Displacement Coalition Bulletin #25 - Call or E-Mail Your Councilmembers Today!
(please circulate)
City Council poised to give away tax breaks to developers, passing on to you another $20-$30 million in added property taxes while homeowners and Seattle tenants will face higher rents!
- Call your councilmembers today and oppose the proposed “multi-family tax abatement” giveaway!

Full Council Vote Next Monday – March 15th! With your calls and e-mails, we can still turn 'em around on this one. If we don't, it means millions passed on to you in higher taxes (and higher rents for those of you who are tenants)! We really need you to call 'em on this one ASAP!
 

CITY COUNCIL HAS NO IDEA WHAT AFFORDABLE RENTS ARE IN SEATTLE– They’re set to give these tax breaks to developers who ‘set-aside’ 20-30 percent of their units at rents between $850 and $1100 per month – Councilmembers seem to think that’s “affordable”. IF YOU ARE A RENTER, CALL OR E-MAIL THEM AND TELL THEM WHAT YOU PAY IN RENT (see below for details).

The program was designed to help low income people. Now it will simply provide huge subsidies to big developers who are building in many neighborhoods anyway while actually hurting many low income tenants! First adopted in 1998, locally, the multi-family tax abatement program was intended to to stimulate affordable housing in a few low income communities. Now, however, pushed by big developers in South Lake Union, Northgate, U-District, and Capitol Hill, the Mayor and several Councilmembers want to extend the program from 9 to 17 areas including many affluent neighborhoods. In doing so, the Mayor and Council would simply be giving away huge tax subsidies to developers who are building anyway in most of these areas – neighborhoods where housing growth targets are easily being achieved.

The Mayor and Council’s current proposal (up for a vote in full Council Monday March 15th) would give tax breaks to developers who agree to set aside 20-30 percent of their new units at prices between $850-$1100 a month with the other 70-80 percent of units allowed to rise to whatever stratospheric level the market will bear. Only the upper tier of Seattle renters can afford even the set-aside units in these benefiting apartment buildings. Census data shows that 60% of all of Seattle tenants (approximately 75,000-80,000 households) need units priced at or below $850 a month with most in the $550-$700 range. Some councilmembers say the program’s higher priced set aside requirements are OK because they will ensure that developers include some “affordable” units in their projects that otherwise would not get developed. Obviously, the Mayor and most Councilmembers have no idea what constitutes is truly affordable to a tenant in living in real world Seattle.

Over a ten year period the total subsidy may amount to 20-30 million dollars. Under our current tax system it also means that this amount must be made up by the rest of us taxpayers. These added costs will be passed on to us and translate directly into higher property taxes. Low income and senior citizen homeowners will pay more. It also means that existing low income apartment owners charging reasonable rents will face higher taxes as one landlord stated in testimony before the council, “we’ll be forced to charge higher rents”. So the average tenant, not just low income tenants, actually will be hurt by this proposal.

Specifically when you call or write councilmembers - urge them to vote ‘NO’ on the Mayor and Council’s Multi-Family Tax Abatement Proposal. In addition: Specifically urge them to limit use of this program to only a few low income communities not now experiencing growth such as Southeast and/or SW Seattle and the Central District and not for South Lake Union or other affluent areas that don’t need this stimulus at all. Also urge them to require any developer receiving these tax breaks to set aside at least 30% of their units for truly low income people – those with incomes below 50% of the Cities area median and below market rents for those neighborhoods. For example, instead of giving tax breaks to a developer setting aside a few units at $850 a month, require the set asides to be priced at or below $600-$700 a month or below what you can afford.

If you are a renter, when you call or e-mail, also be sure and tell them how much you pay in rent and how much less that is than the price of “set-aside” units under this program. The “set-asides” are units the landlord is required to provide in exchange for the reduced taxes. The “set-aside” for a studio is $885/month, for a one bedroom $949/month, for a 2 bedroom $1,139 and for a 3 bedroom $1,316. (I’ve included the correct set-aside rent in the sample scripts below) These are not affordable rents and are above market in most neighborhoods; so what are the developers actually giving the community who participate in this program? At most they're giving us a bunch of "expensive" and "very expensive" units.

If you are a renter or homeowner, for more details on what you could say when you call to oppose the program, see below

Please call or e-mail if you can...it will really make a difference for you and our city. Councilmembers addresses:
mailto:Tom.Rasmussen@seattle.gov             684-8808
mailto:Richard.McIver@seattle.gov              684-8800
mailto:Peter.Steinbrueck@seattle.gov           684-8804
mailto:Jean.Godden@seattle.gov                  684-8807
mailto:Nick.Licata@seattle.gov                    684-8803
mailto:Richard.Conlin@seattle.gov               684-8805
mailto:Jan.Drago@seattle.gov                      684-8801
mailto:David.Della@seattle.gov                    684-8806
mailto:Jim.Compton@seattle.gov                 684-8802

If you rent a studio apartment:
“About 50% of Seattle renters make about 50% median income (about $27,250 for a household of 1). I pay $ X a month to rent my studio apartment. This program would cause me to subsidize, through my rent, the development of an $885 studio apartment. Why should I subsidize the development of an apartment that will cost almost $ X more a month than mine? Limit this program to low income communities like Southeast and/or SW Seattle and the Central District. Don’t include South Lake Union or other affluent areas that don’t need this stimulus. Set aside at least 30% of the units for people like me–with incomes below 50% of the median income and below market rents. Instead of giving tax breaks to a developer setting aside a few studio units at $885 a month, which I can’t even afford, require the set asides to be priced at $600 a month (housing unit affordable to 50 % median income).”

If you rent a one bedroom apartment:
“About 50% of Seattle renters make about 50% median income (about $31,150 for a household of 2). I pay $ X a month to rent my one bedroom apartment. This program would cause me to subsidize, through my rent, the development of a $949 one-bedroom apartment. Why should I subsidize the development of an apartment that will cost $ X more a month than mine? Limit this program to low income communities like Southeast and/or SW Seattle and the Central District. Don’t include South Lake Union or other affluent areas that don’t need this stimulus. Set aside at least 30% of the units for people like me–with incomes below 50% of the median income and below market rents. Instead of giving tax breaks to a developer setting aside one bedroom units at $949 a month, which I can’t even afford, require the set asides to be priced at $700 a month (housing unit affordable to 50 % median income).”

If you rent a 2 bedroom apartment/house:
“About 50% of Seattle renters make about 50% median income (about $35,000 for a household of 3). I pay $ X a month to rent my two bedroom apartment. This program would cause me to subsidize, through my rent, the development of a $1,139 2 bedroom apartment. Why should I subsidize the development of an apartment that will cost almost $ X more a month than mine? Limit this program to low income communities like Southeast and/or SW Seattle and the Central District. Don’t include South Lake Union or other affluent areas that don’t need this stimulus. Set aside at least 30% of the units for people like me–with incomes below 50% of the median income and below market rents. Instead of giving tax breaks to a developer setting aside two bedroom units at $1,139 a month, which I can’t even afford, require the set asides to be priced at $850 a month (housing unit affordable to 50 % median income).”

If you rent a 3 bedroom apartment/house:
“About 50% of Seattle renters make about 50% median income (about $40,000 for a household of 4). I pay $ X a month to rent my 3 bedroom apartment. This program would cause me to subsidize, through my rent, the development of a $1,316 three-bedroom apartment. Why should I subsidize the development of an apartment that will cost more than $ X more a month than mine? Limit this program to low income communities like Southeast and/or SW Seattle and the Central District. Don’t include South Lake Union or other affluent areas that don’t need this stimulus. Set aside at least 30% of the units for people like me–with incomes below 50% of the median income and below market rents. Instead of giving tax breaks to a developer setting aside three bedroom units at $1,316 a month, which I can’t even afford, require the set asides to be priced at $1000 a month (housing unit affordable to 50 % median income).”

If you are a homeowner:
Tell them how much your property taxes have gone up recently and how it is affecting you. Tell them that you cannot fathom why you should be forced to pay higher taxes, just so a few developers who offer rentals at $850 - $1100 and up can walk away with $20-30 million in tax breaks.

See link for info on income and affordable rent:
http://www.seattle.gov/housing/

In sum & how councilmembers voted in committee:
The Mayor has sold this program to most Councilmembers as an “affordable” housing program, but obviously it is not. This measure goes before the full Council for a vote next Monday March 15th so call our e-mail your councilmembers today. It passed out the Council’s Housing Committee last week on a 3-2 vote in favor of the proposal. Councilmembers Nick Licata and Richard McIver shared our concerns and opposed it in Committee. Tom Rasmussen, David Della, and Jan Drago voted in favor of it.

But again, there is still time to act so please call or e-mail ‘em ASAP or find yourself footing a bigger tax bill just so Paul Allen can get a few more tax breaks in South Lake Union. For more information, contact 632-0668
 

return to main page        return to top