Seattle City Council Caves to Big Developers with Phony Ballot Initiative
Seattle DSA Housing Justice Working Group statement written by Tom Barnard
On September 19th, the Seattle City Council finally unveiled its alternative to I-137 after refusing to act earlier to put it on the November ballot. Clearly trying to subvert the voter approved newly created Seattle Social Housing Developer (SSHD), the council created an alternative which results in significantly less funding, contains methods to keep the developer from accessing that funding, and creates a bureaucratic process designed to erect operational roadblocks.
The council’s alternative cuts funding for new housing from approximately $50 million/yr to a maximum of $10 million/yr, and then sunset in five years. This would sharply curtail the number of units that could be purchased or built, setting the SSHD up to fail.
Worse yet, instead of creating a new excess compensation tax aimed at the richest companies in the City, it would raid existing funds from the JumpStart payroll expense tax, most of which is currently earmarked for other affordable housing projects limited to people making less than 80% of the area median income (AMI). This not only deprives other essential social services of funds, but also forces the SSHD to compete for those funds with other affordable housing nonprofits. During public comment, spokespeople from the Low Income Housing Institute and Plymouth Housing urged the council to vote “no” on the alternative.
In fact, the Council’s option would not create social housing at all, as incomes for the housing units would be capped at 80% AMI. As specified in I-135, Social housing is a mixed-income housing model in which wealthier tenants, at 120% AMI, subsidize the rents of those making less, with rents permanently capped at 30% of residents’ income.
Council members engaged in various attempts at rhetorical subterfuge by describing the alternative as “proof of concept” for social housing, which in fact it is not. Sponsor Maritza Rivera claimed their alternative, “balances the need for innovation with the need for accountability” without giving “a blank check to yet another new agency that does not have the experience creating housing.” And after doing everything they could to keep it from the November ballot, Councilmember Rob Saka claimed that having two competing measures on the ballot was “simply good governance … centering choice [and] optionality.”
The fact is that the Seattle City Council and its real estate backers who fueled their rise to power are attempting to keep in place a housing system which does work for the vast majority of Seattle renters.
Tenants face ever increasing rental rates that beggar them, from developments owned by Wall Street dark money investors whose only interest is a maximum return on investment. Seattle DSA’s Housing Justice Working Group believes that housing is a human right and we stand in solidarity with House our Neighbors and coalition partners in opposition to the Council’s alternative.
Seattle voters will not be fooled. The idea of social housing is on an upswing, from the recent King County workforce housing initiative, to ongoing discussions at the state level, to Alexandria Ocasio Cortez's brand new legislation that will establish and fund federal social housing.
SDSA’s successful effort to get the signatures necessary to place I-137 on the ballot will need to follow up later this year with a vigorous effort to turn out the vote for the February ballot. To get involved in the fight to fund social housing join us at our next working group meeting on October 6th at 7pm.