Seattle
By Krist Novoselić (January 25, 2025)
Seattle voters are considering the idea of social housing again on the February ballot. This time, the questions are; do you support the idea of social housing funding, and how should it be funded?
🔘Prop 1A — proposes a new tax — on top of JumpStart tax — on employers with payroll over $1 million a year, to finance Social Housing construction.
☑️Prop 1B — proposes using funds from the JumpStart to finance Social Housing construction.
👉VOTE FOR 1B!✅
Seattle implemented the JumpStart tax in 2020. An employer with more than $8.8 million in annual payroll; and at least one employee with an annual compensation of $190,000, must pay this tax.
The idea behind JumpStart is to mitigate the impact of Seattle’s economic boom through a redistribution of wealth. Here is a report from the city about where JumpStart is spent.
The intention of this tax on big business is to allow the city to fund programs for affordable housing, renters assistance and even a Green New Deal environmental program. JumpStart seeks to help those negatively affected by Seattle’s growth, however, it turned out to be the gift that keeps on giving.
Last year, the city dealt with a budget deficit by using $141 million from JumpStart funds. Progressives complained this violated the spirit of the tax — and called for more progressive revenue to instead fund the budget.
Progressives accused the council of “raiding” Jumpstart. Essentially, Prop 1A is that new progressive revenue — yet another tax on the big employers.
Money goes where it is treated best. Stacking taxes on businesses, no matter how big they are, will cause those affected to relocate.
If Olympia also implements new progressive revenue, businesses and individuals will move to other states — who will welcome them, and the economic stimulus they create.
Who will fund JumpStart if the big, bad corporations move away? Progressives, with their zeal for imposing taxes, threaten to kill the proverbial goose if social housing with Prop 1A is passed.
Social Housing Prop 1A funds a quasi-governmental entity: the Seattle Social Housing Developer (SSHD). According to its proponents, this recently created, unelected government will receive around $520 million in tax revenue over the next 10 years.
SSHD governance, according to its Charter, consists of thirteen members:
➢Seven are appointed by the Seattle Renters Commission
➢One is appointed by the Martin Luther King, Jr. County Labor Council
➢One appointed by El Centro De La Raza
➢One appointed by the Green New Deal Oversight Board
➢One appointed by the mayor
➢Two are appointed by the Seattle City Council
There is a lot to unpack with the makeup of the Board. For brevity, I will make a couple of points.
The seven appointees from Seattle Renters Commission are baked in as the majority. Only a puny three board members — out of thirteen — answer directly to Seattle’s duly-elected government.
According to the SSHD Charter, after a building is constructed and inhabited, the renters commission appointees no longer hold power. The new majority of the SSHD board are instead elected by the tenants of the social housing.
The SSHD Charter refers to the tenants as a constituency, and the rules articulate the rights and roles of this body of renters. Once construction is complete, new tenants / constituents pay rent at levels according to their incomes. This is supposed to keep the social housing building unit humming along.
The Seattle Social Housing Developer is just that — a developer. The constituency elects a board, who act as a construction company. This developer uses public funds to finance more construction to build its own constituency.
The SSHD Charter resembles a cooperative model — which is a form of private business. However, the SSHD is kind-of private. This governmental / CoOp entity holds autonomy, and should mind and guard its own affairs. Nevertheless, if financial distress ever falls upon the project, social housing is then everybody’s problem and you can bet on the undertaking running to government / taxpayers for help.
Like the shining city on the hill, if social housing lives up to the grand promises, it could be a model for social democracy in places willing to accomodate this ethic. On the other hand, like the tragedy of the commons, the project could look like those used and abused electric scooters we see laying around Seattle.
Yes on Prop. 1B provides $10 million a year from JumpStart for five years — great funding for an unelected body which has had trouble organizing.
Vote for Prop. 1B, this way, if social housing turns out to be a boondoggle, there will be less damage.
CASCADE PARTY of WASHINGTON
PO Box 28004
Seattle, WA 98118