Latest / Industrial Advisors / Growth vs. Regulation: The Future of Industrial Real Estate

Transcript

Growth vs. Regulation: The Future of Industrial Real Estate · Industrial Advisors

• 0:00
  I feel like the perception from legislators of industrial is like an
• 0:04
  old factory with smoke bill in out.
• 0:05
  Right?
• 0:06
  Yeah.
• 0:06
  And that's not the modern logistics facility.
• 0:08
  Definitely not the modern manufacturing facility.
• 0:10
  Right?
• 0:10
  Yeah.
• 0:10
  With our requirements in the energy curve.
• 0:13
  I don't even know one that has smoke bill.
• 0:14
  Yeah.
• 0:14
  Right.
• 0:14
  Yeah.
• 0:15
  Um, and so I think, I think there is that perception that we're actively trying
• 0:18
  to change to the economic impact study, which we'll talk about, but how many
• 0:21
  times have we seen local municipalities.
• 0:25
  Pass a agenda perhaps, but you know, a dock door restriction.
• 0:29
  A moratorium, yes, yes, yes.
• 0:30
  Can't build over 200,000 feet or like, you know.
• 0:32
  Totally.
• 0:33
  And they're doing these in, in my opinion, without having requisite data of what
• 0:38
  they're losing in terms of public.
• 0:40
  Tax revenue.
• 0:41
  Right.
• 0:56
  Welcome to our Industrial Advisors podcast.
• 0:59
  Yep.
• 0:59
  Bill Condon and Matt McGregor.
• 1:01
  And we have two great guests with us here today in our
• 1:04
  office we have, uh, drew Zaki.
• 1:07
  Did I say that right?
• 1:07
  That's right.
• 1:08
  Close enough.
• 1:08
  Okay.
• 1:08
  Perfect.
• 1:09
  Principal at, uh, bear Creek Real Estate Development and on the Naop
• 1:14
  Washington Executive Committee member and Industrial Government Affairs lead.
• 1:18
  So Drew, thank you for joining us.
• 1:20
  Yeah, appreciate it.
• 1:21
  Yeah, thanks for having me.
• 1:22
  And, uh, we also have Carter Nelson, director of Government
• 1:25
  Affairs of Naop Washington.
• 1:27
  So Carter, thank you.
• 1:28
  For joining us as, as well.
• 1:30
  Yeah.
• 1:30
  Thanks for having me.
• 1:31
  Yeah.
• 1:31
  Appreciate it.
• 1:32
  Beautiful day here in, in Seattle.
• 1:33
  It's not raining.
• 1:35
  Um, well let's, let's, you guys could kick us off.
• 1:38
  Uh, maybe Drew give us a little background on your role at Bear Creek
• 1:42
  and then how you got involved with Naop and, and some of the industrial,
• 1:47
  uh, government affairs side of things.
• 1:49
  Yeah, absolutely.
• 1:50
  Started Bear Creek real estate partners about, uh, just shy two years ago and
• 1:54
  have been in industrial development in the Seattle area for, geez.
• 1:58
  Better part of 13 years now.
• 2:00
  Yeah.
• 2:00
  Goes fast.
• 2:01
  Yeah.
• 2:01
  Anyways, uh, bear Creek Real Estate, uh, private, just business partner and
• 2:05
  I, and, um, on the hunt for industrial development as it pertains to Naop.
• 2:09
  Um, I've been involved in Naop probably since I got in the industry in 2013.
• 2:13
  Um, and it's been a great opportunity to network, um, get involved, um, and
• 2:18
  get back to the community a little bit.
• 2:19
  Specifically, started in the South Sound Committee, um, and
• 2:22
  got to mingle with the likes of.
• 2:24
  Jeff Davis and Travis Hale and, uh, some of those guys who were there.
• 2:28
  Um, and as my role kind of evolved in the South Sound Committee.
• 2:31
  Was asked to join the board of directors.
• 2:33
  And then that led to my involvement in government affairs, which really
• 2:36
  has kind of become, I would call it a passion project and advocating
• 2:40
  for sound business policies that pertain to industrial real estate.
• 2:44
  And, uh, NAOP Government Affairs has had a great track record, and I just
• 2:48
  simply am trying to keep the train going and, uh, advocating specifically for
• 2:53
  industrial, um, as, uh, I think it's the most important for us, obviously.
• 2:57
  Yeah.
• 2:57
  Well, we certainly.
• 2:59
  Appreciate your efforts on that front, and um, it matters.
• 3:02
  Yeah, yeah, for sure.
• 3:05
  And maybe with that, uh, speaking of regulatory issues and stuff, Carter, maybe
• 3:09
  tell us what are the biggest headwinds in Washington related with our industry?
• 3:14
  All things regulatory legislation.
• 3:16
  What, what's going on and, and what can we do about it?
• 3:20
  Well, that is the million dollar question, no pun intended.
• 3:23
  I know the millionaire's tax got everybody's attention
• 3:26
  this last legislative session.
• 3:28
  I think, you know, just general tax policy and investment opportunity
• 3:32
  in Washington is really where.
• 3:34
  We're always focused, but when it comes to industrial, specifically,
• 3:38
  Drew's been on the front lines.
• 3:40
  We've been kind of dealing with this increasing anti industrial rhetoric
• 3:44
  at the state and local levels.
• 3:46
  And so through that kind of this push for environmental justice policy, which
• 3:50
  is pretty, I. Broad reaching and vaguely defined and really puts the burden of
• 3:56
  solving prior environmental damages to new developers who enter spaces where
• 4:02
  there might have been some, um, kind of overburdened communities and environmental
• 4:07
  factors, and so things like that where.
• 4:09
  We can be educating legislators on why broad, broadly applied and
• 4:14
  vague, um, environmental justice policies really damaging to the
• 4:18
  future of industrial development.
• 4:20
  And does that happen because whoever caused the, the damage is long gone.
• 4:27
  And so they're just gonna try to put that on the next guy.
• 4:30
  Oftentimes, I think that's really the, the thought process there is that
• 4:34
  if you want to enter this space, you now need to fix the sins of the past.
• 4:40
  And instead of really having a, a broader conversation, uh, and a
• 4:43
  collaborative conversation about how we can really approach environmental
• 4:47
  concerns, because environmental justice is important, we're not against that.
• 4:51
  I think it really comes down to, you know.
• 4:54
  Whose responsibility is it to address those sins of the past?
• 4:58
  Yes.
• 4:58
  And how we can work together to not push industry out, not push development
• 5:02
  out, because that brings opportunities, that brings jobs and economic growth.
• 5:06
  And so that's really been our message throughout those battles.
• 5:09
  Yeah.
• 5:10
  And if you'll, you, you feel good environmental justice, I mean, a
• 5:12
  lot of the crux of the issue is.
• 5:14
  Warehouses being built close to communities.
• 5:16
  Right?
• 5:16
  And we know that oftentimes we don't get to choose where
• 5:19
  these warehouses are built.
• 5:20
  There is a finite amount of industrial land.
• 5:22
  It's important to our economy, which we'll talk about, but yet
• 5:25
  we're getting pushback for this.
• 5:26
  So it's in, in my head, it's a very much a. Comprehensive plan issue.
• 5:30
  But to Carter's point, the burden is being pushed to new development.
• 5:34
  And I think, as Carter mentioned, we're not against environmental justice,
• 5:37
  but we need to find a predictable mitigation measure to solve for that.
• 5:42
  And some of the legislation that we've seen is very vague, overarching,
• 5:46
  and our fear is that these local municipalities aren't capable of handling.
• 5:51
  Or not, I don't wanna say capable, but don't want to get into that fight.
• 5:54
  Right.
• 5:55
  It's a very political fight and they're gonna kick what would be a CIPA
• 5:58
  process into an environmental impact statement or a standard development.
• 6:02
  Right?
• 6:02
  Yeah.
• 6:02
  We know environmental impact statement.
• 6:04
  You have to do alternatives analysis.
• 6:06
  I mean, that's a years long process where CIPA is a month long process.
• 6:09
  Mm-hmm.
• 6:09
  So you can imagine if every industrial project that triggered
• 6:11
  SEPA could potentially go through an environmental impact statement,
• 6:15
  what would that do to our.
• 6:16
  Development supply.
• 6:17
  Right, right.
• 6:18
  And so, hugely impactful, something that we're advocating for, educating
• 6:22
  for, um, and frankly are at the table trying to have meaningful discussions
• 6:25
  with legislators is, is the general like feeling from the legislators and
• 6:30
  stuff that industrial is not great, they just don't wanna support it?
• 6:33
  Or what's the general feeling?
• 6:35
  I mean, I can't speak to all legislators, but I know one thing
• 6:38
  we hear locally and across the state is that these are low wage jobs.
• 6:42
  That, that, um, you know, just across the board distribution.
• 6:44
  Yeah.
• 6:44
  And you know, it's, some of it is anti Amazon, not sure not being a fan of
• 6:48
  that, but I think one of the, the biggest points that we learned, you know, in
• 6:52
  our study, in our work here is that these are not low wage jobs, right?
• 6:55
  These are family wage jobs, and these are opportunities for folks that might not
• 6:58
  have a four year college degree, which is.
• 7:00
  Really important and something that is key to our workforce development
• 7:04
  and opportunities, especially in overburdened communities.
• 7:07
  That's right, for sure.
• 7:08
  I mean, I think that unless you are in this space like we are day in and day out
• 7:12
  on the industrial side, you really don't understand how many jobs do get created
• 7:18
  through industrial development, through industrial warehouses, manufacturing,
• 7:22
  and what a great thing that is for the overall economy, even if it is lower.
• 7:27
  You know, wage jobs, I mean, people are still getting employed.
• 7:30
  Yep.
• 7:30
  And, and that is a good thing for the overall, overall economy or
• 7:32
  how much the average consumer uses something that came through the port.
• 7:36
  Right?
• 7:36
  That's right.
• 7:36
  Very good.
• 7:37
  We often forget about that.
• 7:37
  Yeah.
• 7:38
  And I can't tell, I mean, we, one thing we love about our job is you walk
• 7:40
  in all these different manufacturing distribution facilities and you just
• 7:44
  see all the different stuff going on.
• 7:47
  And quite often with our clients, you'll walk in and they'll have.
• 7:50
  You know, we'll have done their deals for the last 20 some years, and you
• 7:53
  get to know a lot of the employees and they'll have banners, you know, 20,
• 7:57
  30, 40 years of, you know, the, the employees that have been working there.
• 8:00
  So certainly they are good jobs, right?
• 8:03
  If they've, yeah.
• 8:03
  Been there that long.
• 8:04
  We were in an, uh, one of our longtime clients.
• 8:07
  Yeah.
• 8:07
  Belmont Cabinets.
• 8:08
  Mont Cabinets, yesterday in Incre.
• 8:10
  Incredible company that started in Kent.
• 8:12
  Expanded down into Sumner employs hundreds of hundreds of people.
• 8:16
  To Matt's point though, you know, manufacturing, right?
• 8:18
  I mean, brings in a ton of jobs and the pride of people that
• 8:22
  work there is off the charts.
• 8:24
  Awesome.
• 8:25
  Yes.
• 8:25
  And so I think there's that component of the, that side of industrial like
• 8:28
  that, that is also like untold off oftentimes of Rainier industries.
• 8:32
  Yeah.
• 8:32
  Yeah.
• 8:32
  You know, they're on the, the top 25 oldest companies in Washington.
• 8:36
  Yeah, it's fantastic.
• 8:37
  To your question, Matt, the per, I feel like the perception from.
• 8:41
  Legislators of industrial is like an old factory with smoke bill now, right?
• 8:44
  Yeah.
• 8:45
  And that's not the modern logistics facility or the modern
• 8:48
  manufacturing facility, right?
• 8:49
  Yeah.
• 8:49
  With our requirements in the energy curve.
• 8:52
  I don't even know one that has smoke bill.
• 8:53
  Yeah.
• 8:53
  Right.
• 8:53
  Yeah.
• 8:54
  Um, and so I think, I think there is that perception that we're actively
• 8:57
  trying to change to the economic impact study, which we'll talk about.
• 9:00
  But how many times have we seen local municipalities.
• 9:03
  Pass a agenda perhaps, but you know, a dock door restriction.
• 9:08
  A moratorium, yes, yes.
• 9:09
  Can't build over 200,000 feet or like, you know.
• 9:11
  Totally.
• 9:12
  And they're doing these in, in my opinion, without having requisite
• 9:16
  data of what they're losing in terms of public tax revenue.
• 9:20
  Right.
• 9:20
  Which our industrial developments bring in our economic impact
• 9:23
  study does a good job showing.
• 9:24
  And so again, that's just our goal is before you pass this moratorium.
• 9:28
  Are you sure you know what you're leaving on the table?
• 9:31
  Right.
• 9:31
  'cause that's a very important Yeah.
• 9:33
  For them to understand.
• 9:34
  Yeah.
• 9:34
  By the way, who does have a door tax?
• 9:36
  There's a restriction.
• 9:37
  Uh oh.
• 9:38
  Restriction.
• 9:38
  But not, 'cause I've heard the float of door tax for years,
• 9:41
  but I've, I don't, I can't think of a municipality that has one.
• 9:44
  Yeah, there's, there's restrictions.
• 9:46
  Try not to name certain restrictions, but there is, call 'em out.
• 9:49
  Call out.
• 9:51
  There are restrictions.
• 9:52
  There is mor terms that have been passed.
• 9:53
  There's ones that are actively evaluating a mort or have a moratorium in place.
• 9:57
  They're evaluating the merits of it.
• 9:58
  Yes, for sure.
• 10:00
  And yeah, I'm aware a few of those.
• 10:01
  Yeah.
• 10:01
  And as we know policies from, you know, whether it's.
• 10:05
  You know, San Francisco up I five, it's the same thing locally, right?
• 10:08
  If one, someone passes a moratorium on a, you know, yeah.
• 10:11
  In Thurston or Lewis County, what is, uh, you know, municipality and
• 10:14
  Snohomish County, they're gonna try to go do the same thing, right?
• 10:17
  Yeah.
• 10:17
  And so we have to educate that it's maybe not in their best interest.
• 10:20
  Yes.
• 10:21
  You know, the other, you mentioned education.
• 10:23
  The other educational piece I think that is important is if you look at commercial
• 10:27
  real estate just holistically, right?
• 10:30
  And you have office and you have industrial, and you have
• 10:32
  multifamily and you have retail.
• 10:34
  Well, the industrial portion of commercial real estate became kind of the golden
• 10:38
  child of investment, of activity, of everything about five to seven years ago.
• 10:43
  Oh, maybe longer.
• 10:44
  Maybe longer, 10 years ago, whatever it is, right?
• 10:47
  But it used to be kind of an afterthought of like, oh, it's just
• 10:49
  steady, Eddie Industrial, whatever now.
• 10:51
  Then it became like, this is where we wanna put our capital.
• 10:54
  And so embracing that yes concept, if you know that is, is a good thing to,
• 10:59
  to do to support the continued growth of industrial, because it is no longer.
• 11:03
  The afterthought of commercial real estate, it is the golden
• 11:06
  child of commercial real estate.
• 11:07
  Yeah.
• 11:07
  And you look at a, a lot of these funds have allocations to different
• 11:10
  asset types and industrial is still a key component of that.
• 11:12
  Yeah.
• 11:13
  But are we effectively shooting ourselves in the foot in the local market and
• 11:16
  not getting that capital that's ready to deploy for industrial and they're
• 11:20
  gonna go to other markets that are, you know, waving with open arms
• 11:23
  saying, come to our market for sure.
• 11:24
  We're going out the red carpet and we're sitting here battling.
• 11:26
  Simple regulations.
• 11:28
  Right.
• 11:28
  And so we just launched a, a, a big asset, um, the other day and
• 11:33
  one of the first people that called said, man, if it was just over the
• 11:37
  border into Idaho with all this new legislation, you know, being proposed in
• 11:42
  Washington, we're not gonna buy there.
• 11:44
  And that was the first one we'd heard.
• 11:45
  Yeah.
• 11:45
  Yeah.
• 11:45
  So that's real.
• 11:46
  Yeah.
• 11:47
  Yeah.
• 11:47
  It is having an impact.
• 11:48
  Yeah.
• 11:49
  Um, so we've talked environmental, we've talked about some of the, the challenges.
• 11:53
  What other.
• 11:54
  Other than environmental, I mean obviously power, energy, what other issues
• 11:59
  are we faced with on the industrial.
• 12:02
  You know, kind of development side that, that you're running into.
• 12:04
  Absolutely.
• 12:05
  We talked about the legislative issues, right?
• 12:06
  That's statewide policies that we're battling environmental justice taxes.
• 12:10
  Uh, we talked about some of the local regulations, uh, doctoral
• 12:13
  restrictions, moratoriums, you name it.
• 12:15
  We have the energy code, which, uh, the 21 energy code went into effect in 24.
• 12:20
  And it's a pretty significant impact into what we're underwriting in our budgets.
• 12:24
  Right.
• 12:25
  And I think the net net of it is, it's a, it's a prescriptive energy code.
• 12:28
  You can pick and choose different points to get to a total of the requisite
• 12:32
  points to achieve energy code, but by my calculations, it's about a $5 a building
• 12:36
  square foot increase for new development.
• 12:38
  Now you have just solely based on energy.
• 12:40
  So we're based on energy code.
• 12:41
  Right.
• 12:41
  And that's EV auto.
• 12:43
  Parking, mandatory ev auto parking.
• 12:45
  That is mandatory renewable energy.
• 12:47
  So there's solar panels on your roofs, uh, that is dock, seal,
• 12:50
  or air barrier testing, which is solved by a few different ways.
• 12:53
  That's increased.
• 12:54
  MEP efficient, MEP systems, you can't use gas anymore,
• 12:58
  you gotta use electric, right?
• 13:00
  So the sum of that you put into your budget.
• 13:02
  Then you have your contractors markup.
• 13:04
  Then you have your state sales tax, then you have your
• 13:06
  contingency on top of that, right?
• 13:08
  In case something goes wrong, you have to solve for, and then a
• 13:10
  development fee on top of that, right?
• 13:11
  And you add that all up.
• 13:12
  We're we're hitting $5 a square foot just on energy code impacts.
• 13:16
  And again, I'm not sure that that was fully.
• 13:19
  Contemplated.
• 13:20
  I know Naop was not, you know, approached on, Hey, what's the budget impact
• 13:24
  of this energy code for industrial?
• 13:25
  Which would've been great.
• 13:26
  And so we're trying to work backwards, educate to make sure that
• 13:29
  we don't get another energy code.
• 13:30
  Right.
• 13:30
  That's gonna be even more punitive.
• 13:32
  Yeah.
• 13:32
  Yeah.
• 13:33
  And that's five bucks a foot over the building.
• 13:34
  Over the building.
• 13:34
  Over the building.
• 13:35
  Yeah.
• 13:35
  Yeah.
• 13:36
  Maybe you can answer this, maybe you can't.
• 13:37
  But the, the, the panel thing has always been in Washington, you,
• 13:41
  you're just never gonna pay that off because of the weather, right?
• 13:44
  The solar, yeah, the solar panel.
• 13:46
  So is that.
• 13:47
  Uh, more political, let's do these panels.
• 13:50
  Or is it real?
• 13:51
  Like if you actually do 'em.
• 13:52
  'cause I would think people would be voluntarily doing them and you just
• 13:55
  drive down to the valley and I can't even think of a building that has them.
• 13:58
  I would agree with that and I, I don't know the payoff of that, but
• 14:01
  to your point, we often budget the bare minimum to achieve energy code.
• 14:05
  Right?
• 14:05
  So if it was.
• 14:07
  A huge people would do it for sure.
• 14:09
  Why not?
• 14:10
  The whole roof would be solar.
• 14:11
  Right?
• 14:11
  Of course.
• 14:11
  More we are doing just the bare minimum.
• 14:13
  We do achieve code and it's just at a time when we're battling
• 14:15
  so many massive headwinds.
• 14:17
  Economics, you know?
• 14:18
  Yeah.
• 14:18
  Port volumes, interest rates, you name it.
• 14:20
  And now new developments have another, you know, call it a $5 a square
• 14:24
  foot, you know, energy code premium.
• 14:26
  And some buildings are vested where they don't have that.
• 14:29
  You know, you can buy a vacant building right now for a lot
• 14:32
  less than you could build for.
• 14:33
  Yeah.
• 14:33
  And part of that reason is the energy code.
• 14:35
  Right?
• 14:35
  Yeah, that's a good point.
• 14:36
  Yeah.
• 14:36
  Well, and it's created this whole other issue, which is grid capacity and
• 14:40
  utilities ability to service buildings.
• 14:43
  I mean, we're hearing an increasing number of industrial developers that are
• 14:48
  being told no from PSE when they come and they're like, we need this amount of.
• 14:52
  Power, they're not able to service them.
• 14:54
  And so we have a real issue crisis that's happening now, which is access to energy.
• 15:00
  And we've, we've d we've gone a really long ways as the, you know,
• 15:03
  in Washington state in terms of climate policy, but we haven't really
• 15:07
  solved the need for renewable power.
• 15:09
  Right.
• 15:09
  Yeah.
• 15:10
  And, and do you, are companies running into that issue when they can prove
• 15:14
  the need for the end user with the power, or is it upfront when they're
• 15:18
  saying, we need 4,000 amps of power?
• 15:21
  Uh, because we're gonna have a future user that's gonna need it.
• 15:23
  But there are, are when developers are actually able to show that the end
• 15:27
  user needs the power, are they still running into issues with PN Energy?
• 15:31
  Oftentimes, and you see a lot of the times, Hey, this project,
• 15:34
  you know, this lands for sale.
• 15:35
  Oh, it's saddled.
• 15:36
  You gotta build a substation, right?
• 15:37
  And so the developments are getting saddled with infrastructure upgrades.
• 15:40
  We worked on a project, it was a small $12 million project and there was
• 15:45
  three face power right down the street.
• 15:46
  We should have connected.
• 15:48
  Power Company wanted us to.
• 15:49
  Uh, build a redundant line from a substation over a mile away to the tune
• 15:54
  of $1.6 million in a 12 to 18 month timeline on a $12 million project.
• 15:58
  That doesn't, it killed the deal.
• 15:59
  Yeah, it doesn't work.
• 15:59
  Yeah.
• 16:00
  So we're, it's just a, it's an interesting battle, right?
• 16:02
  And it's, 'cause it's a spec market, so you can't show your tenant demands, but
• 16:06
  you're building demands are actively increasing because of the energy code.
• 16:09
  Ev auto parking not allowed to use gas for antifreeze heaters.
• 16:13
  So you're building, you know, requirements for power are increasing.
• 16:16
  Your tenant wants more when they come.
• 16:17
  Power companies are trying to, you know, give you the bare
• 16:20
  minimum will serve letter.
• 16:21
  Um, so it's, it's a pretty interesting dynamic, but something
• 16:24
  that needs to be solved for.
• 16:25
  Yeah.
• 16:26
  Are there any, there, there's a lot of challenges, you know,
• 16:29
  with different municipalities.
• 16:31
  Are there any cities that, that you, that you think are better to work with
• 16:35
  within the region when it comes to industrial development or do things
• 16:38
  better than some of the other ones?
• 16:40
  Great question.
• 16:41
  Um.
• 16:42
  I have enjoyed, and a lot of people have varying opinions on this, and
• 16:45
  there's been some change, but we've had a lot of meetings with Pierce
• 16:48
  County, you know, that's f Frederickson.
• 16:49
  Um, and I've, I recently just went through a SEPA process there
• 16:52
  and they were great to work with and half the half the battle is.
• 16:57
  Can you just call someone and, and get ahold of Well, someone pick
• 17:00
  up the phone on the other side.
• 17:01
  Yeah.
• 17:02
  And we had a great planner down there and a great staff.
• 17:04
  Uh, we work with some of their, uh, long range planning on some of
• 17:08
  their zoning code changes and so it's a great proactive relationship.
• 17:11
  I wish, I really appreciate.
• 17:12
  Right.
• 17:13
  It we may not agree on the end, you know, zoning.
• 17:15
  Whatever change, but at least we're having a proactive conversation.
• 17:18
  And so there's others, um, and there's some that are more difficult, but,
• 17:22
  you know, I would give a, a tip of the captive Pierce County, if you will.
• 17:25
  Absolutely.
• 17:25
  You know, that, that that has been kinda the answer for the last, when
• 17:29
  Sumner first started getting built out, you know, that was in early on
• 17:33
  in our career, so like 2000 5, 6, 7.
• 17:36
  They were really good.
• 17:38
  Yeah.
• 17:38
  You know, and, um, well, I think it's always the, the areas that
• 17:42
  are chasing the new business.
• 17:43
  Yeah.
• 17:43
  Right, right.
• 17:43
  And then once they get saturated, Hey, let's throw a b and o tax.
• 17:46
  Yeah.
• 17:46
  Let's throw a door tag.
• 17:49
  But also some nerd f Frederickson have been our best.
• 17:52
  Mar absorption markets.
• 17:54
  Sumner was in Incre.
• 17:54
  All the developers love them for Yeah, I don't hear it now 'cause
• 17:57
  there's not a ton of development.
• 17:59
  Yeah.
• 17:59
  You know, a couple projects, I mean, who doesn't love Sumner?
• 18:02
  Exactly, exactly.
• 18:03
  But you could imagine what F Frederickson look like if, if Pierce County
• 18:06
  wasn't as accommodating for sure.
• 18:08
  Right?
• 18:08
  Yeah.
• 18:08
  You can get, you know, executive priority for certain projects.
• 18:11
  They did a great job accommodating that growth in a meaningful manner,
• 18:15
  and we're seeing other jurisdictions want to shy away from that.
• 18:18
  And you look at what the net tax rev public tax revenue's gonna be for Pierce
• 18:21
  County and they'll be better for it.
• 18:22
  Yeah, for sure.
• 18:23
  Jobs, and you name it.
• 18:24
  Yeah.
• 18:25
  Let's talk about the, the, the study and, and why Naop supported the
• 18:30
  industrial economic impact study.
• 18:33
  Uh, what was the basis for, you know, and why, why did you
• 18:36
  guys get behind it so much?
• 18:37
  As we kind of have touched on, there's a gap of understanding for
• 18:40
  people who are creating policy at the state level and locally, and we
• 18:44
  really saw that need, the increasing.
• 18:47
  Anti industrial rhetoric and we needed to have data that we could
• 18:50
  point to, to say, you know, to kind of combat some of those claims.
• 18:54
  The low wage jobs is a, is definitely one, and, and highlight the amazing tax
• 18:59
  revenue and other contributions that industrial development has for our state.
• 19:03
  And so we, you know, we.
• 19:05
  Decided that it was worth the money to really focus in on that and have a
• 19:09
  really great study to point to when we're sitting down with legislators and trying
• 19:13
  to come at it from a different angle and educate people on what their, what the
• 19:17
  impacts of those policies could have on their communities and on our state's,
• 19:21
  GDP and, and to overall tax revenue.
• 19:24
  Yeah, absolutely.
• 19:25
  I think we, we felt, NAOP felt like we needed empirical data to show why
• 19:30
  industrial is good for the Pacific Northwest, because we're hearing.
• 19:33
  So often that it's not.
• 19:34
  Yeah.
• 19:34
  And oftentimes unfounded.
• 19:35
  It's not.
• 19:36
  You know, you go to a neighborhood meeting, they're against industrial, they
• 19:38
  don't want it in their community, but someone's gotta show them net benefits
• 19:42
  and that's what this report does.
• 19:43
  So we're pretty excited about it.
• 19:44
  Is that report available for anybody to see?
• 19:48
  Yes.
• 19:48
  Yep.
• 19:49
  How to, if someone wants to find that report, where is it?
• 19:51
  So it's on our website, nap.org.
• 19:53
  Nap wa.org.
• 19:55
  We can.
• 19:56
  Fix that.
• 19:56
  It's under our research and it's also the start of what I think is going to be
• 20:01
  just a continuous effort on our part to really be highlighting the contributions
• 20:05
  of all aspects of our industry, not just industrial, but I think this is
• 20:09
  the first study I've seen of, of this.
• 20:11
  Kind.
• 20:12
  And we've been meeting with stakeholders that are in the industrial space.
• 20:15
  Ports is a great example.
• 20:17
  And they, they love this kind of data because they can point to
• 20:19
  this as we're, again, all facing rising number of policy ideas that
• 20:24
  impact industry and supply chain.
• 20:26
  And in Washington, and we'll put a link to it, uh, in the footnotes of this podcast.
• 20:31
  But, um, for the listener, how can they get involved?
• 20:34
  How the, how, how can they support?
• 20:36
  Well, I think first and foremost, being able to share information
• 20:39
  like this is really important.
• 20:40
  We're doing a social media and just general media push.
• 20:43
  You might see this referenced in op-eds in your communities.
• 20:47
  Um, you'll also see it on social media, but I think more generally.
• 20:52
  Our mission is to make sure that Washington is a place that people wanna
• 20:55
  invest, and that's for industrial, commercial, multifamily, all asset types.
• 20:59
  But you know, this is, this study is just one example of when we have
• 21:03
  enough members that say this is a problem, or we see policies that are
• 21:06
  really going to affect our industry.
• 21:08
  We jump into action, we, we put our money where our mouth is and, and that's what
• 21:12
  this study is and we're gonna continue to, to have more efforts like that.
• 21:16
  So I hope folks would consider getting engaged or at least following along with
• 21:20
  what Naop, Washington State is doing.
• 21:21
  There aren't a whole lot of groups.
• 21:23
  We have great coalitions, but we're really kind of the main lead when it
• 21:26
  comes to specifically representing industrial development in Washington.
• 21:31
  Yeah, I think it's important to get involved, obviously,
• 21:33
  and advocate for sound.
• 21:34
  Business policies, right?
• 21:35
  If you're local, that can be joining naapp, joining government affairs.
• 21:39
  That could be.
• 21:40
  Um, and thanks to our funders who are allowed us to procure this economic
• 21:44
  impact study, 'cause it's not a inexpensive study, but it's well worth it.
• 21:48
  But thanks to our funders, so you can donate, you know, dollars towards naapp
• 21:51
  government affairs, which we can then use.
• 21:53
  Um, so there's a number of ways to get involved, but I think, you know,
• 21:55
  whether it's your time or your money, um, we'd love to have you and, and
• 21:58
  could use the support for sure.
• 22:00
  Yeah, I think it's really good for people to know about this because you guys do.
• 22:04
  Yeah.
• 22:05
  Awesome work and it really matters.
• 22:07
  And so we appreciate everything that you guys are doing.
• 22:10
  Certainly being really involved on the industrial side of commercial real
• 22:13
  estate and, uh, and just overall for, for the, the state overall, it's just a
• 22:18
  good thing to have industrial product.
• 22:21
  Yes.
• 22:21
  Jobs, everything that we just talked about, and so getting that out there
• 22:25
  to people that just, you wouldn't know if you're not in the space.
• 22:28
  So I think you guys are doing great work.
• 22:30
  Yeah.
• 22:31
  Thank you.
• 22:31
  Thank you.
• 22:32
  Credit to this awesome study really comes to Eco Northwest and
• 22:35
  Morgan Shook led the effort there.
• 22:37
  We've also gotten really great support from Hubble Communications, which is
• 22:41
  a firm that really focuses on land use and they've been kind of fundamental in
• 22:45
  some of the data center and industrial lands fights in Oregon, which again,
• 22:49
  we're seeing similar to Washington.
• 22:51
  And then really just big thank you to our GA funders.
• 22:54
  We couldn't do this work without the support of.
• 22:57
  Lots of different companies who are invested in Naop and make sure
• 23:01
  that we can continue to do this work and stand up for our industry.
• 23:05
  Awesome.
• 23:05
  Well, thank you both for, um, joining us today.
• 23:09
  Very insightful, um, educational and, uh, appreciate all that you guys are
• 23:14
  doing and, and let's keep doing it.
• 23:15
  Yeah.
• 23:16
  Yeah.
• 23:16
  Thanks so much.
• 23:17
  Yeah, thanks.
• 23:17
  Thank you.
• 23:18
  Thanks.