Seattleites Will Vote on Competing Measures to Fund Social Housing

...by Josh Cohen / CascadePBS.org

On a crisp, sunny morning in January, two dozen volunteers spread out across north Capitol Hill with a message: "Tax wealthy businesses to fund social housing."

The volunteers were knocking on doors trying to drum up support for Proposition 1A and against Proposition 1B, two competing social housing funding measures being put to Seattle voters on Feb. 11.  

Prop 1A, the measure pushed by social housing advocates, would levy a 5% “excess compensation” tax on employer payroll expenses for each Seattle-based employee paid over $1 million in annual compensation. In other words, an employer would pay a 5% tax on any dollar over $1 million in total employee compensation. Total compensation includes base salary, stock and bonuses.  

Prop 1B is an alternative backed by the Seattle Metropolitan Chamber of Commerce that was placed on the ballot by the City Council. Instead of creating a new tax, it draws from the existing Jumpstart payroll tax. It also caps the income limits for social housing residents at a lower level than outlined in the voter-approved charter that created the Seattle Social Housing Developer.  

Conor Krystad, an affable, enthusiastic 25-year-old campaign volunteer, was sent east of 15th Avenue where there’s a mix of old apartment buildings, single family homes, multi-million-dollar mansions and former mansions that have been converted into duplexes and co-ops. 

Conor Krystad, 25, advocates for social housing with House Our Neighbors in Seattle. (Charissa Soriano for Cascade PBS) 

 

Volunteers were given a list of likely supporters — Krystad did not, for example, knock on Amazon CEO Andy Jassy’s door, which was on his route — so the reception ranged from a polite “no thanks” to “I’ll read up on this” to “you’ve got my vote.”  

Krystad grew up in Seattle and recently returned after moving away for college. He has uncles who live in Seattle public housing and he is drawn to the idea of mixed-income, publicly owned affordable housing that social housing advocates are pushing.  

“Housing is a human right and social housing provides for that by making it cheaper,” said Krystad. “Having the rent adjust as your income changes, and having it be tenant-run, would provide a lot of improvements over current public housing. Public housing is good. Social housing is better." 

What is social housing and what’s on the ballot?

Joy Randall, dressed as “Housey,” the Prop 1A campaign mascot, talks with volunteers in favor of the ballot proposition before a door-knocking outreach effort on Capitol Hill on January 19, 2025. (Charissa Soriano for Cascade PBS) 

 

Social housing is a form of mixed-income affordable housing that’s owned by a public entity in perpetuity and will charge residents no more than 30% of their income for monthly rent (the standard definition for an “affordable” housing cost).  

The Seattle Social Housing Developer (SSHD) was created by ballot initiative in February 2023, which voters approved 57% to 43%. SSHD is a public development authority tasked with acquiring and developing housing projects. At the time, the campaign behind the social housing measure said they might come back to voters with a second measure to create a new funding source.  

While social housing could provide some housing for those at the lowest end of the income spectrum, it will primarily house people making between 50% to 120% of Seattle's area median income (AMI), or $52,700 to $126,480, respectively, for an individual.  

The higher rents paid by higher-income tenants are meant to help subsidize the lower rents paid by lower-income residents and pay for ongoing maintenance and operations.  

By contrast, nonprofit affordable housing providers in Seattle such as Bellwether Housing and Community Roots Housing primarily build subsidized housing for people earning 30% to 60% AMI, with some housing for slightly higher and lower income brackets. Seattle Housing Authority and King County Housing Authority, the region’s traditional public housing entities, almost exclusively house people earning 0-30% AMI.  

Social housing advocates in Seattle argue that with the city’s ever-rising cost of living, middle-income earners such as teachers, librarians and service workers are also getting priced out of the city by the private housing market. 

Proponents also tout the fact that building decisions would be made, in part, by tenant governing boards and that new social housing would be built to environmentally friendly passive house standards.  

The model is famously successful in Vienna where more than 60% of the population lives in a form of social housing and residents enjoy long-term stability not often experienced by American renters.  

Social housing is catching on outside of socialist Austrian enclaves too. In Montgomery County, Maryland, the government housing agency operates projects that combine market rate units with income-restricted affordable housing. Atlanta and Massachusetts are using similar models. King County is developing its workforce housing initiative that would use bonds to pay for mixed-income public housing developments.  

Now, two years after the approval of Seattle’s social housing charter, advocates are returning to voters to ask for capital funding that will pay for acquisition of existing buildings to be converted into social housing, construction of new buildings, and staffing the fledgling SSHD.  

As with the campaign to create SSHD, advocates collected signatures to get Prop 1A on the ballot. Some city councilmembers objected to the scale of the tax measure and the allowance of 100% to 120% AMI residents and voted in September to send Prop 1B to the ballot to compete with Prop 1A.  

Voters will have a two-step process on February’s ballot. First, they will decide if either social housing measure should be enacted into law. If they vote yes, they will then choose between Prop 1A and Prop 1B.  

Prop 1A

Ryan Driscoll, an organizer with 350 Seattle, welcomes new volunteers in favor of Prop 1A before a door-knocking campaign on Capitol Hill on Jan. 19, 2025. (Charissa Soriano for Cascade PBS) 

 

If passed, the excess compensation tax created by Prop 1A would generate about $50 million a year for the social housing developer, which would help construct about 2,000 units of housing over 10 years. 

“Voters have already made resoundingly clear that they want more tools to address the housing affordability crisis,” said Tiffani McCoy, pointing to the 14 percentage-point victory in 2023 that created SSHD. McCoy is co-executive director of House Our Neighbors, the social housing advocacy organization behind Prop 1A and the 2023 measure. House Our Neighbors is a separate entity from SSHD, a governmental body that cannot advocate on electoral issues.  

McCoy argued that Seattle renters are fed up with the instability of the private rental market where there’s no limit on how much rents can increase each year and middle-income residents are frequently priced out of their homes and the city.   

“At the end of the day, you either think that the status quo is working in housing, that our current investments are enough, and we should just do more of the same,” said McCoy. “Or you fundamentally believe that we need a new housing model that has a different financing mechanism that creates self-sustaining buildings once they're up and running.” 

Prop 1A has garnered endorsements from a broad swath of labor unions, grassroots advocacy groups, Democratic organizations and politicians including State Reps. Nicole Macri, D-Seattle, Darya Farivar, D-Seattle, State Sen. Rebecca Saldaña and former State Rep. Frank Chopp.  

The Let’s Build Social Housing PAC working in support of Prop 1A has raised more than $476,000 since the start of 2024. According to data from the Washington Public Disclosure Commission, about 65% of donations to the PAC came from individuals. Some nonprofits and foundations have also supported the campaign, including the Inatai Foundation which gave $125,000 in January. Unions including UFCW 3000 and Protec 17 also donated.  

While neutral on social housing broadly, Seattle’s Chamber of Commerce is opposed to Prop 1A and has spearheaded the campaign against it and in favor of Prop 1B.  

Chamber President Rachel Smith argued that SSHD is unprepared to take on $50 million per year in tax revenue with its one staff member, 13-person volunteer board of directors, and limited public information on their business plans.   

SSHD had a bumpy start — something House Our Neighbors blames on the fact that the city was slow to deliver $850,000 in start-up funds required by the 2023 ballot initiative. The board initially struggled to meet requirements of Washington’s Open Public Meetings Act or comply with public records requests.  

In September, Roberto Jiménez joined SSHD as its first CEO. He brings nearly 20 years of experience leading nonprofit affordable housing developers. He was previously CEO at Mutual Housing California, which owns and operates 1,148 homes and has a $10 million annual budget. Prior to that, Jiménez ran the Farmworkers Housing Development Corp. in Oregon’s Willamette Valley.

Jiménez pointed to the expertise on SSHD’s board of directors as well including Julie Howe, a real estate broker and developer who teaches at University of Washington’s real estate school and Mike Eliason, an architect who specializes in passive house design.  

If 1A passes, Jiménez said SSHD would focus on purchasing existing apartment buildings to convert into social housing to start and has a goal of getting a project under contract within a year.  

Prop 1B

Placed on the ballot by the City Council last September, Prop 1B would direct $10 million a year from Jumpstart to SSHD for the next five years and limit the funding for residents earning up to 80% AMI instead of 120%. Jumpstart is Seattle’s existing payroll tax on large businesses that was created by the council in 2020.  

In addition, Prop 1B would require SSHD to hire a chief financial officer and demonstrate “adequate financial controls” as determined by the Seattle Office of Housing to access funding.  

The Chamber of Commerce’s Smith said that 1B provides a reasonable amount of money that the developer can “actually get out the door” and that it provides the “support and accountability of the Office of Housing.”  

Along with the Chamber, the campaigns for 1B and against 1A have drawn significant financial backing from area businesses such as Microsoft, T-Mobile, the Kraken ownership group and several real estate industry representatives who contributed more than $111,000 and pledged another $235,000 to the People for Responsible Social Housing PAC.  

Mayor Bruce Harrell endorsed Prop 1B, appearing on a campaign mailer in support of the measure.  

House our Neighbors’ McCoy argued that 1B will exacerbate Seattle’s affordable housing crisis since it draws more money away from Jumpstart, which was originally earmarked for affordable housing along with climate and community development projects.  

Since its implementation in 2020, the Council has always relied on some portion of Jumpstart revenues to backfill the city budget since the tax has, so far, always raised more money than projected. But this year, facing a more than $250 million budget deficit, the Council and mayor redirected more than $300 million in Jumpstart money to shore up the deficit and pay for new spending priorities.  

Smith countered that the city tripled the size of its housing levy, which the Chamber backed and voters approved in 2023 and the Office of Housing is working with a historically large $342 million housing fund this year, which will be used for affordable housing construction, maintenance and other existing housing programs.   

Jiménez said that capping incomes at 80% AMI would result in the failure of SSHD’s social housing model, since it relies in part on the tenants who earn 100% of AMI if not 120% to balance its budget.  

The case against both 1A and 1B

While House Our Neighbors and the Chamber have fought over 1A and 1B, another group has lobbied against both measures and instead wants voters to choose No on the first part of the ballot.  

Alice Woldt, Roger Valdez and George Howland Jr. wrote the statement of opposition in the King County voter guide. Woldt is former director of the Faith Action Network. Valdez is director of the Center for Housing Economics and a proponent of vastly expanding the supply of market rate housing to bring down prices. Howland Jr. is a longtime Seattle journalist.  

The trio argues that investing public resources in middle-income housing is a mistake and that public money should instead be invested in existing nonprofits to build more housing for the lowest income residents to address the homelessness crisis.  

Ballots for the February special election must be returned by 8 p.m. on Feb. 11.  

Visit cascadepbs.org/donate to support nonprofit, freely distributed, local journalism.

CascadePBS.org