In Seattle Another Big Spending Tax Measure On The Ballot

This fall in Seattle, a $970 million housing levy measure will be on the ballot for voters to consider. It will pass, likely with a comfortable majority. There is no organized opposition to the levy. As with many west coast housing measures, voters are hungry for an end to the problems they associate with a “housing crisis,” specifically rising prices and encampments in public areas. Yet none of the measures passed over the years have done anything to solve either of those problems. Measure HHH in Los Angeles, for example, prompted an unusual headline for a critique by Ezra Klein: “The Way Los Angeles Is Trying to Solve Homelessness Is ‘Absolutely Insane.’” In a post about that measure, I pointed to one project funded from the $1.2 billion measure that had a total development cost of $752,492 per unit. In California, projects like this one often funded with Low Income Housing Tax Credits (LIHTC) are ringing in at $1,000,000 a unit.

I am probably the only and certainly the harshest critic of these bloated price tags for rental housing, so it isn’t a surprise that I was the only person that election officials could find that would be willing to write the “con” statement for the levy. Tax measures are as close to mom and apple pie as Seattle has these days. It is almost seen as a patriotic duty to line up and vote for taxes the way people offer blood donations when there is a disaster. Could this burn my last bridge among the locals? Maybe. But someone has to tell the truth or at least introduce some skepticism into the mix. What follows are the “con and pro” statements each followed a rebuttal that will appear in the official voter’s guide in the upcoming election. Bottom line, Seattle and every city facing housing issues doesn’t need more money, they need more housing.

Seattle – con

Has the money we’ve spent solved the housing problem? As of 2022, the City collected $171.1 million in Mandatory Housing Affordability fees, $25 million from taxes on Uber
UBER
and Lyft
LYFT
rides, and $248.1 million from the “Jump Start” tax. There is at least $75 million in King County’s 2023-2024 housing budget, and another $693.7 million from the state. That’s over $1 billion.

Now, the City wants $970 million “to serve more than 9,000 low-income individuals and families,” according to the Mayor. Grab a calculator. Divide $970 million by 9,000; it’s $107,777.78 per person, or $1,283.07 per month, for seven years. A two-bedroom in Seattle rents for $2,795.

Apartments built with the levy could rent for $1,850. If the City gave $970 million to 9,000 households over the 7 years to help with rent, the average two-bedroom apartment would be $1,512, $338 less than a levy unit and have $0 maintenance costs.

You should vote “No,” not because the levy is a tax (it’s a small amount per household) but because of the reckless way it will be spent. Where did all that other money go? We should give households cash for housing expenses, not a spot on a waiting list.

Seattle – con rebuttal

Over the life of every affordable home created by the Seattle housing levy, dozens of families are helped into stable, quality housing. Partnering with other funds, housing built by this proposal will serve tens of thousands of Seattle neighbors. This package, like past successful levies, funds more than brick and mortar– including emergency rent stabilization, assistance for low-income seniors to age in place, emergency housing, and other programs that strengthen communities. Please vote yes!

Seattle – pro

Since 1986 the Housing Levy has been Seattle’s most effective tool to improve housing access, stability, and equity. Renewing the levy will help meet today’s urgent transitional and affordable housing needs and plan for the future. With your vote, this measure will:Produce and preserve 3,500 new affordable homes and reinvest in existing affordable housing;

Stabilize 4,500 individuals and families at risk of eviction and homelessness through rent assistance and case management; Help 1,150 formerly homeless individuals and people with acute needs enter and remain in stable, supportive homes; Create 360 affordable homeownership opportunities targeted to marginalized communities.

Levy renewal also provides wage support, career training, and professional development for workers in supportive and emergency housing– expanding services to help people out of homelessness, substance use, and behavioral health crises.

Past levies have exceeded targets through sound fiscal management and independent review. Let’s build on this success. Endorsed by Mayor Harrell and City Council, Housing Development Consortium, United Way of KC, Plymouth Housing, Bellwether Housing, Habitat For Humanity, Mary’s Place, Chief Seattle Club, YWCA, Seattle/King County Coalition on Homelessness, Youth Care, Seattle Metropolitan Chamber of Commerce, Downtown Seattle Association, MLK Labor, SEIU Healthcare 1199NW, and more!

Seattle – con rebuttal

To paraphrase George Bernard Shaw, “Some people see a housing crisis, and say, “We need more money;” I say, “We need more housing!” The Gardner House project touted by the levy oversight committee cost $46 million for 95 units, $484,210 per unit. Average sales price for a 1,200 square foot house in Seattle is about $600,000. Is this “sound fiscal management?” The levy fuels exorbitant spending; better, efficient use of money would mean more housing.