Post navigation

Prev: (02/21/23) | Next: (02/21/23)

What’s next now that Seattle’s Social Housing Developer initiative has passed

The Liberty Bank Building’s financing recipe combining debt, tax credit equity and critical funding from the Office of Housing and the state’s Housing Trust Fund could be the kind of creative combinations Seattle’s new Social Housing Developer will need to employ (Image: Community Roots Housing)

With Initiative 135 to create a Seattle Social Housing Developer winning handily with voters, backers are now turning their attention to pushing the effort forward with the Seattle City Council and Mayor Bruce Harrell including making sure the $750,000 in administrative and staffing startup costs gets accounted for quickly.

“We’ve seen (Mayor Harrell) talk about budgeting for this next Fall, but that is not what the initiative dictates,” the House Our Neighbors group said. “We will fight for the funding for the staff positions in the supplemental budget.”

Other costs like office space that will be allocated for the process are also part of the $750,000 plan dictated by the initiative.

Next steps will also include 60 days for the city to form of a board to guide the process:

From the day the election results are certified by King County Elections, as per Charter Article VII, Section 2, the entities charged with board appointments will have 60 days to make said appointments to the board. The following entities will be responsible for appointing board members with specific qualifications, including the demonstrated commitment to the vision of social housing.

The initiative also spells out the board’s intended composition:

  • Seattle Renters’ Commission: 7 renters

    • 3 at 0-50% AMI

    • 2 at 50-80% AMI

    • 2 at 80-100% AMI

  • MLK Labor: 1 rank-and-file union member

  • El Centro de la Raza: 1 representative from an organization that provides housing to historically marginalized communities

  • Green New Deal Oversight Board: 1 green development professional

  • Seattle City Council (2) / Mayor (1)

    • 1 non-profit development professional

    • 1 public housing finance professional

    • 1 urban planning professional

“Once appointed, the board will meet at a minimum once a month, and create committees for hiring, finances, and other oversight tasks of the developer,” the initiative’s directives read.

The board’s first job will be to appoint a chief executive officer and chief financial officer.

Those hires — and the board — will then have to sort out the biggest challenge for the new organization: how to o acquire and take over management of existing properties for affordable housing while also setting the groundwork for philanthropy and grants to create new renter-governed housing in the city.

The wheels are turning for how those elements will be funded including possible state or federal funding, public bonds, or a new effort involving an initiative and property tax.

“Our initiative follows the path of the Pike Place Market and the monorail. This is a multi-step process. We are setting up the structure and the vision to get this public developer started, then we will begin raising money,” House Our Neighbors says. “We are pursuing several options, but money that is available today will not necessarily be the extent of what’s available tomorrow. Once the public developer is established, they can receive and request funds from city, state, federal governments, as well as private donations if those donors feel so inclined.”

But first, Seattle needs to be put the team in place to figure that puzzle out.

 

$5 A MONTH TO HELP KEEP CHS PAYWALL-FREE THIS SPRING
🌈🐣🌼🌷🌱🌳🌾🍀🍃🦔🐇🐝🐑🌞🌻 

Subscribe to CHS to help us hire writers and photographers to cover the neighborhood. CHS is a pay what you can community news site with no required sign-in or paywall. To stay that way, we need you.

Become a subscriber to help us cover the neighborhood for $5 a month -- or choose your level of support 👍 

 
Subscribe and support CHS Contributors -- $1/$5/$10 per month

18 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Jonathan
Jonathan
2 years ago

What an absolute joke. 750k right off the bat to employ a bunch of activists. And I’m not really sure the monorail is an example they want to be using for the future of this “project”, although maybe it’s ironic gallows humor.

CKathes
CKathes
2 years ago
Reply to  Jonathan

Social housing is an experiment. It might or might not live up to its stated goals but if we’re ever going to solve our affordable housing crisis we have to be willing to try new ideas. (And of course the staff members will be “activists.” When did employing activists become a bad thing?)

Derek
Derek
2 years ago
Reply to  Jonathan

What’s your beef with activists? What’s up with all the republican commenters on here?

Allan
Allan
2 years ago

This initiative needs a permanent funding source so that they do not constantly have to beg for money. Martin Luther King said that a budget is a ‘moral document’. If you want to see where a city’s priorities are, look at its budget.

Some things that don’t benefit Seattleites at all have a permanent funding source. Example: The Seattle Convention Center has a permanent funding source in the B&O tax among other things, so they get to spend big on an ugly skybridge over Pike, or an entire new building every 15 or so years. I never voted for a new convention center, I don’t believe any Seattleites did. We were never asked. This initiative is the city of Seattle’s chance to do something really right: Propose a permanent funding source for this effort, and let the people of Seattle vote for it!

Seattle is becoming like Telluride, Colorado – a playground for the rich, where anybody who works in a support role (teachers, cops, repair people etc. etc.) has to commute from far away. We don’t want that kind of city, and the ‘market’ has failed to provide an alternative.

Hillery
Hillery
2 years ago

I’d like to see more action and less smoke and mirrors.

Whichever
Whichever
2 years ago

More tax money to be sent to a group that’ll certainly misallocate it.

Derek
Derek
2 years ago
Reply to  Whichever

*Dogwhistle comment detected*

Guesty
Guesty
2 years ago

“What’s next?” – taxes, lots of taxes. Renters will wonder, once again, “why is my rent being raised?”

Sigh
Sigh
2 years ago

Time will show that this is not a good idea.

zach
zach
2 years ago

I voted against this measure because of the uncertainty of obtaining needed funds. And now, already, the backers are having to go begging to the City Council for money in the supplemental budget….not a good sign for problems to come. I hope I’m wrong.

Matt
Matt
2 years ago
Reply to  zach

It’s not begging, it’s demanding startup costs that we’re written into the proposal…

CH Resident
CH Resident
2 years ago
Reply to  zach

That guy who was always at the Capitol Hill Sunday market schilling for this totally lied through his teeth about it already being funded.

lar
lar
2 years ago

I feel it passed because it was the only item on the ballot. People who were strongly in favor sent in back. Most people took a look at the single item ballot, was unsure of the issue or their feelings about it, and put it aside. If it was on an election year ballot it would have failed.

Matt
Matt
2 years ago
Reply to  lar

That’s a really roundabout way of saying their wasn’t a solid campaign with an alternative argument. A large portion of the city, including many of it’s low and middle income residents, think the status quo is not okay, yet that is all that those who stood against this offered 🤷🏻‍♂️

Glenn
Glenn
2 years ago
Reply to  lar

I feel like it passed because it promised lots for nothing. Anyone paying attention knows lots will require lots, and it’s only a question of where it comes from.

chres
chres
2 years ago
Reply to  lar

Sounds like the other side should have offered a better alternative to help the homeless crisis then rather than just “more sweeps”.

Let's talk
Let's talk
2 years ago

“The wheels are turning for how those elements will be funded including possible state or federal funding, public bonds, or a new effort involving an initiative and property tax. ” There it is what most feared the usual property tax hike. There are already people losing their homes due to increased property taxes and using it will turn into a perpetual cycle. As property taxes increase more people will lose their homes and look to social housing for solutions which will increase the need thus continue to increase the property tax and on and on. We’ll be where we are today, higher paid workers will be the only ones able to afford to buy or rent. They need to take property taxes off the table.

Exactly
Exactly
2 years ago
Reply to  Let's talk

As property taxes increase more people will lose their homes and look to social housing for solutions which will increase the need thus continue to increase the property tax and on and on.

You are correct, and the socialist mindsets behind this initiative view this as a feature, not a bug.