASED ON
WHAT WE KNOW IN SEATTLE, WHAT
WE COULD EXPECT THE IMPACT TO
BE FROM THIS LEGISLATION HERE
FOR US?
BASED ON THOSE EXAMPLES FROM
OTHER CITIES?
BECAUSE WE DO HAVE SOME, YOU
KNOW, THESE ILLUSTRATIVE
EXAMPLES FROM OTHER PLACES.
BUT IT WOULD BE NICE TO BE ABLE
TO, WITH CONFIDENCE, STAND BY
SOME ESTIMATES OF WHAT WE COULD
EXPECT TO SEE, BASED ON THOSE
EXPERIENCES HERE.
>> YEAH, SO I WOULD BE HAPPY TO
START PUTTING TOGETHER WHAT
THOSE NUMBERS MIGHT LOOK LIKE
WITH THE HELP OF MY COLLEAGUES
AND GET BACK TO YOU ALL.
>> THAT WOULD BE REALLY
HELPFUL.
THANK YOU SO MUCH.
>>> THANK YOU, COUNCIL MEMBER
LEWIS AND ASHA.
IN THE INTEREST OF TIME I'LL
MOVE TO THE OTHER PANELISTS.
FEEL FREE TO ASK QUESTIONS OR
MAKE COMMENTS ON ANY PART OF
THE PRESENTATION.
IT DOESN'T MATTER WHAT THE
ORDER IS.
SO I WOULD LIKE TO CALL ON
ELLEN MILLER NOW, TO SAY A FEW
WORDS ABOUT WHAT THEIR
EXPERIENCE HAS BEEN IN NEW
YORK, WHICH IS ONE OF THE
CITIES WHERE RIGHT TO COUNSEL
LAW HAS BEEN PASSED AND THERE
IS EXPERIENCE THERE.
>>> THANK YOU.
I'M ELLEN.
I'M ATENT ORGANIZER WITH FULL-
TIME TENANT UNION IN NEW YORK
CITY.
FORMED TO REPRESENT TENANTS
UNDER OUR CORPORATE MANAGEMENT
COMPANY WHEN A FEW DOZENS
TENANTS WHO WERE LAID OFF
DECIDED TO RENT STRIKE AND KNEW
WE WOULD BE SAFEST IF WE WERE
ELECTTIVELY ORGANIZED.
ONE YEAR IN, FULL-TIME TENANT
UNION IS ADVOCATING ALONG MANY
ON HOUSING ORGANIZATIONS FOR
MANY OF THE SAME DEMANDS
INCLUDING RENT CANCELLATION,
HOUSING FOR THE HOMELESS AND NO
EVICTIONS DURING THE PAN.
IN A CAPITALISTSIVE THEM
TREATED TREATS HOUSING A
COMMODITY, ALL HOUSING ISSUES
AND IN PARTICULAREE VICTIMS ARE
ABOUT LANDLORDS LEVERAGING
POWER OVER TENANTS TO MAXIMIZE
THEIR PROFITS.
EVERY SINGLE ONE OF NEW YORK
CITY'S TOP 20 WORST EVICTORS
OWNS MORE THAN $18 MILLION OF
PROPERTY, MORE THAN HALF OWN
MORE THAN $100 MILLION AND
THREE ARE MULTIPLE BILLIONS,
JOINING THE RANKS OF
BILLIONAIRES NATIONWIDE WHO
HAVE COLLECTED ANOTHER TRILLION
DOLLARS OVER THE COURSE OF THE
PANDEMIC ALONE.
ALLOWING THEM TO PREY ON LOW
INCOME BLACK AND BROWN TENANTS,
UNDOCUMENTED IMMIGRANTS AND
WOMEN WHO EVICTIONS
DISPROPORTIONATELY AFFECT.
>>> SO IT IS REALLY NO WONDER
ARE THAT AT LEAST HALF OF
TENANT WHO ARE EVICTED WOULD
NOT BE IF THEY HAD ACCESS TO
LEGAL AID.
THIS POWER DYNAMIC THAT ALLOWS
CORPORATE LANDLORDS TO UNFAIRLY
LEVERAGE THE SYSTEM IS
UNCONSCIONABLE.
THE ABILITY FOR TENANTS TO
ACCESS GOOD LEGAL COUNSEL IS
ONE CRITICAL STEP IN LEVELING
THE PLAYING FIELD.
NEW YORK CITY WON FIRST IN THE
NATION RIGHT TO COUNSEL FOR
TENANTS FACING EVICTION IN 2017
THROUGH COMMITTED COALITION
BASED MASS STRUGGLE AND BEVEN
WITHIN ITS FIVE YEAR PHASE IN
THE NUMBERS ALREADY SPEAK
VOLUMES.
EVICTIONS HAVE BEEN ON THE
DECLINE SINCE SOME PUBLIC
REPRESENTATIONS FOR TENANTS
FIRST BEGAN IN 2013.
BUT WITH THE RIGHT TO COUNSEL
LEGISLATION THAT GUARANTEED
REPRESENTATION THE NUMBERS ONLY
GET MORE PROMISING.
EVICTIONS AND RIGHT TO COUNSEL
ZIP CODES HAVE DECLINED BY 29%
SINCE THE LAW WAS IMPLEMENTED.
A GREATER DECREASE THAN
NONRIGHT TO COUNSEL ZIP CODES.
IN 2019 EVICTIONS IN NEW YORK
CITY DROPPED 15% AND OVERALL
80% OF NEW YORK CITY TENANTS
FACING EVICTIONS REMAINED THIS
THEIR HOMES.
RIGHT TO COUNSEL PUNCHES ABOVE
ITS WEIGHT ECONOMICALLY AS
WELL.
OUT OF NEW YORK CITY'S $92.5
BILLION BUDGET FOR THE 2020
FISCAL YEAR, ONE-TENTH OF A
PERCENT WENT TO RIGHT TO
COUNSEL.
THIS IS IN CONTRAST TO THE 12%
OF THE BUDGET THAT WENT TO THE
NEW YORK CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT
WHICH HAS A CONSISTENT TRACK
RECORD OF HARMING TENANTS BY
SIDING WITH LANDLORDS DURING
ILLEGAL LOCKOUTS.
NEW YORK CITY'S RIGHT TO
COUNSEL WAS SIGNED INTO LAW
WITH A PHASE IN BY ZIP COLD
CODE.
DURING THE PANDEMIC, AS NEW
YORK HAS FACED SOME OF THE
NATION'S HIGHEST UNEMPLOYMENT
LEVELS AND SEE THE CONTRACTION
OF MOST OF THE INDUSTRIES
CENTRAL TO THE LIVELIHOOD OF
NEW YORK'S WORKING CLASS THESE
RESTRICTIONS HAVE BEEN ROLLED
BACK.
RIGHT TO COUNSEL ATTORNEYS ARE
BEING ASSIGNED TO ALL CASES,
INCLUDING EMERGENCY AND
MAINTENANCE REQUESTS,
REGARDLESS OF INCOME, LOCATION
OR IMMIGRATION STATUS.
AND AS A TENANT ORGANIZER THE
IMPACT OF THIS UNIVERSAL RIGHT
TO COUNSEL DURING THE PANDEMIC
CANNOT BE OVERSTATED.
RIGHT TO COUNSEL HAS BEEN
INVALUABLE FOR FIGHTING
LANDLORD MALPRACTICE OF ALL
SORTS OF THE FOR EXAMPLE FULL-
TIME TENANT UNION HAS BEEN ABLE
TO KEEP CONSISTENT CONTACT WITH
A LEGAL AID LAWYER WHOM WE
CONTINUE SULT WITH ISSUES,
INFORMAL EVICTIONS INVOLVING
EGREGIOUS INTIMIDATION TACKS
TICKS.
MOST IMPORTANTLY, UNIVERSAL
RIGHT TO COUNSEL ACTIVELY
ENCOURAGES THE MOST VULNERABLE
TENANTS TO UTILIZE IT BY
REMOVING CONFUSION AROUND THE
SLUGGISH AND OVERCOMPLICATED
BUREAUCRACY OF MEANS TEST THAT
GO SO OFTEN CAUSES INDIVIDUALS
IN HIGHLY STRESSFUL CRISIS
SITUATIONS TO SIMPLY GIVE UP,
EVEN IF THEY WOULD BE ELIGIBLE.
IN CONTRAST STRICT MEANS
TESTING MEASURES ATTACHED TO
NEW YORK'S RENT RELIEF PROGRAM
MEANT ONLY $40 MILLION OF THE
ALLOCATED $100 MILLION WERE
SPENT ON THE PROGRAM, YET 60%
OF THE APPLICANTS WERE DENIED
ACCESS.
NEW YORK STATE ROLLED BACK ITS
UNIVERSAL MORATORIUM BUT THE
COMPLICATED APPLICATION PROCESS
HAS MEANT THAT OVER THE THREE
MONTHS THIS PLAN HAS BEEN IN
PLACE, ONLY 9000 TENANTS
STATEWIDE HAVE APPLIED FOR THE
PROGRAM.
A NUMBER WHICH TENANTS,
LANDLORDS AND LAWMAKERS ALIKE
RECOGNIZE DOES NOT REMOTELY
REFLECT THE NEED.
UNIVERSAL RIGHT TO COUNSEL
ADDRESSES TENANTS'S MOST
IMMEDIATE AND URGENT NEED AS A
CRUCIAL OPPONENT IN COMBATTING
THE BALANCE OF POWER.
THIS IS ALSO JUST THE FIRST
STEP.
THE NEXT STEP FOR SEATTLE, NEW
YORK CITY AND THE REST OF THE
COUNTRY MUST BE TAKING ON THE
ENORMOUS DEBT CRISIS FACING
TENANTS, WHICH IF LEFT
UNADDRESSED WILL LEAD TO WAVES
OF EVICTIONS IN THE NEAR FUTURE
AND EXACERBATE THE CREASE SIS
AND WILL FURTHER THE RACIAL
WEALTH GAP FOR GENERATIONS TO
COME.
THE HOUSING CRISIS DID NOT
START WITH THIS PANDEMIC SO WE
CANNOT RELY ON MSA SONS OF BACK
TO NORMAL TOEN IT.
IN ADDITION TO RIGHT TO COUNSEL
LEGISLATION WE NEED A
MORATORIUM GUARANTEED TO LAST
UNTIL ONE YEAR AFTER THE
PANDEMIC TO ENSURE NO ONE IS
FORCED FROM THEIR HOME.
WE NEED TO UNIVERSALLY CANCEL
RENT FOR ALL TENANTS AND
PROVIDE ASSISTANCE FOR
STRUGGLING SMALL SCALE
LANDLORDS WHILE CORPORATES TAKE
THE HIT THEY CAN AFFORD.
BEYOND THE PANDEMIC WE MUST
CONTINUE TO FIGHT FOR
INSTITUTING RENT CONTROL AND
ULTIMATELY WE MUST FIGHT TO PUT
AN END TO FOR PROFIT HOUSING
ALL TOGETHER.
UNDER A CAPITALIST SYSTEM ANY
BASIC HUMAN NEED TREATED AS A
COMMODITY WILL BE EXPLOITED BY
THE RULING CLASS TO DRIVE
PROFITS WITH AS LITTLE REGARD
FOR THE HUMAN EXPENSE AS WE CAN
LET THEM GET AWAY.
AND WE CANNOT LET THEM GET AWAY
WITH IT ANY LONGER.
SOLIDARITY.
>>> THANK YOU.
THAT WAS VERY BOLD, CHOCK FULL
OF REALLY, REALLY USEFUL
INFORMATION ABOUT NOT ONLY THE
RIGHT TO COUNSEL LAW AND HOW IT
IS WORKING IN NEW YORK BUT ALSO
A VERY STRONG CASE
STATISTICALLY BASED CASE
AGAINST LAP HOLES BUT I ALSO
REALLY APPRECIATE THE
COMMITMENT YOU CLEARLY BRING
FOR THE RENTERS YOU REPRESENT
AT FULL-TIME TENANTS UNION.
SIMILARLY, I WOULD LIKE TO
WELCOME KATE RUBIN FOR A FEW
YEARS AND AFTER THAT VIOLET.
AND ONCE WE HEAR FROM ALL OF
THEM, WE'LL OPEN IT UP FOR
QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS.
GO AHEAD, KATE.
>>> THANK YOU.
I AM A RENTTER IN DISTRICT TWO
AND THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF
THE SEATTLE HOUSING JUSTICE
NONPROFIT.
WE ARE HEARING FROM RENTERS
EVERY SINGLE DAY.
PEOPLE WHO ARE TERRIFIED OF
WHAT IS TO DOM UPON THE END OF
THE EVICTION MORATORIUM.
MANY OF THEM ARE CONVINCED THAT
IS THE ONLY THING THAT IS
PREVENTING THEM FROM BECOMING
HOMELESSNESS.
I RECEIVED PERMISSION FROM A
RENTTER IN LAKE SEE CITY TO
SHARE HER STORY.
CLAIRE LOST HER JOB AS A
BARTENDER AND SERVER AT THE
BEGINNING OF THE PANDEMIC.
BECAUSE SHE WAS
IMMUNOCOMPROMISED SHE HAS BEEN
UNABLE TO TAKE A JOB THAT
DOESN'T JEOPARDIZE HER HELP.
MANAGEMENT HAVE BEEN ON TOP OF
SENDING PASSIVE AGGRESSIVE E-
MAILS, ONE OF WHICH I'M GOING
SHARE NOW.
SUBJECT.
WE ARE HERE TO HELP.
WE HOPE EVERYONE IS CONTINUING
STAY SAFE AND REMAIN POSITIVE
THROUGH THIS CHALLENGING TIME.
WE WANTED TO REACH BACK OUT TO
ENCOURAGE YOU TO BE IN TOUCH IF
CAN BE OF ASSISTANCE AND HE ARE
MIND YOU WE ARE ALL IN THIS
TOGETHER.
AT THIS TIME, YOU HAVE AN
OUTSTANDING BALANCE ON YOUR
ACCOUNT OF $30,683 AND 64
CENTS.
IF YOU ARE IN NEED OF FINANCIAL
ASSISTANCE, FOOD AND/OR
HEALTHCARE, WE URGE YOU TO
IDENTIFY RESOURCES OFFERED BY
FEDERAL, STATE AND LOCAL
GOVERNMENTS, AS WELL AS
COMMUNITY ORGANIZATIONS.
ADDITIONAL UNEMPLOYMENT
BENEFITS AND GOVERNMENT
STIMULUS PROGRAMS ARE AVAILABLE
TO HELP US ALL MANAGE OUR
OBLIGATIONS.
AS A REMINDER, THE CURRENT
MORATORIUM ON EVICTIONS AND
LATE FEES DOES NOT RELIEF
RESIDENTS OF THEIR
RESPONSIBILITIES SURROUNDING
THEIR LEASE.
THIS INCLUDES THE PAYMENT OF
RENT, UTILITIES AND SATISFYING
PROPER INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS.
IF YOU HAVE NOT PAID YOUR
FEBRUARY RENT IN FULL OR YOU
THINK YOU'LL HAVE DIFFICULTY
DOING SO IN MARCH, PLEAS
CONTACT THE OFFICE IMMEDIATELY.
COMMUNICATION IS CRUCIAL DURING
THIS TIME AND UNDERSTANDING
RESIDENTS INTENTIONS AND
HELPING WORK OUT A PLAN TO GET
BACK ON TRACK IS CRITICAL FOR
EVERYONE INVOLVED.
SO THE APARTMENT COMPLEX SHE
LIVES IN IS MANAGED BY CON AM
MANAGEMENT CORPORATION, WHO
MANAGES A PORTFOLIO OF MORE
THAN 53,000 UNITS.
THEY WERE INCLUDED IN THE LIST
OF TOP 10 PLAINTIFFS IN
SEATTLE.
SO IT DOESN'T SOUND LIKE THEY
ARE HERE TO HELP AND HONESTLY
DOESN'T EVEN SOUND LIKE THEY
REALIZE THEY ARE COMMUNICATING
WITH PEOPLE WHO ARE STRUGGLING
TO SUR ARRIVE.
S COUNCIL MEMBER SAWANT NOTED
IN MORE OPENING STATEMENT,
THESE RICH AND POWERFUL
CORPORATIONS ARE THE ONES
PUSHING WORKING PEOPLE OUT OF
THEIR HOMES, NOT MOM AND POP
LANDLORD.
CLAIRE TRIED TO ORGANIZE WITH
HER NEIGHBORS IN ORDER TO BUILD
SOLIDARITY AS SHE IS FEELING
ALONE, SCARED AND OVERWHELMED.
BUT MAINTENANCE TOOK DOWN A
FLYER SHE POSTED.
THESE POWERFUL CORPORATIONS
LACK HUMANITY.
THEY DON'T SEE THEIR TENANTS AS
REAL PEOPLE, THEY SEE THEM AS
DOLLAR SIGNS.
CLAIRE'S SITUATION ISN'T
UNIQUE.
I SPOKE WITH ANOTHER TENANT IN
THE UNIVERSITY DISTRICT WHO HAS
BEEN STOCKPILING CAMPING GEAR
WHO WHEN THE MORATORIUM ENDS.
SHE SAID THE ENCAMPMENT NEARBY
SHE IS PLANNING ON MOVING TO
WHICH SHE IS INEVITABLELY
EVICTED WAS RECENTLY SWEPT AND
NOW SHE IS EVEN MORE
FRIGHTENED.
RIGHT TO COUNSEL IS SO
DESPERATELY NEEDED.
THESE ARE OUR NEIGHBORS AND
THEIR LIVES LITERALLY DEPEND ON
IT.
WE KNOW THE COMMUNITIES
INCREASING THE RATES OF COVID-
19 TRANSMISSION AND DEATHS.
BOTH THE TENANTS I MENTIONED
AND THOUSANDS OF OTHERS ARE
HIGH-RISK AND DON'T HAVE A
SAFETY NET.
THEY DON'T KNOW THEIR RIGHTS,
AND EVEN WHEN THEY DO, THERE IS
SUCH A HUGE POWER IMPALACE,
MAKING TENANTS PROVE ECONOMIC
HARDSHIP WILL ONLY MAKE IT
HARDER FOR THEM WHEN THEY ARE
OVERWHELMED AND STRUGGLING TO
NAVIGATE OVERLAPPING CRISES TO
ACCESS SERVICE.
LANDLORDS ARE HIRING DOUBT
THROAT LAWYERS.
WITHOUT ADEQUATE
REPRESENTATION, HOW WILL THEY
DEFEND THEMSELVES?
WELL I UNDERSTAND THERE IS A
RIGHT TO COUNSEL, IT SHOULD BE
LOOKED AT AS A PREVENTIVE
MEASURE.
BUT HOMELESSNESS CRISIS ALSO
COSTS OF THE CITY A LOT OF
MONEY FROM SWEEPS WHICH CAUSED
FURTHER HARM AND DISPLACEMENT
AND PEOPLE ARE STILL SUFFERING.
WE SEE IT EVERYWHERE.
HOW BILL YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD LOOK
IF THOUSANDS OF YOUR NEIGHBORS
ARE EVICTED?
WHAT WOULD SEATTLE BE LIKE IF
THE ART TESTS,BER STAINERS,
STUDENTS, GROCERY STORE CLERKS
AND SERVICE AND HOSPITALITY
WORKERS ARE SUDDENLY FORCED
OUST EVER THEIR HOMES?
THEY HAVE BEEN KEEPING THE CITY
ALIVE.
LOW INCOME BLACK AND INDIGINOUS
PEOPLE OF COLOR ARE MORE LIKELY
TO BE RENTERS AND THE FIRST TO
BE DISPLACED.
THESE WERE ALREADY
DISPROPORTIONATELY AFFECTED
APPROXIMATE BEFORE THE HOMELESS
CRISIS AND WE HAVE THE
OPPORTUNITY TO PUMP THE BRAKES,
TO GIVE PEOPLE FAIR
REPRESENTATION AND SUPPORT AND
TO ULTIMATELY KEEP THEM HOUSE
AND SAVE LIVES.
THANK YOU.
>>> THANK YOU SO MUCH, KATE.
REALLY APPRECIATE THE STRONG
ADVOCACY THAT YOU AND OTHER
ORGANIZERS BRING IN.
THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR SHARING
CLAIRE'S STORY.
AND THOUSAND SHE IS
COURAGEOUSLY ORGANIZING WITH
HER FELLOW RENTERS.
I WANTED TO ADD TO WHAT YOU ARE
SAYING.
CON AM IS A HUGE LANDLORD.
AND THEY ARE A TOP 10 EVICTOR,
AM I RIGHT?
>> YEAH THEY WERE NUMBER 10 ON
THE LIST.
>> RIGHT AND I BELIEVE THEY OWN
53,000 APARTMENTS IN 26
METROPOLITAN AREAS THROUGHOUT
THE UNITED STATES.
SO DEFINITELY NOT A MOM AND POP
LANDLORD.
SO I THINK THAT INFORMATION IS
NECESSARY.
BEFORE I MOVE TO, I HAVE A
REQUEST TO ALL THE PANELISTS
WHO HAVE SPOKEN SO FAR, IF YOU
COULD JUST STAY THROUGH THE
NEXT ITEM, WHEN WE WILL BE
VOTING ON THE LEGISLATION
BECAUSE COUNCIL MEMBERS MAY
HAVE QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS
DIRECTED TO YOU.
SO I'LL APPRECIATE YOUR TIME
FOR THAT DURATION.
NEXT WE HAVE PAIGE.
>>> HI, LET ME OKAY.
MY NAME IS PAIGE OWENS, I'M
CURRENTLY A REAL CHANGE VENDOR
AND ADVOCACY INTERN.
I'M HERE TO SPEAK ON BEHALF OF
OUR VENDORS LOW INCOME OR
EXPERIENCING HOMELESSNESS.
I AM CURRENTLY LIVING PAYCHECK
TO PAYCHECK AND ALSO HAVE 12
YEARS OF PERSONAL EXPERIENCE OF
BEING HOMELESS UNDER MY BELT.
I AM SO LUCKY.
>> WE CAN'T HEAR YOU PAIGE,
PAIGE, WE ARE NOT ABLE TO HEAR
YOU.
>> WHERE I WAS PAYING A SMALLER
PORTION OF RENT AND THE PROGRAM
WAS PAYING THE REST AS WELL AS
MY ELECTRICITY.
I WAS WORKING FULL-TIME AT
MCDONALD'S AND ONLY MAKING
AROUND $9 AN HOUR.
AFTER ABOUT SIX MONTHS OF BEING
IN THE PROGRAM THE FUNDING WAS
CUT AND I WAS LEFT WITH A LEASE
AND RENT UTILITIES I COULDN'T
AFFORD ON MY OWN.
THE LANDLORD I HAD WAS NICE
ENOUGH NOT TO PUT AN E VISION
ON MY RECORD BUT TOLD ME I
STILL HAD TO LEAVE.
I PUT ALL MY BELONGINGS INTO A
STORAGE UNIT AND I THEN LOST MY
JOB BECAUSE I WAS RELYING ON
MEMBERS OF THE COMMUNITY IT
MAKE SURE I WOKE UP FOR HIGH
SHIFTS.
BASICALLY RENTS ARE TOO HIGH,
MINIMUM WAGES ARE TOO LOW AND
EVEN IF I WAS WORKING FULL-TIME
I WOULDN'T MAKE ENOUGH TO PAY
THREE TIMES OWED FOR RENT WHICH
I REALIZE YOU NEED TO BE ABLE
TO PAY ELECTRICITY, WATER SEWER
AND GARBAGE, INSURANCE, GAS,
PHONE BILL, ET CETERA.
I LIVE PAYCHECK TO PAYCHECK AND
IF I HADN'T WON THE SECTION 8
LOTTERY AFTER BEING ON THEIR
WAITING LIST FOR THREE YEARS I
WOULD STILL BE LIVING IN THE
ENHANCED NIGHT SHELTER, WHERE
THERE ARE, OF COURSE, A LIMITED
AMOUNT OF BEDS AND A LIMITED
AMOUNT OF TIME THAT YOU CAN
STAY THERE.
AND DON'T EVEN GET ME STARTED
ON HOW STRESSFUL IT IS TO LIVE
IN A ROOM WITH 10 BUNK BEDS
WORKING FULL-TIME.
.
>> I BELIEVE PAIGE'S ZOOM HAS
FROZEN WHERE I FEEL LIKE I
WOULD BE LESS LIKELY TO BE
TAKEN ADVANTAGE OF.
MAYBE IF I HAD HAD RIGHT TO
COUNSEL BACK THEN I WOULD HAVE
ALSO BEEN SENT IN A BETTER
DIRECTION THAN I WOULD HAVE AND
NOT ENDED UP.
OTHER ANOTHER NOTE EXTENDING
THE MORATORIUM THROUGH 2021 IS
A MUST.
JUST THINK, EVEN BEFORE THE
PANDEMIC THERE WERE ALREADY WAY
TOO MANY PEOPLE LIVING
.
>>> PAIGE, YOUR SOUND IS NOT
COMING THROUGH.
YOU MIGHT WANT TO TURN YOUR
CAMERA OFF.
>> WE KEEP MISSING PARTS OF
WHAT YOU ARE SAYING BECAUSE
YOUR SOUND KEEPS GOING OFF.
MAYBE TURN YOUR CAMERA OFF.
MAYBE THAT MIGHT HELP.
JUST TRY IT.
NO PROBLEM, JUST KEEP GOING.
YOU ARE DOING GREAT.
>> OKAY.
ON ANOTHER NOTE, EXTENDING THE
MORATORIUM THROUGH 2021 IS A
MUST.
JUST THINK, EVEN BEFORE THE
PANDEMIC THERE WERE ALREADY WAY
TOO MANY PEOPLE LIVING PAYCHECK
TO PAYCHECK WITH BARELY
ANYTHING IF ANYTHING IN
SAVINGS.
OUR HOMELESS CRISIS IS ALREADY
A CRISIS.
CAN YOU IMAGINE THROWING
THOUSANDS OR INTO THE MIX ALL
THE WHILE KNOWING THERE AREN'T
ENOUGH SHELTER BEDS AS THINGS
ARE NOW FOR EVERYONE WHO IS
ALREADY EXPERIENCING
HOMELESSNESS.
BASICALLY BEWOULD BE FORCING
PEOPLE TO STAY OUTSIDE OR IN
THEIR CARS.
PEOPLE DIE WITHOUT SHELTER,
WHETHER IT BE FROM WEATHER OR
VICE.
PLEASE HELP KEEP PEOPLE OFF THE
STREETS AND OUT OF HARM'S WAY.
>>> THANK YOU SO MUCH, PAIGE.
I REALLY, REALLY APPRECIATE YOU
SHARING YOUR OWN STORY AND
BECAUSE THAT TAKES COURAGE AND
HEART.
AND AS YOU NOTED, THIS IS
HAPPENING TO SO MANY OF OUR
COMMUNITY MEMBERS.
AND YOUR STORY ALSO SHOWS THE
OFTEN UNSEEN OR INVISIBLE ISSUE
OF HOW RENTERS ARE INTIMIDTED
INTO LEAVING, SO IT REALLY IS A
STRONG CASE, AS YOU NOTED.
OF HOW LEGAL ADVICE COULD HELP
SO MANY RENTERS IN A SIMILAR
SITUATION.
WE HAVE VIOLET NEXT.
GO AHEAD.
>> THANK YOU.
I AM HERE, YOU KNOW, I'M ALWAYS
HERE AS A TENANT ADVOCATE.
MY NAME IS VIOLET, EXECUTIVE
DIRECTOR OF THE.
PERFECT IN EXISTENCE FOR OUR
44thIER.
WE HAVE BEEN ADVOCATING FOR
TENANTS FOR SO MANY YEARS.
AND EDMOND BROUGHT UP A GOOD
POINT.
PEOPLE ALWAYS ASK ME, WHY IS
THERE A HOMELESS PROBLEM?
WHY ARE THERE PEOPLE ON THE
STREETS?
AND IT GOES BACK TO RACIST AND
DISCRIMINATORY, THAT HAS BEEN
SET UP BY A SYSTEM THAT, IF WE
WANT TO GET RID OF RACISM IN
HOUSING OR WHATEVER, IS
BREAKING DOWN THIS SYSTEM THAT
HAS BEEN PLACED TO OPPRESS
PEOPLE.
AFRICAN-AMERICAN, AS YOU SEE IS
THE HIGHEST RATE OF NUMBER OF
EVICTIONS.
OUR CALLS ON OUR HOTLINE IS
SOME OF THEM ALREADY LOST THEIR
PLACE AND THEY ARE CALLING US
HOW CAN WE GET BACK IN OUR
PLACE?
AND A LOT OF THE TENANTS WHO
LOSE THEIR PLACE REALLY ARE
AFRAID.
SOMETIMES THEY DON'T KNOW ABOUT
HOUSING JUSTICE PROJECT AND
WHAT WE TRY TO DO IS ACTUALLY
SEND PEOPLE TO HOUSING JUSTICE
PROJECT OR CALLED NORTHWEST
JUSTICE PROJECT.
AT SOME POINT THE TENANTS'S
UNION IS THERE AS A BUFFER TO
HELP TENANTS TO ADVOCATE FOR
THIS.
SOMETIMES WE REACH OUT TO THE
LANDLORDS AND SOMETIMES WE TAKE
THE MEANS OF PROTESTING.
BUT HAVING THIS IN PLACE RIGHT
TO COUNSEL, WILL HELP A LOT OF
PEOPLE.
THE MAJORITY OF PEOPLE THAT
WILL HELP ARE COMMUNITIES OF
COLOR.
THOSE ARE THE HIGHEST RATES OF
EVICTION IN OUR STATE.
THAT IS A FACT.
THAT IS NOT LET'S GUESS ABOUT
IT.
IT IS A FACT.
AS A WOMAN OF COLOR, I SEE
DISCRIMINATION IN EVERYTHING
THAT WE DO AND I THINK THIS IS
THE OPPORTUNITY FOR US AS
PEOPLE AS ADVOCATES, AS COMING
TOGETHER AND REALLY ASKING THE
COUNCIL MEMBERS TO PASS THIS
LEGISLATION RIGHT TO COUNSEL.
IT WOULD HELP SAVE A LOT OF
PEOPLE AND IT WILL LESSEN THE
PEOPLE WHO ARE ON THE STREETS.
IN 2015 THE MAYOR, AT THAT
TIME, DECLARED THAT THERE WOULD
BE NO MORE HOMELESS PROBLEM.
THAT WAS AN UTTER MOST LAY.
IT GOT WORSE AFTER 2015.
WHAT I'M HERE TO SPEAK ABOUT IS
THIS RIGHT TO COUNSEL.
IT IS SOMETHING THAT WE NEED,
IT IS SOMETHING THAT SHOULD BE
PASSED, IT IS SOMETHING GOOD
FOR THE PEOPLE.
IF WE DON'T PASS THIS, YOU WILL
SEE A LOT MORE PEOPLE ON THE
STREETS.
WE HAVE TOO MANY PEOPLE, ONE IS
TOO MANY ON THE STREETS RIGHT
NOW.
AND I THINK IT IS NOT A WHO'S
PRESENTING THIS?
OR HOW CAN WE PASS THIS?
IT IS A HUMAN RIGHTS, IT IS A
MORAL OBLIGATION FOR ALL OF US.
TO REALLY GET THE HEART OF WHY
WE NEED THIS.
AND WHY, WHAT CAN WE DO
TOGETHER?
WE ARE, RIGHT NOW, GEARING UP.
A LOT OF US HAVE WRITTEN TO THE
GOVERNOR, WE HAVE WRITTEN
LETTERS TO THEM, HE IS PROBABLY
SO TIRED OF SEEING E-MAILS FROM
ME.
BUT I'M GOING TO KEEP ASKING TO
EXTEND THE MORATORIUM TO THE
END OF UNTIL JUNE OR MAYBE TO
THE END OF THE YEAR.
WHAT WE WANT TO DO IS YOU KNOW,
WE KNOW THAT LANDLORDS ARE, YOU
KNOW, IT IS NOTED THEY HAVE
SUED THE GOVERNOR ABOUT THE
MORATORIUM.
I JUST THINK RIGHT NOW, IT
TAKES ALL OF US TO STOP TO
EXTEND THE MORATORIUM, ASK THE
MAYOR TO EXTEND IT UNTIL 2021.
AND RIGHT NOW, WE HAVEN'T HEARD
ANYTHING STATEWIDE.
I HAVE BEEN ASKING AROUND,
PEOPLE THAT ARE CLOSE TO THE
GOVERNOR, AND REALLY ANXIOUS.
BECAUSE WHAT IS GOING TO HAPPEN
ON MARCH 31 AND THE MORATORIUM
ENDS?
YOU'LL SEE A LOT OF PEOPLE WHO
ARE IN FEAR RIGHT NOW OF LOSING
THEIR PLACE.
IF WE PASS THIS LEGISLATION, IT
WILL HELP MANY MORE FAMILIES.
AND THE FAMILIES THAT HOUSING
JUSTICE PROJECT AND ALL ARE
LEGAL ADVOCATES FOR PEOPLE WILL
HELP PEOPLE STAY THIS THEIR
HOMES.
OUR ULTIMATE GOAL IS NOT JUST A
HUMAN OBLIGATION, BUT IT IS A
MORAL OBLIGATION TO HELP MANY
MORE PEOPLE.
WE NEED TO STOP THE, THE PEOPLE
THAT ARE ALREADY ON THE
STREETS.
YOU KNOW, EVERYBODY ALWAYS
ASKS, WHY IS IT IMPORTANT THAT
YOU GET THE MESSAGE OUT?
BECAUSE RACIAL DISCRIMINATION
HAS BEEN SOMETHING THAT I HAVE
SEEN OVER AND OVER, EVEN
WORKING AT THE TENANTS UNION.
IT IS SOMETHING THAT HAS BEEN
SET UP.
IT IS SOMETHING I ALWAYS TALK
ABOUT.
WHEN MAKES PEOPLE WHEN I GO
TALK TO PANELS UNCOMFORTABLE.
BUT IT IS SAYING SOMETHING
ABOUT WHY WE ARE IN THE
POSITION WE ARE IN.
IS THAT RACIAL DISCRIMINATION
PLAYS A PART, A LOT OF PARTS IN
ALL OF OUR LIVES.
IN OUR HOUSING, IN OUR WORLD.
AND I THINK SOMETIMES WE HAVE
TO CALL IT AND NAME IT AND SAY
IT.
I, FOR ONE SUPPORT I REALLY AM
APP HAD I THEY EXIST.
THEY ARE HELPING A LOT OF
PEOPLE.
THEY GET A LOT OF PEOPLE
CALLING THEM.
BUT I'M EXCITED, ALWAYS, THAT
THERE ARE ACTUAL ADVOCATES IN
OUR LEGAL WORLD WHO ARE
ACTUALLY ADVOCATES FOO PEOPLE
ARE THERE TO PLAY THAT PART TO
STOP THIS, THIS MASS, MAYBE
MASS WAVE OF EVICTIONS THAT ARE
COMING UP.
AND YOU KNOW, WE GET CALLS ON
THE OUR HOTLINE EVERY DAY,
AFTER THIS MEETING, I HAVE GOT
TO GET ON THE HOTLINE AGAIN TO
SUPPORT ALL THE CALLS THAT ARE
COMING IN.
BECAUSE WE YOU KNOW, IT TAKES
ALL OF US TO PLAY OUR PART.
AND WE SEE SO MANY PEOPLE ON
THE STREETS, AND WE WANT TO
STOP FROM ADDING MORE PEOPLE ON
THE STREETS, IF WE DON'T PASS
LEGISLATION LIKE THIS, IF
>> THANK YOU, VIOLET.
AND WE APPRECIATE YOUR YEARS OF
SERVICE AND SO MANY PEOPLE ARE
PROVIDING VARIOUS SOCIAL
SERVICES ARE OVERWHELMED WITH
THE WORK BUT DOING IT BECAUSE
THEY ARE SO DEDICATED TO IT AND
THE LEAST THE LEGISLATIVE BODY
OF THE CITY CAN DO IS TO ITS
OBLIGATION BY PASSING THESE
LAWS TO HELP THE TENANTS AND
ADVOCATES THEMSELVES SO HAVING
SAID THAT, I INVITE OUR LAST
PANELIST, BIA.
>> THANK YOU, AND THANK YOU TO
EVERYONE WHO HAS SPOKEN SO FAR
ON THE PANEL.
I THINK IT IS SO IMPORTANT.
MY NAME IS BIA AND I'VE BEEN A
RENTER IN SEATTLE FOR 3 YEARS
AND NOW I RENT FROM THRIVE
COMMUNITIES AND CAPITOL HILL
AND ONE OF THE TOP 10
PLAINTIFFS TAKING RENTERS TO
COURT IN SEATTLE.
DURING THE PANDEMIC I'VE BEEN
AN ORGANIZER FOR MUCH OF LAST
YEAR AND I HAD THE OPPORTUNITY
TO TALK TO DOZENS OF RENTERS ON
ANY GIVEN WEEK AT SOCIALLY
DISTANCED TABLES WHILE DOING
PHONE BAKING AND OTHER
ENGAGEMENT WITH RENTERS AND
HELPFUL PEOPLE DEAL DIRECTLY
WITH THE PANDEMIC.
WHAT'S CLEAR TO TALKING FROM
PEOPLE AND HEARING FROM
EVERYONE WHO HAS SPOKEN TODAY
IS HOW DIRE THE SITUATION IS
FOR RENTERS IN SEATTLE NOW.
NO DOUBT ABOUT THE CRISIS WE
ARE FACING.
WE KNOW FROM READING THE NEWS
EVERY DAY THAT ORDINARY PEOPLE
HAVE SUFFERED FOR OVER A YEAR,
NOT ONLY A DEADLY PANDEMIC
WHICH HAS TAKEN THE LIVES OF
FRIENDS AND FAMILIES AND
COMMUNITY MEMBERS, BUT WORKERS
AND MENTORS HAVE LOST INCOME OR
LOST THEIR JOBS COMPLETELY
WHICH HAS WIPED OUT WHAT LITTLE
FINANCIAL SECURITY THEY MAY
HAVE HAD AND PUT THOUSANDS OF
RENTERS DEEP INTO DEBT AND
FORCED MANY MORE ONTO THE
STREETS.
WORKING PREVIOUSLY FOR
CAMPAIGNS ON RENT CONTROL AND
AFFORDABLE HOUSING, AS A RENTER
IN SEATTLE FOR SEVERAL YEARS
NOW, WE ALL KNOW THE COVID-19
PANDEMIC IS BY NO MEANS WHERE
THE CRISIS HAVE BEGUN AND
RENTERS HAVE BEEN STRUGGLING TO
PAY THEIR BILLS LONG BEFORE
MARCH OF LAST YEAR.
THE PANDEMIC AND ECONOMIC
DOWNTURN HAVE EXACERBATED WHAT
WAS ALREADY AN UNTENABLE
SITUATION FOR MANY RENTERS WHO
LIVE AND STILL LIVE A PAYCHECK
AWAY FROM NOT BEING ABLE TO PAY
RENT OR OTHER BILLS AND FACING
EVICTION.
YOU HEAR THAT TIME AND TIME
AGAIN ON THE PHONES AND AFTER
TALKING TO RENTERS IN THE CITY.
IT'S IMPORTANT TO TALK ABOUT
HOW AFFECTIONS ARE NOT ONLY A
SHATTERING OF A PERSON'S
FINANCIAL FUTURE BUT DRAMATIC
AND VIOLENT AND SOMETHING THAT
COMES OUT IN CONVERSATIONS WITH
PEOPLE.
WE ALSO KNOW SO MUCH OF THE
DATA AND RESEARCH BACKS THIS
UP, AS WE HAVE HEARD FROM SOME
OF THE OTHER PRESENTERS.
EVICTIONS RIPPED FAMILIES
APART, CAUSE PROFOUND
PSYCHOLOGICAL HARM TO ADULTS
AND CHILDREN ALIKE, AND LEAVE
WHAT CAN BE LIFELONG EFFECTS.
AS COUNCILMEMBER SAWANT AND
OTHERS HAVE SPOKEN TO,
EVICTIONS AND THE TRAUMA THEY
CAUSE WHILE DISPROPORTIONATELY
ON WOMEN AND PEOPLE OF COLOR
AND THE VAST MAJORITY OF KING
COUNTY RESIDENTS ARE HOMELESS
OR SOME DIE AS A CONSEQUENCE.
THE MOST IMMEDIATE THING THAT
COUNCILMEMBERS CAN DO IS GIVE
PEACE OF MIND TO FAMILIES AND
ORDINARY PEOPLE MANY OF WHOM
ARE GENERALLY BURDENED WITH THE
OVERWHELMING FEAR OF LOSING
EVERYTHING THEY NEED TO SURVIVE
AND ON TOP OF THAT LOSING ANY
HOPE OF STABILITY AND SAFETY,
AND FOR MANY NOT JUST FOR
THEMSELVES, BUT ALSO FOR THEIR
CHILDREN.
GETTING RENTERS IN SEATTLE THE
RIGHT TO COUNCIL WITHOUT MEANS
TESTING PRODUCE EVICTIONS,
MITIGATE TRAUMA AND IS
ABSOLUTELY NECESSARY.
I HAVE HEARD OVER RECENT MONTHS
FROM RENTERS IN SEATTLE SPEAKS
TO THE CLEAR AND OBVIOUS NEED
TO SHORE UP THE BASIC RIGHTS OF
RENTERS, THAT FOLKS IN THE CITY
DEPEND UPON.
I'M HAVING CONVERSATIONS WITH
SO MANY SEATTLE RENTERS AND
REAL SUPPORT FOR THE
INTERCONNECTED DEMANDS TO
IMPROVE THEIR LIVES, AND THE
DEMANDS THAT COUNCILMEMBER AND
HER OFFICE I HAVE BEEN FIGHTING
FOR DURING THIS CRISIS, I SPOKE
TO A RENTER RECENTLY WHO LIVES
IN THE CENTRAL DISTRICT AND
SAID SHE LOST HER JOB IN
DECEMBER AND HAVE BEEN LIVING
ON HER SAVINGS AND SMALL
UNEMPLOYMENT BENEFITS SINCE
THEN.
SHE WAS SCARED AND DIDN'T KNOW
WHAT SHE WOULD DO BECAUSE HER
RENTAL DEBT WAS PILING UP AND
WILL LOOSE HER HOME WHEN THE
MORATORIUM ENDS AT THE END OF
THE MONTH.
DESPITE THIS INCREDIBLE STRESS
BUT ALSO BECAUSE OF IT, THIS
RENTER UNDERSTOOD HOW IMPORTANT
THE ISSUES ARE AND WANTED TO
GET INVOLVED AND DONATED A FEW
DOLLARS TO HELP THE MOVEMENT TO
CANCEL RENT AND FIGHT TO EXTEND
THE MORATORIUM BECAUSE SHE
RECOGNIZED IT THE ONLY WAY SHE
WILL AVOID GETTING EVICTED.
A FEW MONTHS AGO I ALSO HAPPEN
TO SPEAK WITH A SMALL LANDLORD
WHO SHARED HIS THREE TENANTS
HAVE BEEN UNABLE TO PAY RENTS
FOR MONTHS AFTER LOSING JOBS.
HIS FINANCIAL SITUATION AS
THEIR LANDLORD IS STRAINED BUT
LIKE MANY SMALL LANDLORDS WHICH
WE HEARD FROM THIS MORNING HE
RECOGNIZE IT'S NOT THE FAULT OF
HIS TENANTS IN SMALL LANDLORDS
AND TENANTS NEED RELIEF FROM
THE CITY.
HE SUPPORTED THE DEMAND FOR
ENORMOUS CORPORATE LANDLORDS TO
PAY FOR THE GROWING RENT AND
MORTGAGE DEBT THAT TENANTS AND
SMALL LANDLORDS CAN'T POSSIBLY
AFFORD TO PAY.
MUCH LIKE THOSE CONVERSATIONS,
I HAVE HEARD CONSISTENT SUPPORT
FOR EXTENDING THE EVICTION
MORATORIUM FOR THE DEMAND TO
CANCEL RENT AND THAT'S FOR
THOSE LOST INCOMES DURING THE
PANDEMIC FOR THE RIGHT TO
COUNCIL WHEN THEY AS ORDINARY
PEOPLE HAVE NO CHOICE BUT TO GO
AGAINST BILLION-DOLLAR
CORPORATE LAND LORDS IN COURT.
AND ULTIMATELY, REPRESENTATION
FOR ALL TENANTS FACING EVICTION
IS ONE STEP TOWARDS WHAT IS
NEEDED TO MAKE SURE RENTERS AND
WORKERS THROUGH NO FAULT OF
THEIR OWN LOST THEIR INCOME AND
JOBS TO THIS CRISIS AND ENSURE
THEY DON'T HAVE TO PAY TO FIX
THE CRISIS THEY DID NOT CREATE.
THE BIG BANKS AND CORPORATE
LANDLORDS ARE THE ONES WHO
SHOULD BE PAYING USING THE
BILLIONS THEY HAVE AMASSED
SINCE THE PANDEMIC BEGAN.
I WOULD LIKE TO END BY JOINING
MANY, MANY RENTERS, STRUGGLING
HOMEOWNERS AND SMALL BUSINESSES
AND CALLING ON COUNCILMEMBERS
TO SUPPORT CANCELING RENT,
MORTGAGE AND UTILITY PAYMENTS
FOR ALL THOSE AFFECTED BY THE
CRISIS.
THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU, BIA AND THANK
YOU SO MUCH TO ALL OF OUR
SPEAKERS WHO SPOKE WITH SUCH
PASSION AND DEDICATION WHICH
REFLECTS THE GENUINE DEDICATION
THEY FEEL TOWARDS THE PEOPLE
THEY REPRESENT, EITHER AS
PEOPLE DIRECTLY PROVIDING
SERVICES OR SUCH AS SPEAKERS
LIKE BIA WHO CAME INTO CONTACT
WITH RENTERS FACING THIS CRISIS
, AND ALL THE STORIES THAT YOU
SHARED ARE EXTREMELY HELPFUL
AND INFORMATIVE TO THE CITY
COUNCIL COMMITTEE ON RENTERS
RIGHTS TO UNDERSTAND HOW THIS
CRISIS IS AFFECTING VARIOUS
SECTIONS OF OUR COMMUNITY.
OBVIOUSLY I WANT TO OPEN IT UP
TO QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS FROM
COUNCILMEMBERS, BUT WHAT I WILL
DO IS GO AHEAD AND READ OUT THE
NEXT AGENDA ITEM BECAUSE I FEEL
LIKE THOSE TWO, THE COMMUNITY
PANEL DISCUSSION THAT JUST
HAPPENED IN THE NEXT ITEM WHICH
IS LENDING TOGETHER ORGANICALLY
SO I WILL READ THE AGENDA ITEM
TO OUR COMMITTEE.
THIS COUNCIL BUILT 120007,
ORDINANCE RELATING TO
RESIDENTIAL EVICTIONS,
GUARANTEEING THE RIGHT TO LEGAL
COUNCIL REGARDLESS OF THE
ABILITY TO PAY FOR ANY
RESIDENTIAL RENTER IN SEATTLE
RESPONDING TO AN UNLAWFUL
DETAINER SUIT AND ADDING A NEW
SECTION TO THE SEATTLE
MUNICIPAL CODE.
FIRST I WANT TO MAKE A CALL FOR
COUNCILMEMBERS THAT IF YOU HAVE
COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS FOR THE
PANELISTS AND AFTER THAT I WILL
HAVE ASHA VENKATARAMAN FROM
THE COUNCIL LEGISLATION.
>> MADAM CHAIR, I HAVE A
QUESTION FOR THE PANEL.
THANK YOU.
THE QUESTION IS FOR ELIN AND I
APPRECIATE YOUR PRESENTATION
ABOUT THE EXPERIENCE IN NEW
YORK AND HOW IT CAN BE
INSTRUCTED HERE BUT I AM
WONDERING IF YOU COULD SHARE A
LITTLE BIT ABOUT WHAT THE
IMPACT -- FIRST, TELL US WHAT
THE MEANS TESTING THRESHOLD IS
IN NEW YORK, AND HOW THAT
SCREENING PROCESS SORT OF WORKS
IN TERMS OF HOW IT IS
ADMINISTERED, BECAUSE I THINK
GETTING INTO THE GRANULAR
DETAILS CAN HELP SHED SOME
LIGHT ON HOW SOME OF THOSE
THINGS CAN SET UP POTENTIAL
BARRIERS.
I WOULD LIKE TO LEARN A LITTLE
BIT MORE ABOUT NEW YORK'S
EXPERIENCE.
I THINK IT IS IMPORTANT CONTEXT
SETTING FOR WHAT WE ARE
DISCUSSING.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER
LEWIS.
AND TO BE FULLY HONEST, MY
INTERACTION WITH THE RIGHT TO
COUNCIL THERE HAS LARGELY BEEN
DURING THE PANDEMIC AFTER MEANS
TESTING WAS ROLLED BACK BUT
PRIOR TO THE PANDEMIC MEANS
TESTING IN TERMS OF INCOME WAS
BASED ON EARNED INCOME AND
SPECIFICALLY THE THRESHOLD WAS
LOWER THAN NEW YORK CITY'S
MINIMUM WAGE.
THERE WERE PEOPLE MAKING
MINIMUM WAGE WHO DID NOT HAVE
THE GUARANTEED ACCESS TO LEGAL
COUNCIL THAT WAS PUBLICLY
FUNDED.
IT'S CLEAR THAT GIVEN THE
STAGNATION OF MINIMUM WAGE IN
COMPARISON TO INFLATION IN NEW
YORK AND NATIONWIDE, THERE ARE
LOTS OF PEOPLE ABOVE THAT
INCOME BARRIER WHO WOULD NOT BE
ABLE TO AFFORD A LAWYER ON
THEIR OWN, BUT WHO WOULD NOT
QUALIFY, SO THAT IS ONE
REPRESENTATIVE RESTRICTION OF
THE MEANS TESTING OF RIGHT TO
COUNCIL THRESHOLD IN NEW YORK.
THE OTHER INTERESTING ONE IS
INTEGRATION STATUS , THAT
THROUGHOUT VARIOUS MEANS TESTS
TENET BILLS DURING THE PANDEMIC
THERE HAS BEEN A CONSTANT
BATTLE WE HAVE BEEN FACING WITH
MEANS TESTING IS TRYING TO GET
UNDOCUMENTED IMMIGRANTS CAN
ACCESS THE SERVICES THAT THEY
NEED ON THEIR OWN.
BUT OFTEN TIMES, TENANTS ARE
NOT ABLE TO ACCESS THEM ON
THEIR OWN AND NEED TO GO
THROUGH AN AGENCY BECAUSE OF
LACK OF DOCUMENTATION.
UNDOCUMENTED IMMIGRANTS ARE
SOME OF THE MOST VULNERABLE
PEOPLE IN TERMS OF WORKING IN
INFORMAL ECONOMIES WHERE THEIR
JOB INSECURITY IS HIGHER THAN
MANY PEOPLE ESPECIALLY DURING
THE PANDEMIC.
AND GIVEN THE INSTABILITY OF
ECONOMIES DURING THE PANDEMIC,
AND THEN ADDITIONALLY
UNDOCUMENTED TENANTS FACE LOTS
OF ADDITIONAL ISSUES IN THE
EVICTION PROCESS THAT AMERICAN
CITIZENS WOULD NOT FACE AND
THEREFORE THE NEED FOR
REPRESENTATION IS EVEN MORE
CLEAR FOR THE RIGHT TO
REPRESENTATION WITHOUT MEANS
TESTING.
>> THANK YOU.
I QUICK FOLLOW-UP ON THAT TOO.
DURING THE PANDEMIC, THERE HAS
BEEN AN ADJUSTMENT TO TO THE
MEANS TESTING THRESHOLDS.
>> THAT'S CORRECT.
PRIOR TO THE PANDEMIC, THE
MEANS TESTING -- I'M SORRY, THE
COUNCIL LEGISLATION SIGNED AND
2017 WAS ON A 5 YEAR ROLLUP BY
Z.I.P.
CODE SPECIFICALLY WHICH WAS
FULLY ROLLED OUT TO ALL Z.I.P.
CODES BY 2022.
DURING THE PANDEMIC THE Z.I.P.
CODE RESTRICTIONS AND OTHER
INCOME RESTRICTIONS AND
DOCUMENTATION RESTRICTIONS WERE
ROLLED BACK.
>> ARE THOSE PERMANENT OR JUST
FOR THE PENDENCY OF THE
PANDEMIC EMERGENCY?
>> THAT'S A GOOD QUESTION.
MY UNDERSTANDING IS THE Z.I.P.
CODE RESTRICTIONS WOULD REMAIN
BECAUSE IT WAS PLANNED TO BE
ROLLED OUT BY 2022 ANYWAY.
I AM NOT ENTIRELY SURE ABOUT
THE INCOME ELIGIBILITY
REQUIREMENTS.
I IMAGINE THERE WILL BE SOME
IMPERATIVE TO REINSTATE THOSE
AFTER THE PANDEMIC, BUT OF
COURSE, AS TENET ORGANIZERS
WILL FIGHT TO MAKE SURE THE
LEGISLATION REMAINS UNIVERSAL.
>> JUST ONE MORE THING BECAUSE
I DON'T WANT TO MONOPOLIZE ALL
THE QUESTION TIME BUT IT'S BEEN
REALLY HELPFUL, AND I
APPRECIATE YOU BEING HERE.
CAN YOU WALK THROUGH TO THE
EXTENT THAT YOU ARE FAMILIAR
WITH IT, IF I WERE A TENANT IN
NEW YORK FACING EVICTION I
WANTED TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF
THIS, WHAT ARE THINGS I HAVE TO
GO AND DO AND WHAT ARE THE WAIT
TIMES I CAN EXPECT, WHAT ARE
THE ADMINISTRATIVE PROCESSES?
IS AN ONLINE INTO I HAVE TO
PHYSICALLY GO SOMEWHERE?
HOW LONG UNTIL I KNOW I HAVE
COUNCIL ? HOW WAS THE COUNCIL
ASSIGNED?
CAN YOU WALK THROUGH SOME OF
THOSE REAL QUICK JUST TO GET A
SENSE?
I AM JUST CURIOUS HOW EXACTLY
THOSE SYSTEMS WORK STEP-BY-STEP
TO DECONSTRUCT WHAT SOME OF THE
BARRIERS ARE.
>> YEAH, DURING THE PANDEMIC IT
IS VERY STRAIGHTFORWARD.
TENANTS ARE ABLE TO CALL OUR
311 CITY SERVICES LINE AND WILL
BE AUTOMATICALLY PAIRED WITH A
LEGAL AID PROVIDER. BASICALLY
ONCE THEY ARE HOOKED UP WITH
HE LEGAL AID PROVIDER T
CONVERSATION THIS CONTINUING
FROM THERE.
PRIOR TO THE PANDEMIC, WITH
VARIOUS MEANS TESTING
REQUIREMENTS, THERE WOULD BE AN
INTERMEDIARY STEP IN BETWEEN A
TENANT CALLING THE 311 NUMBER
AND THEN BEING PAIRED WITH A
LAWYER WHICH WOULD INCREASE
RATE TIMES.
IT WOULD MAKE FOR THE
POSSIBILITY THAT A TENANT WOULD
NOT GET THE LEGAL
REPRESENTATION AT ALL.
>> ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU SO
MUCH.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER
LEWIS AND THANK YOU, ELIN, FOR
ILLUMINATING INFORMATION.
I SAW THAT EDMUND HAD HIS ZOOM
HAND RAISED UP AND THEN DOWN.
DO YOU WANT TO RESPOND ALSO?
>> I HELPED WITH THE ROLLOUT IN
NEW YORK CITY PRIOR TO COMING
TO SEATTLE AND RIGHT TO COUNCIL
IN THE BRONX AND I WILL SAY
MEANS TESTING WAS A LOGISTICAL
HARDSHIP. PARTICULARLY BECAUSE
WHAT WE HAD TO DO WHEN WE
STARTED THE ROLLOUT AS WE WOULD
HAVE TO GO INTO EACH COURTROOM
AND CALL EVERYONE'S NAME ON THE
CALENDAR THAT THEY AND ASKED
THEM, DO YOU WANT AN ATTORNEY?
HAVE THEM FILL OUT PAPERWORK
AND THEN AT THAT TIME.
ULTIMATELY THAT EATS AWAY AT
THE CLOCK BECAUSE YOU HAVE
LANDLORDS AND ATTORNEY SAYING,
WISE THE CASE THAT MOVING
ALONG?
MEANWHILE WE HAVE DOCUMENTATION
REQUIREMENTS THAT WE SET AT THE
TIME WE HAD TO GET SUPPORTED
AND A LOT OF TIMES PEOPLE DON'T
COME IN WITH PROOF OF INCOME
AND ANY PROOF THEY HAVE READILY
ACCESSIBLE, SO WE HAD TO DO
SHOP CALLS AT THAT POINT AND
SAID I DON'T KNOW IF WE CAN
ACTUALLY UNDER THE FUNDING
REPRESENT THEM SO WE WON'T BE
ABLE TO BILL IT, BUT NOW WE DO
THIS WORK WE ARE FUNDED FOR SO
IT IS STRETCHING US AND MAKE US
MAKE DIFFICULT CALLS.
TO BE FRANK, WE WOULD SAY WE
HAVE TO FIGURE IT OUT LATER.
I'M NOT GOING TO TAKE A TENANT
WHO IS DESPERATE RIGHT THERE
AND NEEDS HELP NOW AND SAY I
CANNOT HELP YOU BECAUSE YOU
DIDN'T HAPPEN TO KNOW YOU
NEEDED TO BRING THINGS THAT
VALIDATE YOUR INCOME.
THAT WAS CREATING A PATCHWORK
OF UNNECESSARY REGULATION, WHEN
A LOT OF PEOPLE ALREADY MET THE
THRESHOLD AND 200% OF THE
FEDERAL POVERTY LINE AND SINCE
LAST TIME WHEN WE HAD THE
DISCUSSION IT IS RARE ANYONE
EXCEEDS THAT.
AS SOON AS YOU START TACKING ON
DOCUMENTATION OR ANY TYPE OF
MEANS TESTING YOU CAN GET
REALLY COMPLICATED AND IT MEANS
A LOT OF TIME LAWYERS ARE
FOCUSED ON SOMEONE'S INCOME
WHEN THEY ARE FOCUSED ON THE
LEGAL CASE AND NOT FOCUS ON THE
OUTCOME OR ANYTHING ELSE.
WE START GIVING THIS PROCESS
WITH A THOUGHT, WHAT ARE WE
úSUPPOSED TO DO WITH THE TIME?
IT'S A HARD THING TO DO IN NEW
YORK CITY AND I DEFINITELY
DISCOURAGE IT AS MUCH AS
POSSIBLE HERE.
BUT I THINK IT'S AN UNNECESSARY
BARRIER AND PEOPLE GET EVICTED
BECAUSE OF POVERTY. I DON'T
THINK WE NEED TO ADD A LAYER TO
PROVE THE POVERTY.
>> THANK YOU, EDMUND.
EXTREMELY HELPFUL.
THAT SHOWED HOW IT IS NOT ONLY
UNJUST BUT NOT REQUIRED BECAUSE
PEOPLE WHO FACE POVERTY ARE THE
ONES WHO ARE THE MOST
OVERWHELMINGLY LIKELY TO BE
EVICTED AND HELPFUL TO MAKE THE
CONNECTION.
COUNCILMEMBER MORALES, NOT SURE
IF YOU WANT TO SPEAK.
YOU LOWERED YOUR HAND.
IF OTHER COUNCILMEMBERS WANT TO
SPEAK, LET ME KNOW.
BUT FAILING THAT, I WILL
INVITE, ASHA VENKATARAMAN --
>> COUNCILMEMBER SAWANT?
I AM SORRY AND I AM RAISING AND
LOWERING, BUT JUST WANT TO
THANK EDMUND FOR THAT
PERSPECTIVE AND I THINK IT'S
REALLY IMPORTANT AS A LAWYER
MOVING THIS FORWARD THAT WE
MAKE SURE IT IS BAKED INTO THE
PROCESS THAT PEOPLE JUST HAVE
ACCESS.
THAT IS THE WHOLE POINT IS
MAKING SURE PEOPLE ARE GETTING
ACCESS TO REPRESENTATION AND
PUTTING UP YET ANOTHER BARRIER
IS NOT GOING TO BE HELPFUL IN
HAVING THE OUTCOME WE ARE
LOOKING FOR.
I JUST WANT TO THANK YOU, ELIN
AND ADMIN , FOR THAT
PERSPECTIVE AND TO SIGNAL MY
SUPPORT AND INTEREST IN HELPING
TO COSPONSOR THE LEGISLATION.
>> THANK YOU SO MUCH,
COUNCILMEMBER MORALES.
WE WILL LIST YOU AS A COSPONSOR
AND I APPRECIATE WHAT YOU SAID
AND ESPECIALLY WHEN YOU SAID
THE POINT IS TO GIVE TENANTS
ACCESS AND WHAT IS THE POINT OF
BAKING INTO THE LEGISLATION
BARRIERS TO THE ACCESS BECAUSE
IT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE, SO I
APPRECIATE THE POINT OF VIEW.
AND BEFORE I CALL ON ASHA,
SOMETHING COUNCILMEMBER MORALES
TRIGGERED MY MEMORY AND I
WONDER IF ALEC CAN GO OVER
SOMETHING THAT YOU ALREADY
MENTIONED IN YOUR PRESENTATION
BUT MAYBE IT WAS MISSED, BUT I
FEEL LIKE SOME NUMBERS YOU USED
TO SHOW WHEN MEANS TESTING WAS
PUT INTO THE EVICTION
MORATORIUM IN NEW YORK,
RECENTLY, IT HAD A HUGE IMPACT,
A NEGATIVE AND BAD IMPACT SO
CAN YOU GO OVER THAT AGAIN?
>> DEFINITELY.
IN JANUARY, THE UNIVERSAL
EVICTION MORATORIUM WAS
EXTENDED UNTIL MAY 1st WITH THE
CAVEAT THAT MARCH 1st THE
UNIVERSAL ASPECT OF BOWL MEANS
TESTED VERSION WERE PROVIDED
FOR TENANTS TO ACCESS THE MEANS
TESTED VERSION OF THE EVICTION
MORATORIUM.
HOWEVER, IN THE THREE MONTHS
THE PLAN WAS IN PLACE ONLY 9000
TENANT STATEWIDE HAVE APPLIED
FOR THE PROGRAM.
>> DO YOU HAVE AN ESTIMATE AS
TO HOW MANY TENANTS, ARE
TALKING ABOUT HUNDREDS OF
THOUSANDS OR TENS OF THOUSANDS
OF TENANTS THAT WOULD ACTUALLY
BE ELIGIBLE IF THERE WASN'T A
BARRIER?
I THINK YOU SAID EARLIER IN THE
PRESENTATION THAT ACTUALLY
LAWMAKERS, SERVICE PROVIDERS,
RENTERS AND EVEN LANDLORDS ARE
ALL IN AGREEMENT IT'S A VERY
LOW NUMBER FOR THE SERVICE.
>> OF COURSE IT'S HARD TO
ESTIMATE WITH A PATCHWORK OF
EVICTION MORATORIUM'S EXACTLY
HOW MANY TENANTS THIS REALLY
AFFECTS, BUT I THINK IT IS
ILLUSTRATIVE AND THE NUMBERS
CERTAINLY WELL INTO THE TENS OF
THOUSANDS IF NOT THE HUNDREDS
OF THOUSANDS.
IF YOU LOOK AT THE RENT RELIEF
PROGRAM ROLLED OUT LAST SUMMER,
THERE WERE ALMOST 100,000
APPLICANTS THAT APPLIED FOR
THAT AND ALMOST 60,000 OF THOSE
APPLICANTS WERE DENIED ACCESS
SO THAT SPEAKS A LITTLE BIT TO
THE NEEDS OF TENANTS AND
CERTAINLY WITHOUT ANY
SUBSTANTIAL RELIEF THE
SITUATION ISN'T GETTING BETTER
AS TIME PROGRESSES.
>> THANK YOU.
THAT DEFINITELY MAKE SENSE.
SO WITHOUT FURTHER DELAY, ASHA
IF YOU CAN GO OVER THE MEMOS
PLEASE?
>> I AM ASHA VENKATARAMAN AND
AS THE COUNCILMEMBER STATED WE
ARE TALKING ABOUT 120007 WHICH
CODIFIES THE SEATTLE MUNICIPAL
CODE AND AS MENTIONED, IT IS
INTENDED TO BE AVAILABLE TO ANY
TENANTS IN SEATTLE THAT ARE
FACING EVICTION.
REGARDLESS OF THE TENANT'S
INCOME.
THE BILL ITSELF LAYS OUT THE
DETAILS OF WHAT THE RIGHT TO
COUNCIL LOOKS LIKE IN THE IDEA
IS FOR COUNCIL TO BE AVAILABLE
AS SOON AS PEOPLE RECEIVE THE
COMPLAINT.
SO WHEN THE SUIT IS FILED BY
THE LANDLORD, THERE IS A
SUMMONS AND A NOTICE OF THE
LANDLORD THAT HAS TO GO TO THE
TENANT AND ONCE THAT IS
RECEIVED, THE RIGHT TO COUNCIL
IS INTENDED TO KICK IN AT THAT
TIME.
IT IS INTENDED TO LAST UNTIL
THE CASE IS OVER, SO UNTIL THE
COURT DISMISSES THE CASE, UNTIL
A JUDGMENT IS ENTERED OR THE
COMPLAINT IS WITHDRAWN.
SO THE TENANT IS GETTING THE
FULL SCOPE OF LEGAL
REPRESENTATION AS NEEDED DURING
THE PROCEEDING.
THE BILL ALSO AUTHORIZES OUR
SEATTLE DEPARTMENT OF
CONSTRUCTION AND INSPECTIONS TO
ENTER INTO A CONTRACT FOR AN
ORGANIZATION TO PROVIDE THOSE
SERVICES.
CURRENTLY THEY CONTRACT WITH
THE HOUSING PROJECT AS WELL AS
THE TENANT LAW CENTER, BUT THE
REQUIREMENTS IN THE BILL LAY
OUT WHAT IT IS THAT THE COUNCIL
IS LOOKING FOR IN AN
ORGANIZATION THAT PROVIDES THE
SERVICES, SO IT IS INTENDED FOR
AN ORGANIZATION WITH EXPERIENCE
SUPPORTING RENTERS AND
ADVOCATING FOR LEGAL RIGHTS HAS
WHERE THE PROCEEDINGS ARE TO
TAKING PLACE, AND IN THIS CASE
THE KING COUNTY COURTHOUSE AND
CAN PROVIDE LEGAL SERVICES IN
LANGUAGES THAT ARE COMMONLY
SPOKEN IN SEATTLE OR HAVE
ACCESS TO TRANSLATION SERVICES.
SO THOSE ARE INTENDED TO MAKE
THE PRACTICALIIES OF OBTAINING
COUNCIL A LITTLE BIT EASIER.
THERE ARE ALSO SOME PROVISIONS
THAT SPEAK TO THE OBLIGATIONS OF
THEM IN TERMS OF EDUCATING
RENTERS IN TERMS OF THEIR RIGHT
TO COUNCIL AND THE IDEA IS FOR
SDCI TO UPDATE THEIR NOTICES TO
MAKE CLEAR THAT ANYONE FACING
EVICTION HAS ACCESS TO COUNCIL
. THEY ALSO SPEAK TO A
REQUIREMENT FOR LANDLORDS TO
UPDATE THEIR NOTICES TO PROVIDE
NOTICE OF THE RIGHT TO COUNCIL
TO THE TENANTS AND GIVES SDCI
THE OPPORTUNITY TO DO
RULEMAKING TO FIGURE OUT WHAT
THE LANGUAGE WOULD LOOK LIKE.
THE LAST PIECE OF THAT IS ONCE
THAT RULEMAKING IS COMPLETED
AND LANDLORDS KNOW WHAT
LANGUAGE THEY ARE SUPPOSED TO
PUT ON THE NOTICE, IF THE
LANGUAGE DOESN'T APPEAR IN THE
NOTICE IT WOULD BE A DEFENSE TO
EVICTION.
A COUPLE OF OTHER THINGS, THE
TENANT IS NOT REQUIRED TO
ACCEPT COUNCIL . IT JUST GIVES
HIM THE OPTION OF RETAINING
COUNCIL . IF THEY CHOOSE NOT TO
HIRE THE COUNCIL PROVIDED BY
THE CITY OR GO OUT TO
INDEPENDENTLY HIRE LEGAL
COUNCIL, THE CITY IS NOT
RESPONSIBLE FOR PAYING THOSE
COSTS.
AND THE ATTORNEYS THAT THE CITY
IS PROVIDING ARE NOT OBLIGATED
TO REPRESENT TENANTS THAT THEY
ARE DOING SO WOULD VIOLATE SOME
WASHINGTON STATE COURT RULES OF
CONFESSIONAL CONDUCT.
SO JUST TO MAKE SURE THAT THE
BILL ISN'T REQUIRING
REPRESENTATION WHEN THERE WOULD
BE CONFLICT, ETHICAL CONFLICT.
THIS INCLUDES THE PROVISION AS
WELL, AND LASTLY AND NOT IN THE
CODIFIED SESSION BUT ASKED THE
CITY TO APPROPRIATE SUFFICIENT
FUNDS SO THE CITY CAN CONTRACT
WITH AN ORGANIZATION AT THE
FUNDING LEVEL THAT WOULD COVER
ALL OF THE TENANTS THAT MIGHT
NEED REPRESENTATION DURING AN
EVENT AND PROCEEDING.
AT THIS POINT, IF THERE ARE NO
QUESTIONS ABOUT THE PROVISIONS
IN THE BILL ITSELF I CAN MOVE
INTO FISCAL CONSIDERATIONS BUT
I WILL PAUSE IN CASE ANYONE HAS
QUESTIONS.
>> I HAVE A QUICK QUESTION ON
THE LAST POINT IF IT IS
APPROPRIATE NOW.
>> OKAY.
>> YOU MENTIONED IN
CIRCUMSTANCES WHERE THERE IS A
CONFLICT, THE CORE AGENCY THAT
HAS BEEN CONTRACTED WITH MIGHT
NOT BE IN A POSITION TO PROVIDE
THE REPRESENTATION.
IT HAPPENS COMMONLY IN THE
CRIMINAL LEGAL SYSTEM WHERE
THERE MIGHT BE A CONFLICT WITH
ONE OF THE DEFENDER AGENCIES SO
ONE OUT SIDE CONFLICT COUNCIL
IS SECURED.
IS THIS A VISION A PROCESS TO
DO THAT OR IS THAT IMPLIED IN
THE RULEMAKING THAT SDCI WOULD
DO THAT AND THEIR CONTRACTING?
WOULD THEY BE IN A POSITION TO
SECURE SUFFICIENT CONTRACTS FOR
A CONFLICT FIRM, OR IS THAT
SOMETHING WE SHOULD ENVISION IN
THE CORE BILL?
>> THERE ISN'T ANYTHING IN THE
BILL ITSELF THAT SPEAKS TO WHAT
DOES HAPPEN IN CASE THERE IS A
CONFLICT OF INTEREST.
SDCI ITSELF HAS THE AUTHORITY
TO CONTRACT WITH A VARIETY OF
ORGANIZATIONS BUT DON'T KNOW
THEY SPECIFICALLY THOUGHT
THROUGH WHAT A PROCESS MIGHT BE
FOR COUNCIL IF THERE IS A
CONFLICT.
I WOULD SAY THAT IN THIS
SITUATION WE CURRENTLY HAVE TWO
DIVIDERS THAT WERE CONTRACTED
FOR, SO THE TENANT LAW CENTER
AND HOUSING JUSTICE PROJECT.
I WOULD THINK IF SOMEONE FROM
HOUSING JUSTICE PROJECT COULD
NOT PROVIDE REPRESENTATION, IF
NONE OF THE ATTORNEYS WERE
ALLOWED TO THAN SOMEONE FROM
THE TENANT LAW CENTER MIGHT BE
ABLE TO BUT THAT IS SOMETHING
WE CAN DISCUSS FURTHER WITH
SDCI TO FIGURE OUT WHAT THE
MORE SPECIFIC PROCESS MIGHT
LOOK LIKE.
>> I THINK WE SHOULD LOOK INTO
IT BECAUSE WE CONTRACT WITH
THREE OF THE CONSTITUENT
AGENCIES OR REPRESENTATION
GROUPS OF DPD WHO ARE PART OF
OUR CONTRACT WITH THE MUNICIPAL
COURT AND CERTAINLY OCCASIONS
WHERE PEOPLE ARE CONFLICTED OUT
OF ALL THREE OF THOSE AGENCIES
AND WE HAVE TO HAVE COVERAGE
COUNCIL COME IN FOR WHATEVER
REASON . I CAN SEE A SCENARIO
WHERE BOTH CONTRACTED GROUPS
COULD BE CONTRACTED OUT SO
SOMETHING TO LOOK INTO.
MY UNDERSTANDING IS A RELATED
QUESTION, THE RIGHT IS GOING TO
ATTACH TO TENANTS, SO WE WILL
BE IN A POSITION WHERE WE HAVE
TO BE ABLE TO FIGURE OUT A WAY
TO PROVIDE THE REPRESENTATION
CONSISTENT WITH THE COURT RULES
AROUND POTENTIAL CONFLICTS.
I THINK IT IS SOMETHING TO
CERTAINLY PREPARE FOR.
ONE MORE QUESTION, RELATED TO
THAT.
AT WHAT POINT UNDER THE CURRENT
LEGISLATION DOES THIS RIGHT GO
INTO EFFECT?
>> AS IT CURRENTLY IS DRAFTED,
IT SAYS LEGAL REPRESENTATION
SHALL BE MADE AVAILABLE UPON
THAT PERSON'S REQUEST AS SOON
AS PRACTICAL AFTER A SERVICE OF
SUMMONS FOR UNLAWFUL DETAINER
SUIT.
THE LANGUAGE AROUND THAT
PERSON'S REQUEST IS ESSENTIALLY
A WAY FOR PEOPLE TO KNOW ONE
WAY OR THE OTHER WHETHER A
TENANT WOULD NEED COUNCIL AT
ALL , AND SO OTHERWISE THERE
MAY NOT NECESSARILY BE A WAY
FOR THAT TO HAPPEN IN THE
OPPOSITE DIRECTION.
>> MY QUESTION WAS ACTUALLY
MORE LIKE WHEN ARE WE GOING TO
BE IN A POSITION WHERE WE ARE
EXPECTED TO BE PROVIDING
LAWYERS TO PEOPLE IN EVICTION
PROCEEDINGS?
LIKE ONE WITH THIS BILL GO INTO
EFFECT IF WE PASSED IT?
I'M SORRY.
>> UNDERSTOOD.
THIS BILL HAS THE REGULAR 30
DAY CLAUSE, SO GOES INTO EFFECT
30 DAYS FROM THE SIGNATURE OF
THE MAYOR.
OSTENSIBLY THIS WOULD GET VOTED
ON NEXT MONDAY OR THE MONDAY
AFTER, AND THE MAYOR WOULD JUST
SIGN IT AND GOES INTO EFFECT
MID APRIL.
>> THE REASON I ASKED THE
QUESTION IS I HAD NOT REALLY
THOUGHT ABOUT IT UNTIL I READ
YOUR COMPARE AND CONTRAST OF
THE STATE WILL AND NOTICED THE
STATE TIMELINE, WHICH WOULD NOT
GO INTO EFFECT FOR LIKE A YEAR
OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
IT MADE ME THINK IN TERMS OF
WHETHER THE DEPARTMENT -- I
HAVE QUESTIONS AND SDCI AND
MAYBE YOU KNOW THE ANSWER SO I
WILL LAST NOW, WHETHER SDCI
WOULD BE IN A POSITION TO
HONOR THAT RIGHT TO COUNCIL ON
THAT TURNAROUND, HAVE THEY
INDICATED THEY WOULD?
>> WE HAVE BEEN HAVING
CONVERSATIONS ABOUT WHAT THE
TIMELINE WOULD LOOK LIKE AND
WHAT MY UNDERSTANDING IS AFTER
THE CONVERSATION WAS BECAUSE WE
ARE ALREADY CONTRACTED WITH
SOME PROVIDERS AND WE ARE IN
THE POSITION WHERE THE
MORATORIUM IS STILL IN EFFECT,
RIGHT NOW WE ARE ABLE TO
PROVIDE COUNCIL TO ANYONE
FACING AN EVICTION FILING.
THE UNCERTAINTY COMES IN AS TO
WHAT HAPPENS WHEN THE
MORATORIUM AND THE SDCI ROLE
IN THIS WOULD BE TO TAKE THE
FUNDING GRANTED AND ADD TO AN
EXISTING CONTRACT OR CREATE A
NEW CONTRACT SO THEY DON'T HAVE
VERY MUCH TO DO WITH THE ACTUAL
-- BECAUSE THEY DON'T HAVE MUCH
TO DO WITH THE PROVISION OF
LEGAL SERVICES THEY ARE WORKING
ON THE CONTRACTING SIDE.
THERE IS NOT GOING TO BE VERY
MUCH TIME THAT IT WILL TAKE TO
WRAP UP BECAUSE THE CONTRACTOR
ARE ALREADY IN PLACE.
THE OTHER THING THAT SDCI
WOULD BE RESPONSIBLE FOR IN
TERMS OF UPDATING NOTICES AND
EDUCATION AND DOING THE
RULEMAKING, HOPEFULLY MY
UNDERSTANDING IS THOSE ARE
THINGS THAT CAN BE DONE IN THE
SHORT TERM AND SO THOSE THINGS
CAN GET DONE BY THE TIME THIS
BILL GOES INTO EFFECT AND
HOPEFULLY ASSUMING THERE IS
SOME SORT OF EXTENSION TO THE
EVICTION MORATORIUM, THEY WOULD
HAVE THE TIME BUILT INTO RAMP
UP ALREADY SO WE WOULDN'T NEED
ADDITIONAL TIME TO BUILD IN AS
THE STATE BILL REFERENCES.
>> AM I TO TAKE THAT TO MEAN
THE DEPARTMENT HASN'T INDICATED
THERE IS ANY ADMINISTER ABILITY
ISSUES GETTING THE OPERATION IN
THE TIMELINE THAT THE
LEGISLATION ENVISIONS?
>> THAT'S MY UNDERSTANDING.
>> OKAY.
>> THANK YOU, ASHA, FORGIVING
ALL THE INFORMATION.
I BELIEVE COUNCILMEMBER
PEDERSEN HAS A QUESTION.
BEFORE OPENING IT UP FOR THE
COUNCILMEMBER, IN TERMS OF WHAT
ASHA WAS REFERENCING, WE DON'T
KNOW WHAT WILL HAPPEN WITH THE
MORATORIUM AND ORGANIZING WITH
RENTERS TO ENSURE THE
MORATORIUMS ARE RENEWED, BUT WE
DON'T WANT THE MORATORIUMS TO
AND WITHOUT RENTERS HAVING
COUNCIL SO IT IS IMPORTANT
THAT WE DO THIS.
HAVING SAID THAT,
COUNCILMEMBER, PLEASE GO AHEAD.
>> THANK YOU, CHAIR SAWANT.
GOOD MORNING, EVERYBODY.
I WANT TO THANK COUNCILMEMBER
SAWANT AND COUNCILMEMBER LEWIS
FOR BRINGING THIS FORWARD.
ALSO THANK YOU FOR THE PANEL OF
TENANT ADVOCATES TODAY, FOR
YOUR TIME AND YOUR EXPERIENCE
SHARING IT WITH US.
BOTH HERE IN SEATTLE AND WITH
OTHER CITIES.
WHILE WE DON'T HAVE ANY
LANDLORDS AT THE TABLE TODAY TO
GET THEIR PERSPECTIVE ON HOW
THE PRACTICAL IMPACTS OF THIS
FROM THEIR PERSPECTIVE, I DID
HEAR SOME OF THEM CALL IN AND
THAT WAS HELPFUL.
AND IT SOUNDS LIKE THE SEATTLE
DEPARTMENT OF CONSTRUCTION AND
INSPECTIONS HAS BEEN CONSULTED
WITH THEIR NAME IN THE BILL TO
HELP ADMINISTER THIS.
OBVIOUSLY WE HAVE THE SEATTLE
HOUSING LEVITY THAT AWARDS
MONEY TO NONPROFITS TO BUILD
AND OPERATE LOW-INCOME HOUSING
THROUGH THE CITY AND WE PARTNER
WITH THE SEATTLE HOUSING
AUTHORITY AND KING COUNTY
HOUSING AUTHORITY AND THESE
QUESTIONS ARE ALL FOR ASHA, AND
I WANT TO KNOW IF YOU HAD A
CHANCE TO RUN IT BY THE
SEATTLE OFFICE OF HOUSING OR
THE SEATTLE HOUSING AUTHORITY
OR KING COUNTY HOUSING
AUTHORITY?
>> WE DID THE OFFICE OF HOUSING
BUT DID NOT RECEIVE ANY
CONCERNS FROM THEM ABOUT THIS
PARTICULAR PIECE OF
LEGISLATION.
I HAVEN'T TALKED TO THE KING
COUNTY HOUSING AUTHORITY OR TO
SHA, SO NOT SURE IF
COUNCILMEMBER SAWANT, IF YOUR
OFFICE HAD THE CONVERSATION?
I HAVE NOT.
>> WE HAVE ALREADY TALKED A LOT
ABOUT THE CONCEPT OF MEANS
TESTING, OF WHETHER SOMETHING
LIKE THIS SHOULD BE TARGETED TO
THOSE WHO ARE LOW INCOME, AND I
HAVE HEARD THE ARGUMENTS
AGAINST THAT, SO I APPRECIATE
THAT BEING FLESHED OUT AND NOT
SURE I AM TOTALLY ON BOARD WITH
THAT BUT I DO APPRECIATE IT.
SO I UNDERSTAND THE COUNCIL
BILL BETTER, IN ADDITION TO
THERE NOT BEING MEANS TESTING,
LOOKS LIKE IT'S NOT TARGETED
TO NONPAYMENT OF RENT.
BUT FOR A LEGEND VIOLATION OF
THE LEASE IN ADDITION TO
POTENTIAL NONPAYMENT OF RENT.
IS THAT TRUE, ASHA ?
>> THAT'S CORRECT.
>> OKAY.
WOULD BE INTERESTED, IF WE ARE
ABLE TO GET ANYMORE BACK FROM
THE OFFICE OF HOUSING OR
HOUSING AUTHORITY WHETHER THERE
IS CONCERN ABOUT THIS NOT
APPLYING TO OTHER ISSUES OF THE
LEASE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE
TENANT AND THE LANDLORD AND IN
SOME CASES MANY NONPROFITS
OPERATING HOUSING THROUGHOUT
THE CITY.
I WAS DOING SOME RESEARCH AS
QUICKLY AS I COULD BEFORE
TODAY'S MEETING ON SOME OTHER
INTERVENTIONS THAT WE HAVE.
THERE ARE DIFFERENT WAYS WE ARE
TRYING TO SUPPORT TENANTS IN
NEED, AND WAS REMINDED OF THE
DIFFERENT BUDGET ACTIONS WE
TOOK A FEW MONTHS AGO.
UNDER COUNCILMEMBER SAWANT'S
LEADERSHIP TO INCREASE THE
BUDGET, THERE WAS AN INCREASE
OF $460,000 FOR EVICTION LEGAL
DEFENSE AND ANOTHER $145,000
INCREASE FROM COUNCILMEMBER
STRAUSS ADDING $500,000 SO IT
LOOKS LIKE WE HAVE MORE THAN
DOUBLED THE FINANCIAL SUPPORT.
THE REASON I MENTION THAT IS I
AM INTERESTED IN TRYING TO BE
HELPFUL THROUGH THE BUDGET
PROCESS TO PROVIDE THE FUNDING
FOR THOSE WHO NEED IT.
WHERE IS THIS IS A REGULATORY
CHANGE, SO THERE ARE DIFFERENT
WAYS TO HELP AND I AM MORE
INTERESTED IN THE BUDGETARY
ADS, AND I'M GLAD WE ADDED
MONEY IN THE PAST AND HOPE WE
CAN CONSIDER THAT AS WE SEE
WHAT HAPPENS GOING FORWARD.
WE ALSO BANNED EVICTIONS DURING
THE COLDEST WINTER MONTHS
THANKS TO COUNCILMEMBER
SAWANT'S LEADERSHIP.
WE BANNED IT DURING THE COVID
PANDEMIC AND ADOPTED THE
PRESIDENT'S PROGRAM TO
ESTABLISH BACK WHEN FOLLOWING
COVID SO I'M INTERESTED IN THE
STATE SENATE BILL 5160, AND AS
I UNDERSTAND IT IT IS MOVING
FORWARD.
THE LEGISLATIVE SESSION WILL BE
OVER SOON AND INTERESTED TO SEE
WHAT THE STATE LEGISLATORS COME
UP WITH.
I KNOW THEY ARE CONSIDERING
SEVERAL ELEMENTS THAT WOULD BE
USEFUL.
I WANT TO SIGNAL I DO HAVE
CONCERNS ABOUT THE BILL BEFORE
US IN ITS PRESENT FORM.
I AM INTERESTED IN LOOKING AT
THE BUDGET SITUATION,
INTERESTED IN SEEING WHAT THE
STATE LEGISLATURE DOES AND WANT
TO GET THOSE THOUGHTS OUT THERE
AS WE CONSIDER THIS.
THANK YOU.
>> IF IT WOULD BE HELPFUL, I
CAN TALK A LITTLE MORE ABOUT
THE BUDGETARY PIECE OF IT AND
WHAT WE ARE LOOKING AT AS WELL
AS SOME OF THE ELEMENTS IN THE
STATE BILL.
>> GO AHEAD, ASHA .
>> CURRENTLY IN TERMS OF WHAT
WE ARE LOOKING AT WITH FUNDING,
FOR 2021, THE WHOLE BUDGET FOR
TENANT SERVICES, SO NOT JUST
THE BUDGET FOR LEGAL BUT THE
ENTIRE BUDGET IS CLOSE TO $1.7
MILLION.
WHAT WE ACTUALLY ALLOCATE TO
PIECES AROUND LEGAL EVICTION
DEFENSE IS ABOUT ONE-THIRD OF
THAT AND THAT HAS BEEN THE CASE
FOR THE PAST TWO YEARS AT
LEAST.
THOSE FUNDS ARE SPLIT BETWEEN
THE HOUSING JUSTICE PROJECT AND
THE TENANT LAW CENTER.
THE SPECIFICS OF LEGAL
REPRESENTATION ARE ONE OF THE
THINGS THAT GETS FUNDED, SO AT
THE MOMENT AS REFERENCED IN THE
MEMO, THE HOUSING JUSTICE
PROJECT GETS $218,000 OF ABOUT
THE $560,000 ALLOCATED TO JUST
THE LEGAL AND EVICTION EVENTS
PIECE.
SO WORKING FROM THE ESTIMATE
THAT IT WOULD TAKE $750,000 TO
BE ABLE TO PROVIDE LEGAL
COUNCIL IN A TYPICAL YEAR AND
NOT NECESSARILY IN A MORATORIUM
OR PANDEMIC YEAR, BUT IF WE
LOOK AT 1200 EVICTIONS THAT ARE
FILED A YEAR IN SEATTLE, WE
LOOK AT THAT $750,000 NUMBER.
CURRENTLY GIVEN THE $218,000
AND GIVEN THE UNCERTAINTY
AROUND WHEN THE MORATORIUM WILL
BE LIFTED, IT IS POSSIBLE THAT
AT SOME POINT DURING THIS YEAR
WHICH AS I MENTIONED WE DON'T
KNOW YET, MORE FUNDING WILL BE
NEEDED FOR ALLOCATION TO LEGAL
AND EVICTION DEFENSE.
THERE ARE STILL SOME FUNDS THAT
SDCI HAS NOT YET AWARDED OUT OF
THE $1.7 MILLION THAT COULD GO
TOWARDS FUNDING LEGAL EVICTION
DEFENSE PIECE.
IN FUTURE YEARS TO FUND IT LONG-
TERM, WITH THE $750,000 NUMBER
THERE ARE COUPLE OF WAYS TO
DEAL WITH FUNDING IN THAT
SCENARIO.
ASSUMING THE ASSUMPTION THAT NO
ADDITIONAL FUNDS WOULD BE
ADDED, FOR THE 2022 BUDGET,
THERE WOULD NEED TO BE
REALLOCATION OF HOW THE CURRENT
TENANT SERVICES BUDGET IS
GRANTED.
THAT WOULD MEAN RESHUFFLING
SOME OF THE CURRENT WAYS IN
WHICH THOSE FUNDS OR HOW SDCI
ALLOCATES THE FUNDS.
IF THERE ARE FUNDS ADDED DURING
THIS YEAR'S BUDGET FOR 2022 AN
ONGOING, THE REALLOCATION MAY
NOT NECESSARILY BE NEEDED BUT
DEPENDS HOW MUCH ADDITIONAL
FUNDING ENDS UP BEING ADDED TO
THE BUDGET FOR 2022.
THAT COULD BE -- THERE IS A GAP
OF ABOUT FOUR $40,000 BETWEEN
WHAT WOULD BE AWARDED FOR THE
HOUSING JUSTICE PROJECT
ASSUMING ADDITIONAL FUNDS GET
ADDED THIS YEAR AND THE
$750,000 NUMBER, SO BALLPARK TO
KEEP THE TENANT SERVICES BUDGET
HOLE, WE NEED BETWEEN $300,000
AND $500,000 ADDITIONALLY IN
THIS YEAR'S BUDGET FOR THE
PROGRAM TO MOVE ONGOING.
THE LAST PIECE OF THAT WHICH
WAS MENTIONED EARLIER DURING
THE PANEL BASED ON THE 1200
FILINGS WE ARE CURRENTLY
SEEING.
IT'S ENTIRELY POSSIBLE THAT AS
MRE AND MORE PEOPLE LEARN
ABOUT THE RIGHT TO LEGAL
COUNCIL , AND ARE EDUCATED
ABOUT THE FACT THAT THEY CAN
ACCESS AN ATTORNEY, THAT PEOPLE
WHO HAVE BEEN LEAVING BEFORE
THE FILINGS ACTUALLY HAPPENED
WOULD WAIT UNTIL THERE WAS A
FILING AND THEN WANT TO HAVE
ACCESS TO LEGAL COUNCIL.
IT'S POSSIBLE THE NUMBERS
WOULD INCREASE BUT UNTIL THE
EDUCATION AND OUTREACH IS OUT
THERE AND WE KNOW HOW THE
PROGRAM IS FUNCTIONING IT'S NOT
CLEAR THAT THE $750,000 WILL BE
SUFFICIENT FOR THE LONG-TERM.
SOME OF THIS WILL BE WAITING TO
SEE HOW THE PROGRAM GOES AS IT
IS IMPLEMENTED AND MONITORING
TO SEE IF THERE ARE INCREASES
OR DECREASES IN EVICTION
FILINGS THAT AFFECT THAT
NUMBER.
>> THANK YOU.
>> I WAS GOING TO PAUSE FOR
QUESTIONS BEFORE MOVING TO
ANYTHING ELSE.
>> I DON'T SEE ANY.
>> I HAVE A QUICK QUESTION,
MADAM CHAIR.
>> I APPRECIATE YOU GOING OVER
THOSE COSTS, ASHA.
GOOD REPORTING YESTERDAY BY
S.E.C.
INDICATING OTHER COSTS IN OTHER
CITIES AND HOW WE MIGHT EXPECT
TO SEE IT BUT AS A TOO EARLY TO
TELL HER WOULD YOU BE PREPARED
TO PROVIDE AN OPINION OUR
ANALYSIS ON THIS AND WHETHER WE
WOULD EXPECT THOSE COSTS TO BE
POTENTIAL COST INCREASES AND TO
BE PERMANENT OR TEMPORARY BASED
ON THE UNIQUE IMPACTS OF THE
PANDEMIC?
>> IT'S TOUGH TO SAY.
I THINK IT'S PRIMARILY BECAUSE
THE LANDSCAPE CHANGES SO
QUICKLY, DEPENDING ON WHAT
BILLS GET PAST OUT OF THE STATE
LEGISLATURE THIS YEAR.
ALSO AS WELL AS WHAT
LEGISLATION COMES OUT OF THE
CITY.
IT IS POSSIBLE THAT THE
DIFFERENCES MADE TO THE JUST
CAUSE EVICTION PIECES COULD
HAVE SOME IMPACT ON EVICTION
FILINGS.
IT'S POSSIBLE THAT KNOWING THAT
LANDLORDS KNOW THAT TENANTS
HAVE A RIGHT TO COUNCIL AND
MIGHT BE MORE INTERESTED IN
MEDIATION BEFORE MAKING AN
EVICTION FILING.
THERE ARE A LOT OF FACTORS THAT
GO INTO FIGURING OUT WHETHER
FILINGS WILL INCREASE OR
DECREASE, BUT THE PANDEMIC AND
THE ASSOCIATED MORATORIUM I
THINK YOU GET COMPLICATED FOR
US TO HAVE ANY REAL IDEA IN THE
LONG-TERM ABOUT WHAT WILL
HAPPEN.
>> DO WE KNOW AS ONE LAST
QUESTION IN THE EVENT THAT SOME
KIND OF MEANS TESTING REGIME
WERE ATTACHED TO THIS, WOULD
THAT CARRY ADDITIONAL
UNANTICIPATED COST?
IT HADN'T OCCURRED TO ME UNTIL
TODAY TO ADMINISTER SOMETHING
LIKE THAT, THERE WOULD PROBABLY
NEED TO BE ADDITIONAL
CONTRACTED SERVICE AND
INTERESTED IF THAT CAN BE
QUANTIFIED AND IF YOU DON'T
HAVE THE ANSWER NOW, MAYBE
LATER, JUST CURIOUS ABOUT THAT.
>> I WOULD BE HAPPY TO FOLLOW
UP ON THAT PIECE.
I THINK SOME OF IT DEPENDS ON
WHETHER IT IS SOMETHING WE WANT
SDCI TO BE RESPONSIBLE SO MAKE
COST OF HAVING FTE IN ANY I.T.
COSTS THAT WOULD BE REQUIRED IN
TERMS OF SETTING UP A NEW
PROGRAM, OR WE WOULD WANT TO
CONTRACT OUT TO SOMEONE WHO
COULD DO THE VETTING OR
INCREASE CONTRACT AMOUNTS TO
OUR CURRENT CONTRACTORS TO DO
THAT WORK.
SO THAT IS DEFINITELY SOMETHING
I CAN CHECK ABOUT AND SEE IF WE
CAN GET NUMBERS ON.
>> SO YOU CAN CONFIRM NOW THERE
WOULD LIKELY BE COSTS
ASSOCIATED WITH IT BUT UNCLEAR
WHAT THE COSTS ARE?
>> THAT IS MY CURRENT
UNDERSTANDING.
YES.
AT THE VERY LEAST, SDCI HAS THE
CAPACITY TO STAND UP A NEW
PROGRAM THAT WOULD COVER ALL
OF THE PIECES AROUND WHAT IT
WOULD TAKE TO ADMINISTER A
MEANS TEST WITHOUT ADDITIONAL
FUNDING OR FTEs.
>> AS A LAST RELATED QUESTION
AND I'M SORRY, COUNCILMEMBER
SAWANT BUT YOU WILL PROBABLY
LIKE THIS QUESTION, WE SAW IN
KEVIN SCHOFIELD'S REPORTING
YESTERDAY THAT SAN FRANCISCO
ONLY HAD 6% OF PEOPLE THAT
WEREN'T INDIGENT THAT TOOK
ADVANTAGE OF THE NO MEANS
TESTED SYSTEM.
ANOTHER THING THAT WOULD BE
INTERESTING WHEN YOU LOOK AT
QUANTIFYING THE COST OF WHAT IT
WOULD BE TO ADMINISTER IS, WITH
THE CITY END UP SPENDING MORE
ON MEANS TESTING THAT WE SAVE
IN PROVIDING LEGAL COUNCIL TO
PEOPLE WHO WOULD FALL OUTSIDE
OF IT?
THAT WOULD BE AN INTERESTING
ANALYSIS BECAUSE IT SEEMS LIKE
FROM THE SAN FRANCISCO
EXPERIENCE IT MIGHT ALMOST BE
THE CASE.
YOU CERTAINLY WANT TO SEE THAT
BEFORE WE MAKE ASSUMPTIONS THAT
WE WOULD SAVE TAXPAYER MONEY BY
IMPOSING A MEANS TESTING
REGIME.
BUT I WANT TO CONFIRM THAT
DON'T WANT TO ASSUME THAT.
THE STATISTICS SEEM TO INDICATE
THAT MIGHT BE THE CASE SO I AM
CURIOUS.
>> ABSOLUTELY.
HAPPY TO FOLLOW UP ON THAT
PIECE WHEN I HAVE THE CHANCE TO
TALK TO SDCI.
>> AND I WOULD ADD FROM
OVERALL ECONOMIC EVIDENCE AND I
DON'T HAVE AN EXACT ANSWER TO
YOUR QUESTION, COUNCILMEMBER
LEWIS, AS FAR AS IT IS RELATED
TO RIGHT TO COUNCIL BUT I CAN
TELL YOU THAT THE OVERWHELMING
ECONOMIC EVIDENCE SHOWS A VERY
BASIC FACT THAT YES, IT WILL
ALWAYS COST PUBLIC REVENUES TO
CARRY OUT A MEANS TEST AND NO
QUESTION ABOUT IT.
WHETHER ON BALANCE IT COST MORE
OR LESS IN THE SERVICE IS A
DIFFERENT QUESTION.
BUT THERE IS NO DOUBT THAT IT
ACTUALLY COSTS RESOURCES IN
ORDER TO CARRY OUT A MEANS TEST
AND THE QUESTION IS WHAT DOES
IT ACTUALLY GIVE IN RETURN AND
THAT IS WHAT IS MOST IMPORTANT
AS FAR AS QUESTIONS.
DOES IT ALLOW PEOPLE WHO NEED
THE SERVICE TO ACCESS IT OR
DOES IT CREATE BARRIERS?
I PROMISE YOU RIGHT TO COUNCIL
IS NOT THE FIRST KIND OF
PUBLIC ASSISTANCE WITH THIS
QUESTION CAME UP.
THE CONSERVATIVE ECONOMISTS AND
POLITICIANS HAVE MADE ARGUMENTS
IN FAVOR OF MEANS TESTING FOR
DECADES AND FOR DECADES THE
EVIDENCE SHOWS THAT ACTUALLY A
SMALLER AND SOMETIMES VERY
SMALL PROPORTION OF PEOPLE WHO
ARE ELIGIBLE FOR THE SERVICE
ACTUALLY END UP GETTING IT
BECAUSE IT SETS UP BARRIERS OF
VARIOUS KINDS.
AND I APPRECIATE EDMUND AND
ELIN GOING OVER ALL OF THOSE
BARRIERS THAT WERE PUT IN
PLACE.
I WOULD SAY THE BIGGEST COST OF
PUTTING IN MEANS TESTING IS NOT
EVEN THE DOLLAR AMOUNT, BUT
ACTUALLY WHAT HAPPENS TO
PEOPLE'S LIVES WHEN THE LIVES
GET RAVAGED BECAUSE THEY ARE
NOT ABLE TO ACCESS AND AS
LEGISLATORS WE HAVE TO PUT THE
BIGGEST VALUE ON WHAT HAPPENS
TO PEOPLE'S LIVES.
A VERY THOROUGH DISCUSSION AND
A LOT OF POINTS, AND ASHA DO
YOU WANT TO GO OVER THE STATE
BILL AND I HAVE SOME POINTS ON
THAT AS WELL AND I WANT TO BE
MINDFUL OF THE TIME.
WE ARE ALREADY PAST TWO HOURS
AND I DON'T WANT TO LOSE
COMMITTEE MEMBERS BECAUSE WE
WANT TO VOTE ON THE LEGISLATION
SO I WILL HAVE YOU TALK ABOUT
THE STATE POLE AND THEN I WILL
ADD SOME POINTS AND HOPEFULLY
WE CAN MOVE TO A VOTE.
GO AHEAD.
>> I CAN SPEAK TO IT VERY
BRIEFLY IN TERMS OF THE
DIFFERENCES BETWEEN WHAT IS IN
THE STATE BILL AND WHAT WE ARE
DISCUSSING CURRENTLY.
IN TERMS OF ELIGIBILITY, THE
STATE BILL DOES LIMIT ACCESS TO
INDIGENT TENANTS WHICH THEY
DEFINE AS RECEIVING A VARIETY
OF PUBLIC ASSISTANCE BENEFITS
ARE BEING AT 200% OF THE
FEDERAL POVERTY LEVEL.
THE OTHER BIG DIFFERENCE -- I'M
SORRY, I'M LOOKING AT MY
COMPARISON, THE OTHER BIG
DIFFERENCE IS THAT AS
COUNCILMEMBER LEWIS MENTIONED,
IT WOULD GO INTO EFFECT UNTIL
EFFECTIVE DATE OF THE BILL.
ASKS THE OFFICE OF CIVIL LEGAL
AID WHICH IS THE OFFICE THAT
WOULD ADMINISTER THE CONTRACTS
TO SUBMIT AN IMPLEMENTATION
PLAN WITHIN 90 DAYS OF WHEN THE
BILL WAS PASSED AND HAS SOME
PRIORITIZATION TO COUNTIES THAT
HAVE THE MOST EVICTIONS.
AND LASTLY, IT IS SPECIFIC THAT
THE COURT MUST APPOINT AN
ATTORNEY TO AN INDIGENT TENANT
AT ANY SHOW CAUSE HEARING OR
SCHEDULED TRIAL SO MORE DETAIL
ABOUT WHEN EXACTLY THAT
ATTORNEY WOULD BE APPOINTED.
IN THE LAST PART IS LEGISLATION
ITSELF UPDATING THE 14 DAY PAY
OR VACATE NOTICE AS WELL AS THE
SUMMONS FORM TO INCLUDE
LANGUAGE AROUND RIGHT TO
COUNCIL.
>> THOSE ARE THE MAIN POINTS OF
THAT BILL.
>> THANK YOU, ASHA.
AND TO ADD TO WHAT YOU SAID, I
WOULD ALSO SAY THAT THE STATE
BILL, JUST TO CLARIFY, THE
STATE TENANT BILL HAS NOT
PASSED EITHER THE CHAMBER AT
THAT POINT AND IT MIGHT GET
WATERED DOWN AND WE DON'T KNOW
BUT WOULD NOT BE SURPRISING BUT
CURRENTLY INCLUDES STRINGENT
MEANS TESTING CAPPED AT 200%.
AND AS YOU HAVE NOTED THE
PROPERTY LINE WILL TAKE EFFECT
FOR YEAR AND MAYBE LONGER BUT
THE MOST IMPORTANT POINT IS
IT'S NOT CLEAR IF THIS WILL
PASS THE SENATE AND WOULD NEED
TO GO TO THE HOUSE ON A TIGHT
TIMELINE OF MANY BILLS WITH
BROAD SUPPORT END UP DYING IN A
TYPICAL YEAR.
THAT IS WHAT WE SEE, SO WHILE
OF COURSE I VERY MUCH HOPE THAT
THIS WILL PASS, WE SIMPLY
CANNOT COUNT ON IT AND IN FACT
THE STATE CONTINUES TO HAVE
SHOCKINGLY ANTI-RENTAL LAWS ON
THE BOOKS LIKE THE STATEWIDE
BEN BENARDRICK CONTROL AND EVEN
OTHER LAWS AND JUSTICE PROJECT
ATTORNEYS HAVE RESENTED IN PAST
YEARS HOW OTHER STATES ARE MUCH
BETTER.
WHAT WE HAVE SEEN ON THE OTHER
HAND IS WHEN WE PASS
PROGRESSIVE LEGISLATION IN
SEATTLE IT HELPS MOMENTUM TO
ALSO PASS IT CITYWIDE WE SOUGHT
WITH THE $15 MINIMUM WAGE AND
ALSO SEE IT FROM RENTERS RIGHTS
AND I WILL ALSO STRESS AND
MAYBE YOU ALREADY SAID THIS,
BUT THE SENATE BILL AND THE
CITY COUNCIL LEGISLATION WILL
NOT BE CONTRADICTORY OR
MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE MANY RENTERS
RIGHTS ARE ASSERTED AT THE
STATE AND LOCAL LEVEL AND IT'S
QUITE IMPORTANT BECAUSE IT
ALLOWS RENTERS TO APPEAL TO THE
CITY OR STATE TO HAVE THE
RIGHTS OF COUNCIL AND NOTHING
BAD THAT COMES OUT OF IT ARE
GOOD THINGS COMING OUT OF IT
DEPENDING WHO YOU REPRESENT.
IF YOU REPRESENT THE MOST
VULNERABLE GOOD THINGS CAN COME
OUT OF IT AND I WANT TO ADD I
FORGOT TO MENTION IN TERMS OF
COUNCILMEMBER LEWIS AND HIS
QUESTION, A VERY GOOD QUESTION
ABOUT DOES IT ACTUALLY HAVE AN
IMPACT ON THE NUMBER OF
EVICTION FILINGS ITSELF IF
TENANTS HAVE REPRESENTATION
GUARANTEED BY LAW?
I THINK THAT IS VERY IMPORTANT
TO NOTE AND I BELIEVE JOHN
POLLICK WHO PRESENTED AT THE
LAST MIDI FOR THE NATIONAL
COALITION FOR RIGHT TO COUNCIL
SAID IN NEW YORK CITY EVICTION
FILINGS HAVE DROPPED BY 30%
INCLUDING A 20% DROP IN 2019
ALONE.
SO IT SHOWS HOW MUCH EVICTIONS
HAVE TO DO WITH THE POWER
DYNAMIC WITH CORPORATE
LANDLORDS AND ORDINARY PEOPLE
WHO ARE RENTERS.
SO WHEN LANDLORDS KNOW THAT
WHAT THEY ARE GOING TO FACE IN
THE COURT IS NOT A REALLY
VULNERABLE TENANT WHO WAS LOST
IN THE PROCESS BECAUSE THE
COURTS ARE NOT ON THEIR SIDE,
BUT INSTEAD A TRAINED ATTORNEY,
THEN IT ACTUALLY IS A DETERRENT
TO EVICTION FILINGS ITSELF.
I THINK ALL OF THESE FACTORS
ARE GOING TO PLAY A ROLE IN
WHAT THE NUMBERS, TO BE AT THE
VERY END.
I DON'T BELIEVE YOU CAN
ACTUALLY SEE THAT UNTIL THIS
LAW GOES INTO EFFECT.
I THINK THE SLOT NEEDS TO BE
PUT IN PLACE AND SEE HOW MUCH
OF A GOOD IMPACT IT'S HAVING
BUT NO DOUBT IN MY MIND HAVING
SEEN WHAT'S HAPPENING IN NEW
YORK CITY THAT IT WILL HAVE A
VERY GOOD IMPACT.
HOW MUCH OF AN IMPACT, WE CAN
SEE WHAT HAPPENS WHEN IT'S IN
PLACE BUT VERY CLEAR IT WILL BE
EXTREMELY POSITIVE.
UNLESS THERE ARE BURNING
QUESTIONS, I DON'T WANT TO LOSE
COUNCILMEMBERS AND I REALLY
APPRECIATE YOUR TIME, NOT ONLY
COUNCILMEMBERS BUT PRESENTERS
AND ASHA, I FEEL READY TO MOVE
THIS TO A VOTE.
JUST WAIT A FEW SECONDS BEFORE
I MOVE JUST IN CASE THERE ARE
BURNING QUESTIONS.
SEEING NONE, I WILL GO AHEAD
AND MOVE COUNCIL BILL 120-0074
A VOTE.
DO I HAVE A SECOND?
>> SECOND.
>> THANK YOU.
>> WERE YOU SAYING SOMETHING?
>> I WAS TRYING TO SECOND.
WORK. MES MY MICROPHONE DOESN'T
>> THANK YOU.
SO THE BILL IS BEING MOVED AND
SECONDED.
ARE THERE ANY ADDITIONAL
COMMENTS?
>> COUNCILMEMBER SAWANT?
>> GO AHEAD.
BRIEFLY I APPRECIATE THE
DISCUSSION TODAY.
I PARTICULARLY REQUESTED A LOT
OF INFORMATION FROM CENTRAL
STAFF AND ADDITIONAL ANALYSIS,
SO CONSIDERING I DO SUPPORT THE
CORE TENETS OF THE LEGISLATION
AND COSPONSORED IT, I'M WILLING
TO VOTED OUT OF COMMITTEE IN
RELIANCE THAT WE PROBABLY KNOW
WHAT THE ANSWERS TO A LOT OF
THE QUESTIONS WILL BE.
I WANT TO SIGNAL THAT I FEEL
MORE COMFORTABLE ON THE FINAL
PASSAGE OF THIS AT FULL COUNCIL
HAVING GOT THOSE ANSWERS BACK
FROM CENTRAL STAFF BUT WITH
THOSE RESERVATIONS I WILL VOTE
FOR IT TODAY.
>> THANK YOU.
ANY OTHER COMMENTS?
NOT SEEING ANY HANDS ON ZOOM.
SEEING NO OTHER COMMENTS, I
WILL ASK THE CLERK TO CALL FOR
THE VOTE.
>> COUNCILMEMBER SAWANT?
>> YES.
>> COUNCILMEMBER MORALES?
>> YES.
>> COUNCILMEMBER LEWIS?
>> YES.
>> COUNCILMEMBER PEDERSEN?
>> NO.
>> AND COUNCILMEMBER JUAREZ IS
NOT PRESENT.
THAT IS THREE IN FAVOR AND ONE
OPOSED.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBERS
AND THANK YOU, TED.
AND IN TERMS OF WHAT
COUNCILMEMBER LEWIS SAID BEFORE
I CLOSE THIS AGENDA ITEM, MY
UNDERSTANDING IS THE QUESTIONS
YOU ASKED, COUNCILMEMBER LEWIS,
ARE QUESTIONS THAT WILL HAVE
ANSWERS ONCE THE LAWS IN EFFECT
IN HOW WE SEE HOW MUCH IT IS
DETERRING LANDLORDS FROM FILING
EVICTIONS AND HOW MUCH ARE
SEEKING ASSISTANCE AND SO ON.
I JUST WANT TO BE CLEAR THAT
SOME OF THE QUESTIONS I THINK
ASHA CAN FIND ANSWERS TO AND
SOME ARE JUST THE NATURE OF
STATISTICS AND WE HAVE TO SEE
THE CHANGE IN ORDER TO SEE IF
IT MAKES SENSE SO I JUST WANTED
TO CLARIFY THAT.
>> I THINK SOME OF THE MORE
IMMEDIATE ONES ARE AROUND
QUANTIFYING SOME OF THE FISCAL
IMPLICATIONS FOR THE CITY WHICH
I THINK WE CAN FIGURE OUT.
BUT CERTAINLY SOME OF THEM ARE
WHAT WOULD BE EFFECTIVE THIS
LEGISLATION WOULD BE ON THE
RENTAL MARKET AND IT IS TRUE
THAT WE WON'T REALLY KNOW WHAT
INTEL IT'S AN EFFECT.
IN TERMS OF THE IMPACT ON CITY
FINANCES, THAT STUFF WE SHOULD
BE ABLE TO FIGURE OUT.
AND DEPARTMENTAL CAPACITY AND
WHATEVER ELSE.
>> BUT ALSO I WANT TO CLARIFY
AND TO REITERATE WHAT ASHA SAID
AND I KNOW YOU TALKED ABOUT
DEPARTMENTAL CAPACITY BUT IT IS
THE ATTORNEYS WITH
ORGANIZATIONS LIKE HOUSING
JUSTICE PROVIDING THE SERVICE
AND NOT THE DEPARTMENT OF
CONSTRUCTION PROVIDING THE
SERVICE SO THE BULK OF THE TIME
AND RESOURCES IS NOT FOCUSED ON
THE CITY DEPARTMENTS.
I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY THAT
AS WELL.
WE WILL ABSOLUTELY WORK WITH
ASHA AND CENTRAL STAFF AS A
WHOLE TO MAKE SURE WHATEVER IS
NEEDED IS COMPILED.
AND I ALSO WANT TO SAY WHEN WE
TALK ABOUT UNCERTAINTIES, OF
COURSE IT IS VERY CLEAR AND
HONESTLY STATED IN THE FISCAL
NOTE THAT THERE IS AN ATTORNEY
BUT WANT TO MAKE CLEAR THAT IT
IS NOT IN ALL KINDS OF
DIRECTIONS AND NOT WE ARE GOING
TO FIND OUT IT IS ACTUALLY
HURTING RENTERS.
THAT'S NOT THE CASE.
IT'S ONLY A QUESTION OF HOW
MUCH OF A MAGNITUDE OF AN
EFFECT IT HAS ON RENTERS, AND I
THINK THE INDICATION FROM OTHER
CITIES ARE VERY STRONG, LIKE
$15 AN HOUR AND NOT THE FIRST
AND WINTER EVICTIONS WE ARE NOT
THE FIRST TO DO IT AND A GOOD
THING WE HAVE DATA TO GO BY.
SO ALL OF THAT SHOULD BE
EXTREMELY HELPFUL FOR US TO
MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE
RESPONSES TO THE QUESTIONS THAT
HAVE COME UP.
HAVING SAID THAT, AND IN THE
INTEREST OF TIME, I THINK
COUNCILMEMBERS FOR ENGAGING ON
THAT LEGISLATION AND ESPECIALLY
A VERY BIG THANK YOU AND
GRATITUDE TO ALL OF OUR
PRESENTERS AND PANELISTS
INCLUDING ASHA AND OUR
COMMUNITY MEMBERS AND OUR
RENTERS RIGHTS ADVOCATES AND
RENTER RIGHTS SERVICES
PROVIDERS.
THANK YOU FOR ALL THE
INFORMATION AND GUIDANCE YOU
HAVE PROVIDED NOT JUST TODAY
BUT THROUGHOUT THE YEARS OF
EVER SINCE WE STARTED
RESEARCHING RIGHT TO COUNCIL .
I APPRECIATE THAT.
I WILL MOVE QUICKLY TO THE NEXT
AGENDA ITEM AND THE FINAL ITEMS
ARE ITEMS 3 TO 6 WHICH ARE
REAPPOINTMENTS TO THE SEATTLE
RENTERS COMMISSIONS AND BECAUSE
THEY ARE REAPPOINTMENTS RATHER
THAN NEW APPOINTMENTS, IT IS
NOT CUSTOMARY TO HAVE THEM
APPEAR IN COMMITTEE BUT I WILL
HAVE THEM READ AND RECORD FOR
NOW.
THE APPOINTMENT 01814
REAPPOINTMENT OF DINAH BRACCIO
AND I APOLOGIZE FOR MY DOG WHO
WAS HOWLING . REAPPOINTING FOR
A FIRM OF FEBRUARY 28, 2023 AND
APPOINTMENT 01815 FOUR CALVIN
JONES A MEMBER OF SEATTLE
RENTERS COMMISSION FOR A TERM
OF FEBRUARY 28, 22 AND
REAPPOINTMENT 01816
REAPPOINTMENT OF MAX SCOTTY RAY
McGREGOR IS A MEMBER OF SEATTLE
RENTERS COMMISSION FOR A TERM
OF FEBRUARY 28, 22, APPOINTMENT
01817 REAPPOINTMENT OF REGINA
OWENS AS A MEMBER OF SEATTLE
RENTERS COMMISSION FOR A TERM
TO FEBRUARY 28, 2023.
SO DINAH BRACCIO IS AN
ORGANIZER FOR THE TENANTS UNION
AND JONES GOT INVOLVED IN THE
SUBMISSION IS A GET ENGAGED IN
POINTY PERIOD IS A LEADER IN
THE LGBTQ COMMITTEE AND GINA
OWENS IS WITH THE WASHINGTON
ACTION NETWORK AND ALL FOUR
HAVE PLAYED AN EXCELLENT ROLE
ON THE RENTERS COMMISSION AND
COUNCILMEMBERS MAY KNOW THEM AS
WELL THROUGH THEIR WORK IN THE
COMMUNITY.
I WILL QUICKLY OPEN IT UP FOR
ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS THAT
COUNCILMEMBERS HAVE.
>> SEEING NONE.
I WILL GO AHEAD AND IF THERE IS
NO OPPOSITION I WILL GO AHEAD
AND MOVE ALL FOUR APPOINTMENTS
AS A SINGLE VOTE.
I MOVE APPOINTMENT 01814, 15,
16, AND 17.
>> SECOND.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER
MORALES.
TED, CAN YOU CALL THE ROLL?
>> COUNCILMEMBER SAWANT?
>> YES.
>> COUNCILMEMBER MORALES?
>> YES.
>> COUNCILMEMBER PEDERSEN?
>> YES.
>> COUNCILMEMBER LEWIS?
>> YES.
>> FOUR IN FAVOR.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBERS.
THE APPOINTMENTS AND THE
REAPPOINTMENTS AND THE
LEGISLATION WILL MOVE FORWARD
TO FULL COUNCIL AND THE
APPOINTMENTS WILL MOVE ON
MONDAY.
MY HOPE IS THE LEGISLATION WILL
ALSO MOVE THIS COMING MONDAY
AND WE WILL BE IN TOUCH WITH
ALL COMMITTEE MEMBERS AND WE
WILL BE IN TOUCH WITH COMMUNITY
MEMBERS AND THE PANELISTS TO
MAKE SURE EVERYONE IS WELL
INFORMED ABOUT WHEN THE FINAL
VOTE WILL BE ON THE RIGHT TO
COUNCIL LEGISLATION.
I REALLY APPRECIATE
COUNCILMEMBERS STAYING FOR
LONGER COMMITTEE THAN USUAL.
IF THERE ARE NO FINAL COMMENTS,
I WILL GO AHEAD AND ADJOURN THE
MEETING.
>>