Transcript
Speaker: Hi, everybody. Welcome to the latest episode the Mercer Matters podcast. I'm your host, Ben Sharp, and with me today is Representative Janice Zahn, who is one of the two state representatives for Legislative District 41.
Speaker: She currently holds Position 1, which includes Mercer Island, parts of Bellevue, Newcastle, Issaquah, and parts of Renton. ah She is running against Ellie Nguyen in the election in a couple of weeks here in November.
Speaker: ah Before we dive in, I'd like to remind everybody to please click subscribe to the show on your favorite podcast platform so that you can be alerted when new episodes like this one drop. And if you enjoy the show, please share it with a friend.
Speaker: either in person or social media to help get the word out. I would really appreciate that. um So Representative Zong, welcome to the show. um I think we might start with just asking to introduce yourself ah to our audience, and just a little bit about your background, and then perhaps spend a bit of time about how and why you got into politics.
Speaker: Yeah, well, thank you, Ben, for inviting me. Good morning, everyone. So my name is Janice Zahn. And a little bit about me, i would say that, you know, I would start with the fact that I've lived in South Bellevue now for almost 33 years.
Speaker: Grew up in Hong Kong and my family immigrated to Federal Way when I was 10. So I've been in the United States for a long time and i've brought up my family in East King County.
Speaker: You know, it's really important to me. And in fact, someone asked me last week, you know, why don't want to serve? And I realized for me, my love language has always been acts of service. And so when I think about my education, being part of the Washington public schools and then getting my engineering degree at our local University of Washington,
Speaker: that at some point it's important to think about how the community has brought me up and what it takes to give back to the community.
Speaker: So as I think about a little bit more about me, you know, one of the things that I love the most and I think the most about is community. two daughters and all of the things that we do as a family that I want to make sure that everyone has the opportunity to do.
Speaker: Getting involved with our community and giving back, being part of PEPs for early parents, being part of Girl Scouts.
Speaker: And then when I think about what it takes these days to make sure that our community works. I really thought hard about how, as an engineer that has been a bridge builder for many years, in fact, I designed bridges for a living when I was in the private sector before joining the Port of Seattle overseeing construction, that it really matters that we are problem solvers, that when we think of about how we show up in community and what makes a difference, it's about what we can do to make life better for people. And I've been relieved for a long time, having worked 22 years in government now, that making sure that government works really matters.
Speaker: And that at the heart of it is the very underlying policies that guide that implementation. So i don't know, you know, it's been an interesting almost 10 years since I first ran for city council in Bellevue back in early 2017. And seeing how we can make a difference at the local level, as well as taking that experience to the state level and doing even more to try to make sure that government works for the people.
Speaker: That's great. Thanks. Thanks for that in the background. And and you, we were talking a little bit before we went live on air here that, um tell me a little bit, how does it work, you know, having a full-time job at the Port of Seattle and then also, you know, serving on the state legislature? How were you able to manage that?
Speaker: Yeah. So one of the things I learned a couple of years ago is that as a public sector employee that we are allowed to take up political leave of absence in order to serve in the legislature. Because I would say that prior to that, I didn't think that it was even a possibility.
Speaker: And it has worked out well because I think that it's been a really complimentary relationship of being able bring the voice of actually a staffer implementing policies as a government agency. employee, as well as then bringing that perspective of what it's like to implement policy at the state level. And I've been really grateful that the Court of Seattle has been supportive of that effort and that my family is super supportive to enable me to do that. It's been an honor.
Speaker: that's That's awesome. Yeah, that's we we were talking before. I just don't know how some of these people are able to juggle full time job and and serving in government. And it's pretty, pretty impressive. So that's neat that you're afforded that opportunity.
Speaker: um All right. Well, i I think what we could do now is is ah dive into some of the issues. and And the first question I'd like to ask you is, as you're out campaigning and talking to voters and certainly ah you've you've served for some time, what are the primary issues that you think ah voters care most about in this election? well I would say that education, education, education. um i've And it's been a pretty steady thread from when I was on the city council that even though when I was campaigning, i was campaigning at the city level, that a lot of times education came up. And especially whether our school system is supporting our special education kiddos as much as they need to and their mental health and the rigor of education.
Speaker: and then having an adult daughter that's back living with me because housing is really expensive. I hear at my kitchen table, as well as in community, that the affordability is a challenge, whether it is a young person getting started or seniors aging in place and worried about their ability to stay in their homes.
Speaker: So I think that those are pieces that have been underlying threads. In addition to that, depending on ah where, what neighborhoods, I also hear about transportation safety and just the the connectivity of of getting around safely.
Speaker: And then i think that I also hear people talk about just the how challenging it is right now, because I think that in a lot of ways, we as a community are still recovering from COVID effects and just being able to be back together as a community.
Speaker: all right. Thank you for for that sort of overview. So as as but let's let's pull on a couple of those little bit here. So let's let's talk a little bit about education. What are the main drivers you think, um you know, I have several kids in public schools myself, spent a lot of time, you know, pretty pretty active in the school system, my wife and I both.
Speaker: What are the the primary issues you see in our education system that need to be fixed or addressed or improved? Well, would say that as I've learned more about the education funding, one of the things I've come to understand is that We have for years funded based on a prototypical model of funding that is not centered the student needs in funding, but more of this prototypical that based on
Speaker: ah a certain number of FTE of students, then you get this much money. So it doesn't necessarily tie to what each of the kiddos need. And when McCleary happened about a dozen years ago, it also then created the disparities among districts around the state.
Speaker: And so that's been one of the things we've been working on for a while is how do we get to the a funding model that actually better reflects what the kiddos need in the education system?
Speaker: And also that for special education, we send a number of our kiddos out of state because our own state education system does not adequately provide the kind of resources for their success, then I can't even imagine what it would be like to send one of my kids out of state for education, right? These are our kiddos.
Speaker: So I think that in a lot of ways, the very system that we've put in place needs reform. And we need to also have the kind of education The other thing we heard from the district, so right before, let me take a step back.
Speaker: ah There were two town halls, one before each of the legislative sessions that I served on. And what we heard clearly from a number of school districts that came together was there was inadequate funding for federal education. There was inadequate funding for materials and supplies so that the schools themselves end up trying to figure out how to peanut butter the resources that they have in funding to try to take care of all of this.
Speaker: And then transportation is also a challenge because for districts that are spread out, they don't have the resources to fund all of those. So then they end up looking at where are the cuts? School closures have been an issue.
Speaker: The Bellevue School District was in binding conditions starting last year. because they're their fiscal health was below what the state would say is sufficient.
Speaker: And we're hearing that Lake Washington School District is having conversations around their funding challenges. Rooster Island, we were hearing about the was at the Crest School and the challenge with funding and what changes they have to make.
Speaker: So I think at heart, you know, we have to make sure that the schools have what they need to actually serve the students because we know that when the teachers and the district have what they need, then the kiddos end up with what they need. And that includes, right, a really high education, making sure that all the kids know how to read and math.
Speaker: as well as their you know mental health. Yeah, to to build on that a little bit, um Superintendent Fred Runnell and I have talked a lot, both on this program and and otherwise, about a trend in the in the last four or five years, partly due to COVID, but partly not, where, um you know, Mercer Island in particular, um parents have pulled their kids out of the public schools and and put them, you know, elsewhere.
Speaker: um And some of it's your traditional private school model. Others are, you know, places like SAS, where they're getting, you know, specialized education for, you know, perhaps learning disability or what have you.
Speaker: um yeah It seems to me, you know I grew up a public school kid. I don't remember there being so many choices. I remember there's basically Catholic school and public school, as far as I can remember. Now there's just a ton of choices out there. um And the public school, at least in Mercer Allen, um you know had ah had a big issue because if these kids are not in the district, they're not getting the funding. Right. And so...
Speaker: It's something that the Mercer Island schools have worked hard on to recruit these kids back. And I think to some degree that's been successful. But my question for you is, you know, school choice is something that has been talked about and discussed for a long time.
Speaker: As I mentioned, it seems to me that there's never been more choice. ah How do you think about that and how do you reconcile that with maybe a more traditional public school model? Well, I would say that I've been really blessed, I would say, with the Bellevue school system. So that's where both my daughters went to school all the way from kindergarten and to graduation.
Speaker: And here's what I've told people is that when I think about their education and choices within the public school system, there are The different schools offer different ah additional kind of elective credits that actually provide the opportunity for choice without actually having to only look at private school.
Speaker: So there's a school that focuses on ah automotive and one that focuses on arts and there's one that's a culinary and one that's horticulture. And so I say that because I think that sometimes within the education system, we want to make sure that it isn't all a cookie cutter and that the more that within the school system, we actually offer choices for students,
Speaker: then hopefully we continue to offer an excellent education with choices that they feel like within the public school system, they're still getting what they need. So so you're envisioning it's more of like a hybrid model where they're able students are able to go outside of the public school system to get you know specific education.
Speaker: education or address specific needs. How is that? Is that kind of or did I mishear that? Well, actually, those examples. Yeah, those examples that I gave Ben actually were all part of the Bellevue Public School. Oh, I gotcha. Okay. Yeah. so they And maybe it's a little different for North Star Island because there's only one high school, so you don't have as many choices.
Speaker: But what I meant is that within the five, six high schools in Bellevue, that they actually offer slightly different offerings. And so it gives more opportunity as well as different language opportunities.
Speaker: that is offered that then is a draw. So I think that whatever that might be for each of the individual school districts, it provides that opportunity to think about how we serve the kiddos and offer more options within still the public school system.
Speaker: Sorry, I wasn't quite as clear about that. No, no, that's that's great. I appreciate you clarifying. i I didn't want to put words your mouth. um but So I'm curious, you know you mentioned for for special education kids in particular where the public schools can't meet the need. My understanding is that the public system pays for those kids to go to a specialized school.
Speaker: And sometimes, if it's not often, say to Washington, they go elsewhere, which is I think what you were referring to kind of in your opening remarks. i So that system exists today, as I understand it.
Speaker: I'm curious, let's take an example that's maybe not quite as extreme where yeah you have a parent who says, geez, my kid's just not getting the math that that they need ah within within the public school system. And I want to put them in you know a private math program, for example.
Speaker: Do you think there's room where it makes sense to allow parents to be able to do that and have have the public education system pay for that? Or like what's what's the future look like, I guess, for for that parent in your mind?
Speaker: I think this is a very interesting discussion about what are those different resources. And i think it also comes to an equity issue of If we have parents who have the ability to enrich their children's education as and then those that cannot, I'd have to really think about what that might look like in terms of reimbursement of the additional resources. Because I'd like to think that parents have always have that choice to do additional enrichment.
Speaker: And then what are the things that the schools can also do to help? You know, what are when my daughter was in elementary school, we were part of this after school math club for a while to help with a couple of the topics that um she benefited from. And it wasn't something that was paid by the district. It was one of the parents in the school that thought, you know, it might be nice to create an opportunity to help the kiddos. Yeah. And I think a lot about how community comes together to help kids to be successful.
Speaker: Yeah, certainly. i mean, that's another untapped resource is just the the parental parental expertise that exists, ah you know, in in many of our schools and and tapping into that. um But yeah, I think you know, one one of the things I look at is just how technology is evolving so much and, you know, access to all these different resources is is evolving. um And yeah, the the question then becomes, okay, how do you fund it? Right. Cause some parents, like you said, can support additional curriculum for kids outside of school and and others can't.
Speaker: And, and that's where we all pay into the public school program. And so how do we, think about, you know, in the future, getting access to some of those things for kids. I don't know. Interesting discussion, I guess, ah for another time.
Speaker: Well, and I think it goes to the maybe then the broader question about education funding, So I've only been in the legislature two sessions, so I don't have the context of going back, you know, 10 years and understanding what was going on with McCleary and the funding ah increases at the time for the paramount duty.
Speaker: What I have heard is that at one time, half of our ofard funding in our operating budget was for education and that now we're down to somewhere in the in the 42 43 percent so are we actually funding in a way that actually gives the tools or are we continually trying to again kind of thread that peanut butter of what funding we do have to try to help
Speaker: make sure that every kid can thrive. Yeah. and And I think that's maybe a good segue into into my next question for you. um You know, an issue that's, you know literally on the ballot and on a lot of people's minds is the state income tax issue or the, you know, quote, millionaire's taxes being framed. um Mercedes, you voted for the bill.
Speaker: um And according to some of the research I've done, about a third of the people who will be paying the tax live either in in our district or in a neighboring district.
Speaker: um What was the case for you supporting the the income tax? You know, I was thinking about this because prior to this session, i was on capital budget.
Speaker: And then in December, I was asked to joined the finance committee, not realizing that this was the bill that was going to be top of mind. i think for me what the reason that I voted for it is because I was hearing from my community about affordability, about education funding, about the upcoming impacts of HR1 to our staff and our Medicaid,
Speaker: and the very people that we need to make sure um continues to get the services that they need. And when I think about the shortfall that we have currently and upcoming, continuing to do the same thing we were doing was not sustainable.
Speaker: Last year, we had passed a bill on services or sales tax on services that then we heard back from the school district that ah this is harmful to us. We heard it from the library system. We heard it from the nonprofits. And so we took, we made a change to not tax those services.
Speaker: And what I saw was us removing the loophole for, ah data centers that were getting a tax exemption for when they retrofit their equipment.
Speaker: I was hearing about the fact that small businesses were struggling and so being able to raise the V&O tax threshold so that fewer of them were paying V&O tax.
Speaker: All of those things to me meant that the status quo was not sustainable and that a a change was needed. So in my mind, those were a lot of the reasons that I voted for it.
Speaker: And then one of the things that I had heard from community was that for the importance of for providing additional tax relief, especially for those everyday things, because right now we know that groceries are already tax exempt.
Speaker: but not diapers that includes baby diapers, adult diapers, not over the count of medication ah and or other hygiene products. And so that was one of the things that I pushed to get included in this bill so that in the things that we can do to reduce the everyday burden on people, that that was what we were focused on. So thank you for your thoughtful answer. I'm, I'm curious. So, you know, you mentioned affordability, um the state, you know, the state has limited power to control affordability in general, right? Like it's just, you know, the, the economy is massive and obviously most of it sits outside of Washington state, but,
Speaker: you know As I look at how well how the state of Washington could help with affordability, there's you know a number of things you know from regulation to you know sales tax, as you mentioned, ah is a is a direct tax relief that the state can provide ah citizens.
Speaker: um So is that, in your mind, is that part of the strategy that as funding from the income tax increases, you'll be able to target more more sales tax relief on things that affect everyday folks? Is that in your mind kind of how, what the future looks like? And and perhaps, you know I realize you're just you're just one representative, right? and And you don't have a magic wand. But if you did, what would be some of the other areas of relief that that you'd like to see people get as the income tax revenues increases?
Speaker: Well, I would say a couple of areas, right? So part of that would be looking at sales tax relief more broadly. i think that we need to look at our V&O tax structure. i do not believe that V&O on gross receipts makes sense at all because it does not take into account the fact that as a business for business owners, it's the net that's important and not the gross. right So I think that that needs to be ah
Speaker: completely transformed. I think that property tax is another one where I certainly hear from the community from affordability standpoint that ah seniors trying to age in place, that property tax will continues to go up because counties and cities don't have a lot of revenue levers available to them. So property tax is one of the few areas that they can lean into.
Speaker: And I think that we need to revisit what are the things we can do there. i was really glad that Senator Krishna Dawson passed to a bill this year that raised the limit for when there is eligibility for tax relief that also includes, and I don't know if a lot of people know this, but it included a little ah additional piece that says that you can have up to, i believe it's $6,000 of rental income. And that doesn't actually count towards your income. So if somebody wanted to, write rent out ah ah a room in their home as part of helping to pay the bills, that that at least that portion of the income doesn't count towards the income cap for property tax relief. Oh, I see. Okay. So that that's the tax relief you're talking about would be a form of property tax relief. Okay. Yeah. It's both raising.
Speaker: Well, and I think that's only one part of it, right? So that is the one that did pass this year. My point is that when we look at all of the different revenue options, they're all levers and they work together in a system.
Speaker: Right. So we we need when we talk about tax reform, we have to look at the whole thing in totality because we have right. V&O tax, sales tax, property tax.
Speaker: Now this new one. And so how do we look at the whole thing and what is the right, um, formula and calculation. I'm an engineer, so you can't see me, but I'm like waving my hands. You're talking with your hands. my head like Thinking about it as as an equation of a lot of different parts and pieces.
Speaker: And I think that that's been the complexity of our tax system is that because there are so many levers, ah it's how do we move them in a way that they're synchronized and We aren't always going to get it exactly right and we might have to tweak things. So I would say that, you know, last year with the the tax on services, i don't think we fully understood the impact of what exactly that meant to school districts and libraries and nonprofits. So we had to come back and look at how we correct for that.
Speaker: One thing I would definitely like to see us do, and you'll see that it was an amendment that I supported even though it didn't get passed was the effect of how for businesses that have passed through income, how that shows up in this ah millionaire's tax. And so i know that there is a advisory group that's been meeting to work through the nuances of that implementation.
Speaker: And my hope is that we get better clarity about some of these nuances. Yeah. and And do you think that's the path forward that let's call them nuances? And there's a number of of them that people have raised that I think are reasonable to consider. Like, for example, a small business owner who's owned a you know small business for 30 years, sells it.
Speaker: Right. That's the retirement. They don't have a 401k or anything, all the values in their business. And you know that year they make over a million dollars and now they've got to pay you know not only federal government, but they got to pay 10% tax on that, which is effectively their retirement. And I'm like, well, is that reasonable?
Speaker: um But let's let's let's say you know you may or may not agree with that particular example I raised, but as these things start to come up, Is that the path forward is to address them on a case-by-case basis and make amendments to the law to um help reconcile some of those nuances?
Speaker: Yeah. i I would say that maybe one example that I would think of is, again, that sales tax on services was one where we came back this year based on feedback and said, oh, these are the tweaks that we need to make in order for it to...
Speaker: ah did reflect the nuances that we now have come to understand. And my expectation would be that the, that working group of that actually, I believe they just went yesterday will come back with both their recommendations for what kind of tweaks might be needed, as well as better clarity on in the implementation steps.
Speaker: Like what are the what are the things that need to be adjusted? And I've also come to learn that there's a term called trailer bills, and that is the You know, once we adopt a bill, sometimes they do need to be fixed. And so trailer bills show up. And I fully expect that there will be a trailer bill to that bill with adjustments that will address some of the nuances that we are hearing about.
Speaker: All right. my My last question on this, and and then we'll move on. since Since you were on the finance committee that that worked on this, I'm curious, how did you guys think about and plan for the you know the wealth flight? So you know people who live here that would be subjected to the tax that you know say, oh forget it, I'm leaving Washington and and moving somewhere else.
Speaker: Was that a big deal for you guys as you contemplated this? And and then how do you plan for that in terms of the the hit on revenue projections that you've done? you know If a group of these people leave and that that revenue, that income leaves, how do you guys think how did you think about that and how do you reconcile that that impact?
Speaker: Well, think it's always important to look at what are the the results or the potential impacts of any policy that we adopt. And in my mind, one of the things that we need to acknowledge is that folks move for a number of reasons and that when we are doing our revenue projections and calculations,
Speaker: that we need to be thoughtful about the fact that people do have choices. And so one of the things I always think about as an engineer is that how do we ah how are we thoughtful about the the calculation and really understanding the probability of things happening so that we are not making a presumption one way or the other with incomplete information.
Speaker: I think that this is where I don't believe that we can say that no one will leave. I also don't believe we can say that everyone will leave. So how we account for those nuances is part of the, I would say, revenue projection side of ah What percentage of the revenue do we believe we can count on?
Speaker: And I think that those are always forecasts without absolute certainty, just like most of our revenue projections. In fact, I think that in my two sessions, you know we certainly had conversations around the ah the accuracy of our revenue forecast and how we try to get better at that.
Speaker: Although with that said, I always think that that is comes with so much uncertainty in many, many different areas. I think for me, what I think a lot about is, you know we want to continue to be a state where people want to live, that we have And amazing outdoors. We have clean water, clean air, amazing education, great sports and culture so that we are a place where people want to continue to be.
Speaker: So building on the the budget discussion a little bit, um your opponent, Ellen Nguyen, when I chat with her, mentioned that Olympia, she characterizes as just being generally fiscally responsible and that the state has a spending problem, not a revenue problem.
Speaker: um you know, I looked, it looks like the state operating budget has roughly doubled since 2013 to about, you know, 77 or $80 billion dollars roughly um for the 2025 to 2027 session.
Speaker: How do you think about the the two levers? there's There's income and then there's spending. Obviously we all know that from managing our households. Um,
Speaker: Do you think that there are areas in the budget where we've overspent or spent unwisely in hindsight? And how do you think about managing the revenue and the and then the expense side of the equation?
Speaker: That's the key, right? We every we have to pass a balanced budget. And so that is aligning revenue and expense.
Speaker: When I think about expenses, I will tell you one of the things that it's is the most, I don't know if frustrating is the right word, but concerning is that we have over a billion dollars of tort claims that the state is dealing with from many different areas And that is a large expense that hits operating budget.
Speaker: And in my mind, it's one where we have to work on preventing people from being harmed, that's suing the state, as well as dealing with the past harms that we now have to deal with. I think that is one of the areas that is a large expense area.
Speaker: That is a What are some of the examples of, sorry to interrupt you, but just what, what are, what are some examples of tort claims against the state? Like what, what kinds of things are you seeing? ah the largest one is with the department of children, youth and family. I think it's and been in the paper about, um,
Speaker: abuse in the in this in thee foster care system, in the different systems of the kiddos that are in our care. And I don't want to misspeak because I don't have those notes in front of me of exactly what those up payouts were, but they were significant. So it's and there it's it's different areas that the state operates that that people are suing the state government for various reasons.
Speaker: Okay. Yes. Okay. Yes. So I would say that that is a large portion of, of risk that I very much am concerned about.
Speaker: And then when I think about our expenses, I will say that as an engineer and one that has been a huge proponent for lean and continuous improvement and,
Speaker: Dr. Nadine Burke Harris- Reducing duplication of effort and thinking in a system systemic way, do think that there are things that we need to be focused on to. Nadine Harris- Better collaborate across departments to reduce costs.
Speaker: So an example I will give you is that, you know, I came to learn that for adult family homes that they were getting multiple visits from different agencies, talk out checking on similar things, multiple reports that had to be filed to different departments.
Speaker: And so what we need to do is do more to identify where those areas are, where there is inefficiency and duplication of effort so that we actually are able to have to do more with the same number of people or to do the same with less.
Speaker: And I think that as we look at any government agency, we need to do a lot more of that, breaking down the silos and really looking at how to be more efficient and effective with our resources.
Speaker: And I do think that this is one of the challenges for the state because a lot of the systems that the staff uses are old systems that don't have data interoperability to talk to each other and share knowledge share data. And so that's been one of the things that I've been focused on is, right, how do we identify those areas where those inefficiencies could be mitigated through better collaboration?
Speaker: um How do we look at the, you know, why subject matter expertise is construction, public works, capital delivery, and how do we figure out how to how to um create better tools for our ability to deliver in the most effective way.
Speaker: And I do think that amongst all the different areas of policy that we oversee or have policy over, there's a lot more of those that we should be doing.
Speaker: And I think they are doing that, but it takes time. So is there ah is there a mechanism currently within the state that you're aware of for like, don't a task force or something to work on some of these efficiency system upgrades? Like, you know, you're an engineer. I mean, perfectly suited for this type of thing.
Speaker: Obviously, you're you're a busy lady. You've got a lot going on. You're not going to personally do this. So how does that work? Yeah, well, there's a couple of things. You know, one the state has this JLARC, which is the Joint Legislative Audit.
Speaker: review committee where they take different policy areas and they look at how that's going. Within the auditor's office, they also do performance audits.
Speaker: And then, you know, one of the areas that's been around for a little while is this Results Washington, which for several years, what they do is They highlight some of the different continuous improvement efforts from around the state, from different public agencies.
Speaker: I would like to see a lot more leaning into those kind of efforts of, well, as you probably as you know, right the people that are closest to the work know where those inefficiencies are. So how do we create that space for them to help identify and streamline so that The very, I think, pain points that the staff have are the things same things that can help us be more efficient and effective and really to be able to write do more with less.
Speaker: And it is hard, right? Because as we are talking about trying to balance our budget and the challenges of not having enough money,
Speaker: the idea that we might take we might need to make some investment of having that time to be able to identify those inefficiencies and collaboration is necessary. And I think that that is one of the things I always think about having you know worked in government for many years is how do we make sure we create that space so that we are able to identify and work on the right problem I think that that has been, in my career, the thing I think about the most is, um and part of the lane principles too, is that some of the most dangerous things we can do is focus on the surface issue, thinking that that's the problem we're trying to solve, when it's the underlying rooted issue that we need to focus on in order to
Speaker: get to the very solution that's durable and long-term versus just another ointment on a wound, right? Yeah. um No, I appreciate your thoughts, your perspective on that. um i I want to switch gears a little bit here.
Speaker: ah my understanding is you're on ah you're also on the Joint Committee on Energy Supply. And my question here is about data centers in the state of Washington. um Very controversial. It seems like everybody has an opinion.
Speaker: um from From your perspective ah as ah as ah as a leader in our state ah crafting policy around this, ah how do you view data centers?
Speaker: um you know ah Should we be building them in the state of Washington? What are the what are the pros and cons? um you know Is there a way to generate revenue out of these things to help pay for things um and and put them places that make sense? you know how how do you How do you think about this from your vantage point?
Speaker: This is one of the most important discussion topics is actually both data centers and clean energy. And I say that because, you know, when I first got on the Velvy City Council, we were talking about Energize Eastside energy.
Speaker: yeah creating that pipeline, right? And at that time, we did not see the huge spike in energy demand and data center usage that we do today.
Speaker: Today, what we see, and I would actually ask you this too, right? out How many people are picking up their phone and doing a search that's using a i and data center, almost many, many people. So we know the demands there.
Speaker: And I would say that what I've also come to learn is that data centers have been around actually for many years. Yeah, a very long time. Without a lot of fanfare, right? If you of talk to Representative Ivara, he will tell you that in the town of Quincy, they've had a data center there for many years that has helped them with ah revenue that pays for a lot of things in his district.
Speaker: That's right. Yeah. they're They are data center OGs, I think, even nationally. Those were where a lot of the first ones went. Right. And I would say that that the technology of those data centers at that time has also advanced from from a technology standpoint of energy and water usage, I had an opportunity to tour Microsoft and Redmond and see their energy plant and how they were talking about being able to ah use geothermal to heat and cool their water and have that be a closed loop system.
Speaker: their goal of by 2030 being resource neutral with their ah with their data center and and for me then what I think about is It's not so much whether we want data centers or not.
Speaker: It is just like with any engineering issue. How do we think about that thoughtfully from the standpoint is what is the design of those? What are the siting of those?
Speaker: And how do we make sure that they are paying their fair share of their footprint and their usage?
Speaker: Like I was mentioning to you, I did not realize that um some years back we had provided a tax exemption for ah renewal or renovation of equipment and data centers.
Speaker: That though that revenue was in the, I think I'm trying to remember a hundred million a year ah revenue that we would get back by removing that tax exemption.
Speaker: So I think that nowadays we know that data centers, we don't need to offer any kind of incentive to have them. We need to make sure that we have the right regulatory guardrails so that it does not actually create burden on regular guidelines.
Speaker: residents for either their water bill or their energy bill. And, you know, interestingly enough, I had a chance to go to Denmark on an industrial symbiosis tour and really seeing how other countries have been able to ah locate complimentary kind of facilities so that they're able to leverage and use less water and energy so that we're maximizing our resources as much as we can.
Speaker: And I think that that is things that we can do in the United States, right? We have, I think, the the technology smarts to be able to do it right.
Speaker: And we need to be really thoughtful about it. So as you think about where to site data centers, um is that, in your opinion, something that the state ought to be regulating and and dictating where those go? Or is that should that be left up to the local communities? How how do you think about where to put these things?
Speaker: I think there's so many nuances to this that the state should be thinking more about how we get our clean energy system going and less about trying to regulate where data centers can and can't go.
Speaker: Okay. so So focus on the bigger picture revenue, clean energy, you know making sure that the impact, which I agree, doesn't hit the local communities, but less so on where they go.
Speaker: Yeah, and and in particular in our district, right? I think that we have all seen Puget Sound Energy talking about double digit increase in our electricity bills.
Speaker: I think that is that that clean energy generation, distribution, transmission, we need to lean into that because that is staring at us right now and such an important part of how we live our daily lives, that we rely on electricity.
Speaker: So it adds to our affordability challenge when we're seeing these large forecasted increase in our energy bills. So ah i want to switch gears again a little bit. um the talking Talking about housing in particular,
Speaker: um And there's a lot of discussion about the middle housing bill, um the supportive housing bill, ah House Bill 2266, which I believe you voted for.
Speaker: um And just for those listening, that's the one I believe that requires cities to allow supportive and transitional housing kind of anywhere. um and and sort of override the state overrides the local municipality zoning ah on that specifically with buffers and things.
Speaker: um There's a Mercer Island resident that Matt Augustine that has a petition out that I think has about 2000 signatures now um to to make some changes to that.
Speaker: um How do you, how do you think about, some of the the bigger picture, the state mandating housing requirements in an effort to fix affordability.
Speaker: um How do you think about that effort by the state and then, you know, the local municipalities, you know, you served on the Bellevue City Council, for example. And so you dealt with this a lot, I'm sure.
Speaker: how do you How do you think about that push and pull between, you know, a local municipality having some say in how things are developed and how the community develops versus the state trying to incentivize um certain certain behaviors and in this case, you know, more affordable housing?
Speaker: Yeah, well, I would say that, you know, the underlying foundation of the housing targets is in the Houseville 1220 from several years ago.
Speaker: And I remember this because I was on the Bellevue City Council at the time. So as we updated our comprehensive plan, then there were housing, well, actually both jobs and housing targets that were provided to each of the cities.
Speaker: that actually comes from the Puget Sound Regional Council, which is the four county ah organization where the allocation of where the jobs and housing, as well as all the way down to the affordability comes from Puget Sound Regional Council adoption of the numbers.
Speaker: So at the time, you know, and I'm speaking more from Bellevue because that was when I was on the city council, right? We were then provided that we were expecting 70,000 more jobs in 20 years and 35,000 more housing units.
Speaker: And then it was up to the city to decide where within the city, the zoning had to be updated in order to and and enable that type of housing to be able to be built. But I would say that that doesn't mean that the housing, one, will be built, that the funding is there to be built, or that the private sector will build it.
Speaker: So that's one element of that. And then i would say that the other piece of this is when we look at the affordability levels of the housing, that's when we get into the um where what the the price points are for those rentals that or the housing that's in our community.
Speaker: And house you were talking about really is grounded on the fact that um that housing is that we want to make sure that having a fair housing system means that all housing types should be permitted you under the same terms as if we have ah hotels or any other housing type that they should
Speaker: There shouldn't be an artificial barrier at the very beginning to ah allow all different kinds of housing And then there is a provision in there that talks about the fact that if there are funds being provided or land, that there are guardrails and provisions that are can be required.
Speaker: i think that for me, one of the challenges I've heard is things have been a certain way in our code for a long time. And there's a concern that as that is opened back up, are we going to have the right elements in place to make sure that we are able to have housing and that we continue to have ah safety in our community?
Speaker: So but a question that popped in my mind as you're kind of talking about this, um you know, you mentioned hotels. ah you know, not technically a form of housing, um at least long-term.
Speaker: But as I think about it, you know, i think most people would, you know, if you're living in a single family type neighborhood and say, well, and I don't really want a hotel ah built next door to me. And, you know, in a lot of cases, right, hotels have increased traffic and there's all sorts of, you know, planning that goes along with supporting a hotel in a given spot.
Speaker: And I think it's generally accepted that most neighborhoods wouldn't support such a thing. um you know Some of the housing types that are that are contemplated you know being able to go in single family neighborhoods or other places where that local municipality might say, well, geez, this doesn't make sense. And here's why. Because we know the roads, we know the infrastructure. right There's not the sewer and the water, whatever.
Speaker: But now, you know as and as I understand it, the state said, well, no, you really don't get to say you know this stuff can kind of go anywhere. um do you Do you think that's the right approach or is that you know with With the reflection of hindsight, are there going to are there going to be amendments or or trailer bills, as you referenced earlier, that need to maybe rebalance things a little bit back towards the local municipalities?
Speaker: How do you think about that? I think just like with any bill, we're always open to have conversation around ah whether there are some context or nuance that doesn't quite work yet that we need to consider.
Speaker: And let me clarify, when I said hotel, the Ville actually has that if you have ah a zone for lodging like hotels versus if you have zoning just for residential, that if you have any of that, that then housing is able to be there in those areas different than like an industrial zone. So that's what I meant by that. Okay. Gotcha.
Speaker: Okay. Yeah. And I would say that ultimately, right, we all want safety in our community. And so that is always going to be the most important element is how we make sure that in everything that we do, that we're creating the kind of safe neighborhoods that we all want to live in And I think that ah changing how these regulations are established doesn't take away the fact that the safety and security of the community
Speaker: is still grounded in that work. Well, listen, i we're we're coming up on an hour here and I want to be respectful of your time. ah I ah very much appreciate our discussion. I think we could have ah dug into a number of more things as a film engineer. I would have loved to do that on a couple of things. But for the sake of time, I just want to thank you for for joining the program here. um If people want more information about you and your campaign, where can they go to to find that?
Speaker: Yeah, so my website is info at janicezon.org and happy to engage. You know, we because of election year restrictions, ah aren't always able to do all the same all the things that we need to do with community. But once the election's over, then we can do more to engage with the community, with the staff, to have some town halls and do more to you know, help engage and educate and bring resources. So I look forward to that.
Speaker: Well, Represant, thank you very much for your time and for joining the podcast. Look forward to talking to you again soon. Thank you. Take care now.
