Mayor, Seattle Times, Go to War With Affordable Housing

To Save The Uber Rich a Few Bucks

Shame

Mayor Harrell, whose housing plans seems to be “Sorry Kamala Harris, but Seattle is going back,” joined the Chamber of Commerce and Seattle Times Editorial Board in opposing a measure that would fund workforce housing in Seattle. 

Instead, their plan aims to pit affordable housing advocates against one another and make them fight for the already limited funds, all so they can avoid taxing the richest people just a bit more. 

I-137: Housing For Nurses & Firefighters

Remember that last year, we passed an initiative to create a publicly owned developer tasked with creating workforce housing for middle income workers - nurses, firefighters, and teachers, as well as more working class families in Seattle. We have an upcoming ballot measure (I-137) to fund this with a nickel-on-the-dollar payroll tax on incomes over a million bucks (don’t worry, your first million each year is free!).

This modest tax on the rich is why the Chamber opposes workforce housing. Despite the fact that taxes in Seattle are among the roughest on the poor and the easiest on the rich in the entire country–the Chamber opposes every effort to move us to an even slightly moderate position. Whenever we do, they pretend that if our taxes were a bit fairer–like, I don’t know, Texas–businesses will all flee. 

What I find most disheartening is that Harrell and the Editorial Board’s move is clearly intended to turn affordable housing advocates against one another and make them fight over the scraps.

Alexandria Occasio-Cortez discusses this all-too-common approach:

Et Tu, Bruce?

I have to be honest, I am genuinely disappointed to see Harrell embrace this ugly tactic just to genuflect to the Chamber’s demands. 

All so people making much more than a million dollars a year don’t have to pay a teensy tiny bit more in taxes, mind you. 

A Man, A Plan

The status quo funds deeply affordable housing from our relatively modest housing levy. I-137 would pay for the workforce housing separately. 

But Harrell and the Times instead want no new funding for affordable housing, and to make the new developer fight it out with existing providers for the already limited pool of money available from the housing levy. And presumably, this Fall, they will be shrinking that pool a bunch more when they cut $260M from the discretionary part of our city budget, some of which also goes to affordable housing developers.  

The way I read it, their political bet is that this will turn traditional affordable housing advocates against the workforce housing folks, so those housing developers will push everyone to vote “no” on any new plan. 

But I think this is a political miscalculation and they risk serious backlash.

If anything, this should solidify support among traditional affordable housing developers for I-137.

Most of these organizations understand that Seattle voters are very likely to vote “yes” to something here–and that means if they don’t all stand together and support a yes vote on I-137, they may end up having to live in a world where they compete for the shrinking pie of the housing levy. So if anything, this will mobilize them in support of I-137.

Seattle voters know better than to be bamboozled by this plan.

(Which is why the conservative city council has fought to make sure as few Seattle voters have a chance to vote on it as possible!).

Please make sure your friends and neighbors know.