HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOW 2017-04-10 Item 3A - Discussion - Washington State LegislationCo uNcm AGENDA SYNOPSIS
-411ilials
Meeliii g Dale lire �y Laors review Coutitil revien,
04/10/17 RB
ITEM INFORMATION
n W-Faq M&I
3.A.
;110NSoiZ: RACHEL BIANCHI
04/10/17
AG,FNI)A 1'I'F'NITI'H,F' Requested Legislative Update
C'.\'1'I"("oRy E Discussion
Alig Dale 04110117
F-1 lWolion
Ali g Dale
❑ Resolution
Al�g Dale
❑ Ordinance
AL� Dale
❑ Bid�ward
Al�g Date
❑ Public Hearin �
All
'g ])ale
I. er
❑ Other
Altg L)ale
SP0NS01k ❑Counil EMqyor ❑./-/R. ❑DCD ❑I`hyance ❑Vire ❑TS ❑P&R ❑Police ❑PV ❑Courl
SPONSORS Staff was asked to provide Council with a discussion of legislative issues in Olympia that
su'w\l: \m' the City may or may not want to support. Council consensus is being requested.
Rj?xil,'IWFA) BY ❑ C.O.W. Mtg. CDN Comm ❑ I'Mance Comm. F-1 Public Safety Comm.
F-1 Trans &Infrastructure ❑ Arts Comm. F-1 Parks Comm. ❑ Planning Comm.
DATE: 3/27/17 C()MM1T`f'EJ,.' C1 LUR: HOUGARDY
RECOMMENDATIONS:
SPONSOR /.ADMIN. Communications Division
Committee recommendation; Forward for full Council for consensus
COST IMPACT / FUND SOURCE
AMOUNT BUDGETED APPROPRIATION REQUIRED
Fund Source:
Comments:
MTG. DATE
RECORD OF COUNCIL ACTION
04/10/17
MTG. DATE
ATTACHMENTS
04/10/17
Informational Memorandum dated 03/20/17
Minutes from the CDN meeting of 3/27/17
2
City of Tukwila
Allan Ekberg, Mayor
INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM
TO: City Council
FROM: Rachel Bianchi, Government Affairs and Communications Manager
BY: Brandon Miles, Business Relations Manager
CC: Mayor Ekberg
DATE: March 20, 2017
SUBJECT: Requested State Legislative Update
ISSUE
Should the City take a position on House Bill (HB) 1999, other legislation that pertains to the
Port and SB?
BACKGROUND
Below is a discussion of the three issues that have been requested to be reviewed by the
Community Development and Neighborhoods Committee.
HB 1999
Representative Mia Gregerson approached the City's lobbyist asking for City support for HB
1999, currently being considered in the State House of Representatives. HB 1999 concerns the
makeup and composition of the Port of Seattle's Board of Commissioners. Staff brought the
issue to Committee of the Whole in February, but was asked to bring it to the Community
Development and Neighborhoods committee for further review. Because of agendas and timing
this is the first opportunity for the Committee to review.
Currently, the Port's Commission consists of five commission members elected at large in King
County. HB 1999 restructures the Port Commission to resemble the composition of the King
County Council. The number of Port Commissioners will increase to nine and each
commissioner would represent a specific district. The nine Port Commission districts would have
the same boundaries as the King County Council districts. Under this legislation,
Commissioners must reside in the district he or she represents. Voting is similarly limited by
districts and all at-large positions are eliminated.
HB 1999 was not moved out of the House and is effectively dead.
Studies on Sea-Tac Airport
Air Quality Study
Representative Tina Orwall sponsored HB 1171 that would direct the Washington Department
of Commerce to complete a study regarding "air quality implications of air traffic at the
international airport in this state with the highest number of total annual departures and arrivals."
While the bill itself is dead, it is expected that the budget proviso will move forward. The Port of
Seattle has committed $75,000 to the air quality study. Burien has committed $30,000, which
could be split between the air quality study and impact mitigation study discussed below. The
draft study would need to be presented to the legislature by 2019 and the final by 2021. While
the Senate did not include the proviso in the budget released today, it is expected in the House
budget next week.
3
INFORMATIONAL MEMO
Page 2
Impact Mitigation Study
The City of SeaTac has been pushing a budget proviso for funding for an Airport Impact Study,
like the one done in 1997. The text of the draft proviso language reads:
1500, 000 of the general fund is provided solely for distribution to the Department of
Commerce to contract with a consultant to conduct an analysis of the current and ongoing
impacts of the Sea-Tac International Airport. The analysis will include, but not be limited
to the impacts that current airport operations and expansion will have on public health
transportation, parking, public safety property values and economic development in the
cities of SeaTac, Burien, Des Moines, Tukwila, Federal Way and Normandy Park.
The City of SeaTac has allocated $250,000 to update the study and has asked other
neighboring cities to contribute funding. As of this writing, staff is not aware of other cities
agreeing to such funding, with the exception of Burien's $30,000 that could be split between this
and the air quality study. This proviso was not included in the Senate Transportation budget but
may be in the House Transportation budget.
On a related note, it is possible that an airport capacity study will move this session and may be
included in the Senate budget. The airport capacity study would review long-term capacity
issues as it relates to passenger air travel in Western Washington. This proviso was not
included in the Senate Transportation budget but may be in the House Transportation budget.
SIB 5388
At the same Council meeting where HB 1999 was discussed, Council President asked council
for consensus on staff following up on SB 5388, which seeks to provide additional tools for
removal of unauthorized persons from residential foreclosed properties. The bill and Senate Bill
Report are attached to this memo. SB 5388 passed the Senate unanimously and was
scheduled for a public hearing in the House Committee on Judiciary on March 21. It is likely this
bill will pass the Senate as it has enjoyed bi-partisan support.
RECOMMENDATION
HB 1999 is effectively dead, so no need for any action on the request for support. Staff
recommends supporting but not providing funding for the Sea-Tac air quality study and
remaining neutral on the Impact Mitigation Study. Staff further recommends that the City closely
monitor the airport capacity study, and all airport-related planning that affects Western
Washington. Finally, staff recommends that the City support SB 5388.
ATTACHMENTS
• Proposed HB 1999
• HB 1999 Report
• SB 5388
• SB 5388 Report
Z:\Council Agenda ItemslCommuniGations\Legislative update CDN 032017.doc
H- 1444.1
HOUSE BILL 1999
State of Washington 65th Legislature 2017 Regular Session
By Representatives Gregerson, Stokesbary, Ryu, Hudgins, Cody, Pollet,
Santos, Senn, springer, Fitzgibbon, McBride, Stanford, Kagi, and
Slatter
Read first time 02/07/17. Referred to Committee on State Govt,
Elections & IT.
1 AN ACT
Relating
to elections in port districts that are
2 coextensive
with a
county having a population of over one-half
3 million; and
amending
RCW 53.12.010.
4 BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON:
'61
6
7
8
9
10
11
W'd
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
Sec. 1. RCW 53.12.010 and 2002 c 51 s 1 are each amended to read
as follows:
(1) The powers of the port district shall be exercised through a
port commission consisting of three or five members, ((when)) or as
otherwise permitted by this title((, fi-Fe fftefftbei=s)).
(a) Every port district that is not coextensive with a county
having a population of five hundred thousand or more shall be divided
into the same number of commissioner districts as there are
commissioner positions, each having approximately equal population,
unless provided otherwise under subsection (2) of this section.
(b) Where a port district with three commissioner positions is
coextensive with the boundaries of a county that has a population of
less than five hundred thousand and the county has three county
legislative authority districts, the port commissioner districts
shall be the county legislative authority districts.
(c) In other instances where a port district is divided into
commissioner districts, the port commission shall divide the port
P. 1 HB 1999
1 district into commissioner districts unless the commissioner
2 districts have been described pursuant to RCW 53.04.031. The
3 commissioner districts shall be altered as provided in chapter 53.16
4 RCW.
9
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
r,*
(d) Commissioner districts shall be used as follows: ((4-a+)) (i)
only a registered voter who resides in a commissioner district may be
a candidate for, or hold office as, a commissioner of the
commissioner district; and ((4-b+)) _Ljjj only the voters of a
commissioner district may vote at a primary to nominate candidates
for a commissioner of the commissioner district. Except as provided
in subsection (3) of this section, voters of the entire port district
may vote at a general election to elect a person as a commissioner of
the commissioner district.
(2)(a) In port districts with five commissioners, two of the
commissioner districts may include the entire port district if
approved by the voters of the district either at the time of
formation or at a subsequent port district election at which the
issue is proposed pursuant to a resolution adopted by the board of
commissioners and delivered to the county auditor.
(b) In a port district with five commissioners, where two of the
commissioner districts include the entire port district, the port
district may be divided into five commissioner districts if proposed
pursuant to a resolution adopted by the board of commissioners or
pursuant to a petition by the voters and approved by the voters of
the district at the next general or special election occurring sixty
or more days after the adoption of the resolution. A petition
proposing such an increase must be submitted to the county auditor of
the county in which the port district is located and signed by voters
of the port district at least equal in number to ten percent of the
number of voters in the port district who voted at the last general
election.
Upon approval by the voters, the commissioner district boundaries
shall be redrawn into five districts within one hundred twenty days
and submitted to the county auditor pursuant to RCW 53.16.015. The
new commissioner districts shall be numbered one through five and the
three incumbent commissioners representing the three former districts
shall represent commissioner districts one through three. The two at
large incumbent commissioners shall represent commissioner districts
four and five. If, as a result of redrawing the district boundaries-,
more tl-.an one of the incumbent commissioners resides in one of the
p. 2 HB 1999
1 new commissioner districts,
the commissioners
who reside
in the same
2 commissioner district shall
determine by lot
which of
the numbered
3 commissioner districts they
shall represent
for the
remainder of
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
their respective terms.
(3) (a) Beginning in 2019, any -port district with five members
that is coextensive with a county having a population of over one and
one-half million, and with a legislative authority of nine members,
must be divided into the same commissioner districts as the county
legislative authority districts and include the same number of
commissioner -positions as the county legislative authority.
(b) Each commissioner must reside in the district from which he
or she is elected, and only voters from each district may elect the
commissioner to fill that district's commissioner position. No
commissioner position may be elected at large.
(c) Each commissioner elected prior to 2019 with at least two
years remaining in his or her term may complete his or her term for
the new commissioner district in which he or she resides. If, as a
result of redrawing the district boundaries, more than one of the
incumbent commissioners, with at least two years remaining on each of
their terms, reside in one of the new commissioner districts, the
commissioners who reside in the same commissioner district shall
determine by lot which commissioner will represent the district for
the remainder of the term.
(d) The initial election under this subsection (3) will include
the election of positions in each of the remaining district -positions
as follows:
(i) A certain number of positions elected to serve an initial
two-year term, which in addition to any incumbent commissioner's
position, as established in (c) of this subsection (3), -provide a
total number of four -positions that will -expire at the end of 2021;
and
(ii) Five -positions elected to serve four-year terms.
(e) The county auditor must select which district positions will
be two-year or four-year terms for the initial election, pursuant to
(d) of this subsection. All subsequent terms for all positions must
be for four-year terms.
(f) Each commissioner must receive the same salary as a member of
the state legislature, as set under RCW 43.03.013.
p. 3 HB 1999
HOUSE BILL L REPORT
As Reported by House Committee On:
State Government, Elections & Information Technology
Title: An act relating iV elections hn port districts that are coextensive with 000unty having
population of over one-half million.
Brief Description: Concerning elections in port districts that are coextensive with acounty
having u population ofVvcr one-half million.
Sponsors: Representatives Gregerson, S1okcabnry Rvu` Hudgins, Cody, Po|leL Santos, Senn,
Springer, Fitzgibbon, McBride, Stanford, Koui and 8|a1ncr.
Brief History:
Committee :
State Government, Elections & Information Techm|ogy: 2/15/17,2/17/17|DM
Brief Summary of Bill
• Requires that certain port districts be divided into commissioner districts that
are the same aocounty legislative authority districts beginning in 2019.
• Makes this requirement applicable to any port district with five members that
ix coextensive with n county having n population of over |.5 million and u
legislative authority nf nine members.
• Provides for a transition from five at-largc positions to nine district positions,
and requires that the cononoisuionrro receive the same salary ux state
legislators.
HOUSE COMMITTEE ON STATE GOVERNMENT, ELECTIONS & INFORMATION
TECHNOLOGY
Majority Report: Do pass. Signed b«7members: Representatives Hudgins, Chair, Dolan,
Vice Chair; Volz, Assistant Ranking Minority Member; Appleton, 6regerson, Irwin and
PeUiccktt.
Minority Report: Without recommendation. Signed bv2members: Representatives
Koster, Ranking Minority Member; Kraft.
This analysis was by the use m' legislative
members in their deliberations. This, analysis is not upart of the legislation nor does d
constitute o statement m'leris/otiveintent.
House Bill Report ' | - R8 1909
�
=
Staff: Megan Palchak (786-7105).
Background:
Port districts are established in various Counties of the state to acquire, construct, maintain,
operate, develop, and regulate rail mr motor vehicle transfer and terminal facilities, `vuLcr
transfer and terminal facilities, air transfer and tcnninu| facilities or any combination transfer
and terminal facilities and other commercial transportation, transfer, handling, atnro&t and
terminal facilities, and industrial improvements. Powers of the port district must hc
exercised within the district, through a port commission consisting offive nncrnbura.
Summary ofBill:
Beginning in 2019 port districts must be divided into the uunnc conunoiya loner districts as the
county legislative auth»ritydistricts when the port district has five members and im
coextensive with a county whose population is over 1.5 million.
Commissioners must reside in the district in which they are elected and receive the same
salary aeu member ofthe Washington Legislature. Commissioners elected prior to 2019,
with at least two years cnnnuinioQ in his oc her term, may complete his or her term in u new
commissioner district. If districts are rrdruv/n, and more than one incumbent commissioner
resides in the uanuc district, the cnn000inmiontm determine "by lot" which will represent the
district for the rcrooiudcrofthe tornn. Commissioner terms are specified. The county auditor
Must select district position terms.
Appropriation: None.
Fiscal Note: Preliminary fiscal note available.
Effective Date: The bill takes effect 90 days after n6\ournnountof the session ill which the
bill is passed.
Staff Summary of Public Testimony:
8n The definition ofaport authority is broad. In |9hOa pathway was established in
law for u five-person commission. Comments were made to the Legislature regarding
governance problems, lack of professional staff, and administrative problems. The cost o[
moving io nine commissions ix one-tenth of| percent oF the budget. Nine commission
districts follows the charter established by the King County Council. Cxiub|iuhiog five
districts supports the appearance of" gerrymandering. It isusimple noo\bconaiicu| oJ\uo1nncnt
to Support proportional representation, and mirrors legislative representation. Ports need
}ouo\ representation to deal with battles over impacts otvarious levels and among
communities. There is need to move toward a commission that represents 235,O0Orather
than 2.1 million people. This bill supports transparency and iucrcumcu accountability.
House Bill Report
W
(()nnnxcd) The majority ofconorniomioueodono1auppoddhinbU[ Districting and
commissioner election conversations have not taken place in maritime labor. There are
concerns about preexisting pressure, balanced representation, equity, and barriers to
employment und'obprotection. This bill favors Seattle, political uncertainty, and reduces
representation. Tbtnr is greater diversity within the port than p/dhio Seattle. Cononnionloum
serve not only their district, but the state as vvc|}.
The Northwest Seaport Alliance effectively generates revenue and supports
jobs. Changing the governance model would create an imbalance within the alliance.
Persons g: 0n Representative Gregerson, prime ypnnaor.
( John Pcrsuk' Puget Sound District Council and International Looumhoreand
Warehouse Union; Eric Johnson, Washington Public Ports Commission; and Tom /\|bno,
Seattle Port Commission.
Sean Eagan, The Northwest Seaport /\Uianoc.
Persons Signed In To Testify But Not Testifying: None.
House Bill Report -3'
HB 1999
12
ENGROSSED SUBSTITUTE SENATE BILL 5388
State of Washington 65th Legislature 2017 Regular Session
By Senate Law & Justice (originally sponsored by Senators Zeiger,
Sheldon Kuderer, Padden, Wilson, Conway, Fortunato, Hobbs, Becker,
Warnick, and Honeyford)
READ FIRST TIME 02/09/17.
1 AN ACT Relating to the removal of unauthorized persons from
2 certain premises; adding new sections to chapter 9A.52 RCW; and
3 adding a new section to chapter 4.24 RCW.
N
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
IVA
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON:
NEW SECTION.- Sec. 1. A new section is added to chapter 9A.52
RCW to read as follows:
(1) Subject to subsections (2) and (3) of this section and upon
the receipt of a declaration signed under penalty of perjury and
containing all of the required information and in the form prescribed
in section 2 of this act, a peace officer shall have the authority
to:
(a) Remove the person or persons from the premises, with or
without arresting the person or persons; and
(b) order the person or persons to remain off the premises or be
subject to arrest for criminal trespass.
(2) only a peace officer having probable cause to believe that a
person is guilty of criminal trespass under RCW 9A.52.070 for
knowingly entering or remaining unlawfully in a building considered
residential real property, as defined in RCW 61.24.005, has the
authority and discretion to make an arrest or exclude anyone under
penalty of criminal trespass.
P. 1 ESSB 5388
13
1 (3) While a peace officer can take into account a declaration
2 from the property owner signed under penalty of perjury containing
3 all of the required information and in the form prescribed in section
4 2 of this act, the peace officer must provide the occupant or
5 occupants with a reasonable opportunity to secure and present any
6 credible evidence provided by the person or persons on the premises,
7 which the peace officer must consider, showing that the person or
8 persons are tenants, legal occupants, or the guests or invitees of
9 tenants or legal occupants.
10 (4) Neither the peace officer nor his or her law enforcement
11 agency shall be held liable for actions or omissions made in good
12 faith under this section.
13 (5) This section may not be construed to allow a peace officer to
14 remove or exclude an occupant who is entitled to occupy a dwelling
15 unit under a rental agreement or the occupant's guests or invitees.
16 NEW SECTION.- Sec. 2. A new section is added to chapter 9A.52
17 RCW to read as follows:
18 The owner of premises, or his or her authorized agent, may
19 initiate the investigation and request the removal of an unauthorized
20 person or persons from the premises by providing to law enforcement a
21 declaration containing all of the following required information and
22 in substantially the following form:
23 REQUEST TO REMOVE TRESPASSER(S) FORM
24 The undersigned owner, or authorized agent of the owner, of the
25 premises located at .......... hereby represents and declares under
26 the penalty of perjury that (initial each box):
27 (1) [ ] The declarant is the owner of the premises or the
28 authorized agent of the owner of the premises;
29 (2) [ ] An unauthorized person or persons have entered and are
30 remaining unlawfully on the premises;
31 (3) [ The person or persons were not authorized to enter or
32 remain;
33 (4) [ The person or persons are not a tenant or tenants and
34 have not been a tenant or tenants for the last twelve months on that
35 property;
36 (5) The declarant has demanded that the unauthorized person
37 or persons vacate the premises but they have not done so;
p. 2 ESSB 5388
14
1 (6) [ ] The premises were not abandoned at the time the
2 unauthorized person or persons entered;
3 (7) [ ] The premises were not open to members of the public at
4 the time the unauthorized person or persons entered;
5 (8) [ ] The declarant understands that a person or persons
6 removed from the premises pursuant to section 1 of this act may bring
7 a cause of action under section 3 of this act against the declarant
8 for any false statements made in this declaration, and that as a
9 result of such action the declarant may be held liable for actual
10 damages, costs, and reasonable attorneys' fees;
11 (9) [ ] The declarant understands and acknowledges the
12 prohibitions in RCW 59.18.230 and 59.18.290 against taking or
13 detaining an occupant's personal property or removing or excluding an
14 occupant from a dwelling unit or rental premises without an
15 authorizing court order;
16 (10) [ ] The declarant agrees to indemnify and hold harmless law
17 enforcement for its actions or omissions made in good faith pursuant
18 to this declaration; and
19 (11) [ ] Additional Optional Explanatory Comments:
20 .................................... ...............................
21 .......
22
An owner
of premises who falsely swears on
a declaration provided
23
under this
section may be guilty of false
swearing under RCW
24
9A.72.040 or
of making a false or misleading
statement to a public
25
servant under
RCW 9A.76.175, both of which are
gross misdemeanors.
26 NEW SECTION. Sec. 3. A new section is added to chapter 4.24 RCW
27 to read as follows:
28 All persons removed from premises pursuant to section 1 of this
29 act on the basis of false statements made by a declarant pursuant to
30 section 2 of this act shall have a cause of action to recover from
31 the declarant for the full amount of damages caused thereby, together
32 with costs and reasonable attorneys' fees.
- -- END - --
p. 3 ESSB 5388
15
17
SENATE BILL REPORT
ESSB 5388
As Passed Senate, February 27, 2017
Title: An act relating to the removal of unauthorized persons from certain premises.
Z:�
Brief Description: Concerning the removal of unauthorized persons from certain premises.
Sponsors: Senate Committee on Law & Justice (originally sponsored by Senators Zeiger,
Sheldon, Kuderer, Padden, Wilson, Conway, Fortunato, Hobbs, Becker, Warnick and
Honeyford).
Brief History:
Committee Activity: Law & Justice: 1/26/17, 2/08/17 [DPS].
Floor Activity:
Passed Senate: 2/27/17, 49-0.
Brief Summary of Engrossed First Substitute Bill
• Establishes a process for an owner or an agent to provide to law
enforcement a declaration under penalty of perjury stating that persons
have entered the premises unlawfully.
• Gives the occupant the opportunity to secure and provide contrary
credible evidence which must be considered by the officer.
• Allows law enforcement to remove the persons, with or without arresting
them, and to order them to remain off the premises or be subject to arrest
for criminal trespass.
• Provides that law enforcement is not be held liable.
• Allows a person or persons removed from property on the basis of false
statements in a declaration to pursue a cause of action against the
declarant.
SENATE COMMITTEE ON LAW & JUSTICE
Majority Report: That Substitute Senate Bill No. 5388 be substituted therefor, and the
substitute bill do pass.
This analysis was prepared by non -partisan legislative staff ,ffior the use of legislative
members in their deliberations. This analysis is not apart of the legislation nor does it
constitute a statement of legislative intent.
Senate Bill Report ESSB 5388
17
Signed by Senators Padden, Chair; 0'8un, }loe Chair; Pedersen, Ranking Minority
Member; Angel, OornciUc,prncktand Wilson.
Staff: Aldo Me|chimi(78d-743q)
Background: /\ tenant by euOeczuon is a person who obtains possession of prcrniscx
without the consent of the op/ocr or other person having the hobt to give possession. Tile
tenant by sufferance is liable to pay nc0000ah|c rent for the actual time the tenant occupied
the prernises, and must, on demand, surrender possession to the owner or person who had tile
right ufpossession before the entry.
Criminal trespass in the first dc*rcc is u gross oniadcrncanoc It isconoond1cd when operson
knowingly enters and ronouina un|ondb||y in o building. /lperson enters un|uvvhuUy when the
person is not licensed, invited, or otherwise privileged to enter. In any prosecution, it is a
defense that (|) u building involved in an offense was abandoned, (2) the premises were at
the tinoc open to nucnohers of the public and the person complied with all |ovvfu| conditions
imposed, (3) the yo/unu reasonably believed that the owner o[the prcnoiacs' nr other person
empowered 1n |i0000c access, would have licensed the person to cu1cr or remain, or (4) the
person was attempting to serve |cgo| process.
Summary of Engrossed First Substitute Bill: The owner of premises, or their authorized
agent, may initiate the investigation and request the ,cnoova| of an unauthorized person or
persons frorn the prenniocs by providing to |nvv enforcement u declaration containing all of
the b/||ov/iug required iofhnnodoo:
• the declarant is the owner of the premises or the authorized agent of the owner;
• on unauthorized person or persons have entered and are remaining unlawfully on the
premises;
• the person has not been a tenant on that property for the preceding 12 months;
• the person or persons were not authorized to enter ocronouio;
• the declarant has demanded that the unauthorized person or persons vnco1c the
premises but they have not done so;
• the premises were not abandoned at the time the unauthorized person or persons
entered;
• the premises were not open to noennbcre of the public u1the time the unauthorized
person or persons entered;
• the declarant understands that person or persons removed from the premises may
bring u cause of action against the declarant for any tuloc uiutcnnnota noudc in this
declaration, and that as o result of such action the declarant may be bc|d liable for
actual damages, costs, and reasonable attorneys' fees;
• the declarant agrees to iudcnoniFv and hold harmless )ovv enforcement for its actions
oronuivaionm made iu good faith pursuant to this declaration; and
• additional optional explanatory comments.
The |uvv cohorocnuort officer must provide the occupaot with o reasonable opportunity to
secure and present any credible evidence, which the officer must consider, showing that the
person or persons are tenants, |e�o} occupants, ur the guests or invitees oftenants or legal
occupun1s.
Senate Bill Report -2- BS885388
IMP
Upon the receipt ofo declaration signed under penalty of jury and containing all ofthe
required information and any evidence provided by the occupant, n peace officer has the
authority to:
• ,onovu the person or persons from the premises, with or without arresting the person
or persons; and
• order the person or persons to remain off the prrnoiuca or be subject to arrest for
criminal trespass.
Neither the peace officer nor their law enforcement agency are liable for actions or ornissions
ulndc in good faith. All persons ornnovcd tinnz pcenoincn on the basis of fo|o: statements
noudo by x declarant have ucousc of action to recovcr[roon the declarant for the full arnnunt
of damages, together with costs and reasonable attorneys' fees.
Appropriation: None.
Fiscal Note: Not requested.
Creates Conmmmit1cc/Commnmimsiou/TuwkForce that includes X,ogim|utivc members: No.
Effective Date: Ninety days after adjournment of session in which bill is passed.
Staff Summary of f"obbc Testimony on First Substitute: pQD: This shnp|iKco the
pouccau for removing unauthorized people off of property. Property ov/ocm oonoou the state
are encountering this issue. Without o fhcocd cnby, these nOenmcn are not being charged.
Unlawful detainer actions take u|un�bnnu to resolve. Squatters often present falsified \cusoo.
0vvnoro have to go to court and incur those |idgmdou toa(a for an action against sn0000nc
with whom they have no contractual relationship.
Persons Testifying: PRO: Scoa1orleigur Prime Sponsor; Maynard Mau citizen; RVac
Nelson, citizen; Michele Thounaa, WA [.op/ Income Housing; Michael /\\dboumer, Attorney,
Columbia Legal Services; Laura Parks, citizen; Bobbie Garver, citizen.
Persons Signed In To Testify But Not Testifying: No one.
Senate Bill Report -3- GS8Q5388
20
CUITATI'lAl-ri
Meeting Minutes
City Council Community Development & Neighborhoods Committee
March 27,2017-5.30 p.m. -Hazelnut Conference Room, City Hall
Councilmembers: Kathy Hougardy, Chair; Verna Seat, Kate Krutter
Staff- David Cline, Lynn Miranda, Mia Navarro, Bob Giberson, Derek Speck, Rachel
Bianchi, Laurel Humphrey
Guests: Ken Johnsen and Justine Kim, Shie[s Obletz Johnsen; Evan Lawler and Jesse
Camp, Alliance Residential Company; Todd Smith, resident
CALL TOORDER: Committee Chair Hougardy called the meeting to order at 5:30 p.m.
I. BUSINESS AGENDA
A. State Legislative Update
Staff updated the Committee on state legislation pertaining to the Port of Seattle. HouseBill1999
which proposed to increase the number of Port Commissioners as well as create Port Districts,
was not moved out of the House and is effectively dead. There is no longer a need for the City
Council to take a position. House Bill 1171, directing the Washington State Department of
Commerce to complete an air quality study regarding air traffic, is also dead but a proviso in the
House budget is expected to move forward. The City of SeaTac has also been pushing a proviso
for an impact mitigation study that would analyze impacts relating to health, transportation,
parking, public safety, property values and economic development in SeaTac, Burien, Des
Moines, Tukwila, Federal Way and Normandy Park. Staff recommends supporting but not
providing funding for an air quality study and remaining neutral on an impact mitigation study.
Senate Bill 5388 seeks to provide additional toots for removing trespassers from residential
foreclosed properties. Staff recommends Council support for this bill. UNANIMOUS APPROVAL
TO SUPPORT AIR QUALITY STUDY AND SENATE BILL 5388. FORWARD TO APRIL 3, 2017
REGULAR MEETING.
B. Public Safety Plan Local Hiring and Disadvantaged Business Enterprise Participation
Staff is seeking Committee input on information prepared by Shiets Obletz Johnsen regarding
the integration of local hiring policies and disadvantaged business enterprise participation into
the Public Safety Plan. The Public Safety Committee discussed this information on March 20,
2017 and expressed continued support for toots to encourage local hiring/apprenticeships and
DBE participation, but felt affordability and timeliness should not be compromised. This
Committee also discussed the options and expressed continued support to pursue a too[ that
makes sense for Tukwila, as well as for a policy applicable to all projects in the City. Use of this
21