AN ORDINANCE relating to low-income housing; requesting that a special election be held concurrent with the November 2009 general election for submission to the qualified electors of the City of a proposition to lift the limit on regular property taxes under Chapter 84.55 RCW in order to authorize the City to levy additional taxes for low-income housing for up to seven (7) years; providing for interim financing pending tax receipts; creating a levy oversight committee; providing for implementation of programs with funds derived from the taxes authorized; and ratifying and confirming certain prior acts.
WHEREAS, the $86,000,000 housing levy authorized in Ordinance 120823 and approved by the voters in 2002 (the "2002 Levy") expires with the collection of 2009 property taxes; and
WHEREAS, the 2002 levy had a production goal of 1,718 rental units, and as of December 2008 the City has approved 2002 Levy funding for the production or preservation of 1,814 rental units, as well as assisted 211 first-time homebuyers and 4,146 renter households at risk of homelessness; and
WHEREAS, the $59,211,000 housing levy authorized in Ordinance 117711 and approved by the voters in 1995 had a production goal of 1,360 units, and over 2,632 units were actually produced or preserved by leveraging other funds; and
WHEREAS, the $49,975,000 housing levy authorized in Ordinance 112904 and approved by the voters in 1986 had a production goal of 1,000 units, and over 1,800 units were actually produced or preserved by leveraging other funds; and
WHEREAS, the $48,178,000 low-income elderly and handicapped housing bond issue authorized in Ordinance 110124 and approved by the voters in 1981 had a production goal of 1,000 units, and 1,198 units were actually produced or preserved; and
WHEREAS, substantial need remains for additional low-income housing and assistance to help low-income persons access housing they can afford, as documented in the Housing Appendix to the Comprehensive Plan and the City’s 2009-2012 Consolidated Plan; and
WHEREAS, Chapter 84.55 RCW generally limits the dollar amount of regular property taxes that a city may levy in any year, but RCW 84.55.050 allows a city to levy taxes exceeding such limit by majority approval of the voters, and allows a city to include in the ballot proposition a limit on the purpose for which the additional taxes levied will be used and to provide for the expiration of the additional taxing authority; and
WHEREAS, RCW 35.21.685 authorizes a city to assist in the development or preservation of publicly or privately owned housing for persons of low income by providing loans or grants of general municipal funds to the owners or developers of the housing, including loans or grants to finance the acquisition, construction or rehabilitation of low-income housing;
NOW THEREFORE,
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY OF SEATTLE AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Findings. The City Council makes the following findings and declares as follows:
A. The City of Seattle has insufficient safe, sanitary, and decent housing affordable to low-income households to meet the present and anticipated needs of such households, as documented in the Housing Appendix to the Comprehensive Plan and the City's 2009-2012 Consolidated Plan.
B. Affordable rental housing for low-income households, including the homeless, other persons with special needs, families and seniors, often requires a commitment of City funds for development or preservation, or other forms of assistance.
C. Promoting home ownership through loans to low-income first-time homebuyers, coupled with homeownership counseling, helps create financial stability for families and mixed income neighborhoods.
D. Providing funding for acquisition or preservation of buildings or property for low-income housing is critical to take advantage of current housing market conditions.
E. Providing funding to help develop, preserve and finance housing affordable to low-income renters and homebuyers helps create jobs and generate significant income received by construction workers and local business owners.
F. The additional taxes to be levied under this ordinance will enable the City to provide for the housing needs of low-income households and thereby to fulfill the purposes of federal, State, County and City laws and policies, including without limitation the federal HOME Investment Partnerships Act, the State Growth Management Act ("GMA"), the Countywide Policies adopted under GMA, and the City's Comprehensive Plan.
Section 2. Definitions. The following terms used in this ordinance shall have the definitions stated below unless the context otherwise clearly requires:
"Low-income housing" means housing that will serve "low-income households."
"Household" means a single person, family or unrelated persons living together.
"Low-income household" means a household with income less than or equal to eighty percent (80%) of median income.
“Median income” means annual median family income for the statistical area or division thereof including Seattle for which median family income is published from time to time by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, or successor agency, with adjustments according to household size in a manner determined by the Director of Housing, provided that if an Administrative and Financial Plan adopted under Section 6 of this ordinance shall adopt a substitute definition of “median income,” the substitute definition shall apply.
To the extent permitted by applicable State law, income determinations may take into account such exclusions, adjustments and rules of computation as may be prescribed or used under federal housing laws, regulations or policies for purposes of establishing income limits, or as may be established in City planning documents consistent with federal laws, regulations or policies.
Section 3. Proposition to Authorize Levy of Additional Regular Property Taxes.
The City submits to the qualified electors of the City a proposition as authorized by RCW 84.55.050(1), to exceed the levy limitation on regular property taxes contained in RCW Chapter 84.55 for property taxes levied in 2009 through 2015 for collection in 2010 through 2016, respectively, raising up to $145,000,000 in aggregate over a period of up to seven years. The proposition shall be limited so that the City shall not levy more than $20,714,286 in additional taxes each year. All the levy proceeds shall be used for the purposes specified in Section 5.A. of this ordinance. The taxes authorized by this proposition will be in addition to the maximum amount of regular property taxes the City would have been limited to by RCW 84.55.010 in the absence of voter approval under this ordinance, plus other authorized lid lifts. If the voters approve the proposition submitted by this ordinance, the maximum total dollar rate for City of Seattle regular property taxes for collection in 2010 shall be a total maximum of $ 3.60 per thousand dollars of assessed valuation. The dollar amount of the City’s levy of regular property taxes in 2009 for collection in 2010, including the increase authorized under this section, shall be used for the purpose of computing the limitations for subsequent levies provided for in RCW Chapter 84.55, through and including the levy of taxes in 2015 for collection in 2016. Pursuant to RCW 84.55.050(5), the maximum regular property taxes that may be levied in 2016 for collection in 2017 and in later years shall be computed as if the limit on regular property taxes had not been increased under this ordinance.
Section 4. Levy Revenues.
A. Unless otherwise directed by ordinance, all revenues collected from the additional taxes authorized pursuant to this ordinance shall be deposited in the Low-Income Housing Fund to be used to finance housing for low-income households and otherwise to provide for the housing needs of such households. The Director of Executive Administration is authorized to create other subfunds or accounts within the Low-Income Housing Fund as may be needed or appropriate to implement the purposes of this ordinance.
B. Pending expenditure for the purposes authorized in this ordinance, amounts deposited in the Low-Income Housing Fund pursuant to this ordinance may be invested in any investments permitted by applicable law. All investment earnings on the balances shall be deposited into the Low-Income Housing Fund. Amounts received by the City from payments with respect to loans, recovery of grants, insurance proceeds or proceeds of sale or disposition of property ("program income") shall be deposited into the Low-Income Housing Fund unless otherwise specified by ordinance. The Director of Housing shall use any investment earnings and program income derived from revenues collected from the additional taxes authorized pursuant to this ordinance consistent with the provisions of any Administrative and Financial Plan (“A & F Plan”) adopted by the City Council under Section 6 of this ordinance.
Section 5. Administration; Use of Proceeds.
A. The levy funds shall be used to finance affordable housing for low-income households, and otherwise to provide for the housing needs of low-income households.
B. The City Office of Housing, or such other department as may be designated by ordinance, shall administer programs funded with the additional taxes authorized pursuant to this ordinance. Programs adopted by the City Council for use of the funds derived under this ordinance shall be referred to as "Levy Programs." Levy Programs shall be implemented consistent with Administrative and Financial Plans, adopted by the City Council under Section 6 of this ordinance.
C. Anticipated Levy Programs are shown in Exhibit 1, attached hereto. The City Council, upon recommendation of the Oversight Committee described in Section 9 of this ordinance, or upon recommendation of the Mayor, or on its own motion, may review the timing of the allocations to particular Levy Programs and make changes to the programs, including additions and deletions of programs and/or in the amount of funds allocated to any program, consistent with the basic purposes of this ordinance and applicable law. Administration funding shown on Exhibit 1 is intended to be used for administration of the use of levy proceeds for all programs except the Operating and Maintenance Program. Administration funding for the Operating and Maintenance Program, for the monitoring of funded projects over their lives, and for any use of loan repayments, may come from investment earnings or program income.
Section 6. Administrative and Financial Plans.
A. Every two years, or at such other intervals as the City Council may specify, the Director of Housing, or other department head as may be designated by the Mayor, shall prepare an A & F Plan covering all of the Levy Programs. Such plans shall cover periods commencing in 2010 and continuing through 2016, and thereafter if so specified by the City Council.
B. Unless otherwise requested by the City Council, each A & F Plan shall include: amounts allocated to programs, which may vary from year to year in order to respond to changing housing market conditions, leveraging opportunities or other circumstances; criteria for evaluating and selecting projects; guidelines for loans or grants, including any fees to be collected to defray costs; requirements for project sponsors; progress and performance reports on ongoing projects and for each Levy Program; program reviews to ensure that levy funds are used for their stated purposes; and guidelines for use of program income and investment earnings. An A & F Plan may include such other information as the Mayor or Director of Housing may deem appropriate or the City Council may request.
C. The A & F Plan shall be submitted to the City Council for its approval, with such modifications as the City Council may require. For purposes of future updates of the A & F Plan, all criteria, guidelines, and requirements contained in a previously approved A & F Plan shall remain in effect pending approval by City Council of a new A & F Plan, unless otherwise provided by ordinance.
Section 7. Appropriations and Funding Approvals. The City Council shall appropriate from the Low-Income Housing Fund, as part of the City budget or supplementally, such monies derived from the levies authorized in this ordinance as it deems necessary to carry out the Levy Programs. The Director of Housing or other department head as may be designated by the Mayor or City Council, or the designee of such director (any such director or designee is hereinafter referred to as "Director"), is authorized, for and on behalf of the City, to select projects for funding and to approve, make and modify loans, grants or other expenditures to carry out the Levy Programs, provided that such authority is subject to the appropriation of sufficient funds. The Director and his or her designees are further authorized, for and on behalf of the City, to execute and deliver such documents and instruments as he or she may determine to be necessary or appropriate to implement the financing of specific projects or to otherwise carry out the Levy Programs.
Section 8. Bonds and Notes. To the extent permitted by applicable law the City may issue bonds, notes or other evidences of indebtedness payable wholly or in part from the proceeds of the additional taxes authorized under this ordinance, and apply such tax proceeds to the payment of principal of, interest on, and premium (if any) on such bonds, notes or other evidences of indebtedness and to the payment of costs associated with them.
Section 9. Oversight Committee.
A. Conditioned upon voter approval of the ballot proposition submitted by this ordinance, there is established an Oversight Committee for the purpose of monitoring the progress of Levy Programs and reporting to the Mayor and City Council on the progress of Levy Programs. The Committee shall inform the Mayor and the City Council of Levy Program accomplishments and problems and make recommendations on the A & F Plans and on actions to be taken, including additions to or deletions of programs or amounts of funds allocated to the several programs, so that Levy Programs may be conducted in a timely and efficient manner. The Committee may elect officers and establish rules of procedure, including rules establishing what shall constitute a quorum. The Director of Housing or such other department head as may be designated by the Mayor shall provide the Committee such information as is necessary for the Committee to determine the status of individual programs and projects. The Oversight Committee shall consist of thirteen (13) voting members, selected as follows: one (1) shall be a City employee appointed by the Mayor or his designee; one (1) shall be a City employee appointed by the City Council; the remainder shall be persons outside City government, of whom six (6) shall be appointed by the Mayor, and five (5) by the City Council. The appointing authority shall remove any member who is absent from two or more consecutive meetings without cause. The appointing authority may remove any member for other good cause shown or to ensure compliance with subsection B of this section.
B. At all times no more than three (3) Committee members appointed by the Mayor and no more than two (2) Committee members appointed by the City Council shall be an officer, director, board member, trustee, partner or employee of an entity that receives or competes for funding under this ordinance; or be a member of the immediate family of, or an individual residing with, an officer, director, board member, trustee, partner or employee of an entity that receives or competes for funding under this ordinance; or be a person seeking or having an arrangement concerning future employment with an entity that receives or competes for funding under this ordinance. For the purposes of this ordinance an individual’s “immediate family” means his or her spouse, domestic partner, child, child of a spouse or domestic partner, brother-in-law, sister-in-law, parent, parent of a spouse or domestic partner, a person for whom the individual acts as a guardian, or a person claimed as a dependent on the individual’s most recent federal income tax return. Subject to the preceding sentence and applicable law, an individual serving as an officer, director, board member, trustee, partner or employee of an entity that receives or competes for funding under this ordinance, or who has an interest in such an entity, shall not thereby be disqualified from serving on the Committee, but shall fully disclose any such relationships and shall not vote on any matter in which the interest of such entity is directly involved. For purposes of this section, “entity” does not include a City department or office.
C. Upon the resignation, retirement, death, incapacity or removal of a Committee member, the authority appointing such member may appoint a replacement for the balance of the term. Committee members shall serve without compensation.
D. The City Council shall prescribe by ordinance or resolution the terms of office of Committee members, which may be staggered to provide continuity, and the initial committee members shall be selected within six months after voter approval of the proposition submitted by this ordinance. The City Council may prescribe such other rules relating to the operation of the Committee as shall be necessary or appropriate.
E. The Oversight Committee shall continue in existence through 2016, and thereafter if so provided by ordinance.
Section 10. Election - Ballot Title. The City Council directs that the City Clerk file this ordinance with the Director of Elections of King County, Washington, as ex officio supervisor of elections, requesting that the Director of Elections call and conduct a special election in the City in conjunction with the state general election to be held on November 3, 2009, for the purpose of submitting to the qualified electors of the City the proposition set forth in this ordinance. The City Clerk is directed to certify to the King County Director of Elections the ballot title approved by the City Attorney in accordance with his responsibilities under RCW 29A.26.071. The following ballot title is submitted to the City Attorney for his consideration:
Seattle’s Proposition 1 concerns increased property taxes for 7 years for low-income housing assistance.
This proposition would fund affordable housing and provide for other housing needs of low-income households, as provided in Ordinance XXX. It would authorize collection of regular property taxes above RCW 84.55 limitations. This proposition allows $145,000,000 in additional taxes over seven years beginning in 2010, limited to $20,714,286 annually. The 2010 regular tax rate would be limited to $3.60 per $1,000 assessed value, including about $.17 in additional taxes.
Should this levy lid lift be approved?
Yes
No
Those in favor shall vote “Yes”; those opposed shall mark their ballots “No”.
Section 11. Severability. If any one or more provisions of this ordinance shall for any reason be held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect any other provision of this ordinance or the levy of additional taxes authorized, but this ordinance shall be construed and enforced as if such invalid provisions had not been contained herein, except that if any provision shall be held invalid by reason of its extent or the range of persons eligible to benefit therefrom, then such provision shall be deemed to be in effect to the extent permitted by law and to benefit only such class of persons as may lawfully be granted the benefit thereof.
Section 12. Ratification. The City Clerk’s certification to the King County Director of Elections of the proposition referred to in Section 10 and any other acts taken after the passage of this ordinance and consistent with its authority, are ratified and confirmed.
Section 13. Effectiveness. Those portions of this ordinance providing for the submission of a ballot proposition to the voters shall take effect and be in force immediately upon the approval by the Mayor; or if returned to the Council by the Mayor unsigned, then immediately upon its return; or if not approved and returned by the Mayor within 10 days after presentation, then on the 11th day after its presentation to the Mayor; or if vetoed by the Mayor, then immediately after its passage over his veto. All provisions of this ordinance that have not taken effect on an earlier date shall take effect and be in force thirty (30) days from and after the Mayor’s approval of this ordinance, but if this ordinance shall not be approved and returned by the Mayor within ten (10) days after presentation, such provisions shall take effect as provided by Municipal Code Section 1.04.020.
Passed by the City Council the ____ day of ________________________, 2009, and signed by me in open session in authentication of its passage this
_____ day of ___________________, 2009.
_________________________________
President __________of the City Council
Approved by me this ____ day of _____________________, 2009.
_________________________________
Gregory J. Nickels, Mayor
Filed by me this ____ day of __________________________, 2009.
____________________________________
City Clerk
(Seal)
King County Elections administers the voting process for Seattle City Offices and City Ballot Issues. All inquiries regarding the following subjects should be directed to them:
The Seattle Ethics & Elections Commission is responsible for administering Campaign Finance regulations and the Voters' Pamphlet for Seattle campaigns, not the actual voting process.
Seattle Form of Government
Seattle is a Charter City with a Mayor-Council form of government. The Mayor is directly elected by the voters and most executive departments report to the Mayor. There are nine City Councilmembers, all of whom are elected at-large. The only other elected position is the City Attorney, who is also elected at-large. The regular term of all offices is four years. There are no term limits.
Candidates for these offices must be U.S. Citizens, registered voters in the City of Seattle at the time they file their declaration of candidacy, and able to read and write the English language.
All City office elections are non-partisan, which means the top two vote-getters in the primary election are placed on the general election ballot. This is true regardless of whether or not one candidate received a majority of the primary vote. If two people or less file declarations of candidacy for any of these offices, that office does not appear on the primary election ballot, but does appear on the general election ballot. Parties do not nominate candidates to appear on the ballot and the ballots do not identify the candidates by party. Parties can and do endorse and support certain candidates, but play no other role in nominating candidates or determining who is placed on the primary or general election ballot.
Ballot issues may appear on your ballot in the primary, general or special election. Those issues are decided in the election where they appear.
Districts, Wards and Precincts
The offices of Mayor, City Attorney and City Council are all elected at-large in Seattle, there are no districts or wards.
If you want information on voting precincts please contact:
These tough economic times call for smart fiscal policy and experienced, effective management. I have a proven track record of successful management and executive experience to deliver major projects on time and on budget, grow our economy, create jobs and keep moving our city forward. Together, we can make Seattle an even better city to live, work and play.
I have the progressive vision, leadership skills, and management experience to move Seattle forward.
I was born and raised in the Pacific Northwest, and my wife and I are raising our family in the Wallingford neighborhood in Seattle. Currently, I am Vice President of Operations Strategy at an international communications carrier, where I help the company thrive by fostering innovation and driving efficiencies.
The Mallahan Plan
In good times and bad, we should have confidence that our city government is using our tax dollars judiciously and in a way that matches our values and priorities. That begins with a mayor who is a proven, effective manager who solves problems, makes difficult decisions, and listens to the people.
I will work with the City Council, neighborhood organizations, our regional partners, and most importantly, the people of Seattle, to create an open and accessible city government focused on Seattle’s priorities and moving Seattle forward.
Transportation – Provide real oversight and develop comprehensive traffic solutions to ease congestion.
Seniors – Seattle shouldn’t just be a great place to grow up but also a great place to grow old. I will work to increase senior services and better support senior centers.
Public safety – Empower and work with neighborhood leadership to protect our community, give our police and first responders the resources they need and expand the gang unit to stop youth violence.
Grow Seattle’s economy – Work with small and large businesses alike to make Seattle a great place to do business and create jobs for our working families. Partner with our colleges and universities to create public/private partnerships to help develop small businesses.
Move Seattle forward – Work with regional and federal partners to bring infrastructure investment projects to Seattle and execute those projects on time and on budget.
We can do better as a City. I believe you deserve better. Please join me in moving Seattle forward.
Thank you for voting Joe Mallahan for Seattle Mayor.
This statement was provided by the candidate, who is solely responsible for the contents therein.
I'm running for mayor because I've seen what can happen when people come together around common goals. Here's my story:
After graduating from UW law school, I joined a Seattle law firm and made partner. My wife and I loved our Greenwood neighborhood, but we worried about our children's safety because we had no sidewalks. City officials didn't seem to care about our concerns, so I worked with my neighbors to organize our community and get sidewalks built. Buoyed by our success, we worked to revitalize our local business district.
Talking to people in other neighborhoods, I realized we weren't alone in our frustration with the lack of progress. I decided to leave the law firm to form a non-profit - the Seattle Great City Initiative - to bring people together, find common ground, and get results.
We've had success. We delivered neighborhood improvements and passed the 2008 Parks Levy.
I want to bring this cooperative approach to the mayor's office.
Here are my priorities:
Transportation - As a Sierra Club leader, I worked for great transit. Now we need to connect Seattle neighborhoods to the new light rail line – with new mass transit on dedicated rights of way that won't get stuck in traffic. You vote for it. We'll build it.
Education - Schools need our help. As mayor, city government will become a partner with the school system – sharing resources and reducing overhead.
Jobs and Economy – President Roosevelt created the CCC. Seattle can learn from history. We need a jobs program to put people to work on things like weatherizing homes, building sidewalks, and improving parks. We need to take care of our local streets and bridges and invest in the next generation of infrastructure - fiber optic Internet to make us competitive and reduce the digital divide.
Finally, I am against the $4.2 billion waterfront tunnel. It's a bad deal and threatens all our other priorities:
1) It's the largest tax increase in city history – putting Seattle under mountains of debt for decades.
2) State law holds Seattle taxpayers responsible for ALL cost overruns.
3) It has no on-ramps or off-ramps downtown and no dedicated transit component.
4) Includes $400 million in new tolls – about $6.00 each way.
Go to my website for additional policy proposals and to share your ideas and feedback.
If we work together, Seattle wins. I'd appreciate your vote.
This statement was provided by the candidate, who is solely responsible for the contents therein.
During this time of change, Seattle needs an experienced, caring City Attorney with a vision for keeping you safe. Based on my record, the Municipal League has rated me as “outstanding.” The Seattle Times described me as “smart, aggressive, plainspoken, and a bulldog in defense of the city.” The Seattle Police Officers Guild, Washington Conservation Voters, the 34th District Democrats, prosecutors, former judges, and public defenders; private attorneys; local and state elected officials; and Labor have endorsed me.
I believe in law and order by holding offenders accountable, tempered with caring. I was raised with six family members in a one-bedroom apartment in the Bronx. My dad, a combat veteran, suffered from alcoholism and died in a fall, leaving my mom to raise four kids. From an early age, I saw homelessness, addiction, and crime and vowed to do something about it.
To protect you, I have:
-Taken a new approach to prosecuting repeat car thieves and, as a result, car theft dropped by 60% since 2005.
-Reduced the cycle of arrest and jail time for low-risk, repeat offenders by creating the nationally recognized Seattle Community Court saving over $1,000,000 in jail costs and providing over 30,000 hours of community service to your neighborhoods.
-Worked to avoid building a new jail through alternatives to putting people away and reduced our jail population by almost 40%.
-Won over $1,000,000 in federal grants to pay for a community prosecutor in every precinct; expand Community Court citywide; drive justice system efficiencies; improve domestic violence prosecution, and deter street drug dealers.
-Partnered with public defenders, mental health treatment providers, and Municipal Court judges to manage low-risk mentally ill offenders in the community instead of in jail.
-Championed better laws for walker, runner and bicycle safety.
In the next four years, I plan to build on these successes by:
-expanding the Drug Market Initiative beyond the Central Area and into Southeast Seattle and other areas, while balancing zero tolerance for drug dealing with giving low level dealers the opportunity to change.
-establishing a treatment court to help defendants addicted to drugs or alcohol help themselves and the community.
-building a family justice center to provide a safe place for domestic violence victims to get help and protection.
With a new Mayor coming into office, a City Attorney with my experience and caring is vital to keeping you safe. Please vote for me, Tom Carr.
This statement was provided by the candidate, who is solely responsible for the contents therein.
AsyourCity Attorney, Pete Holmes will work to make Seattle government open, responsive and attentive toyourpriorities.
Endorsed by the Seattle Times, King County and local Democrats, GLBT leadership and advocates for open government and individual liberties, Pete Holmes is an effective advocate for the people of Seattle. Earning his B.A. at Yale and his J.D. at Virginia, Pete is a seasoned litigator with 25 years of legal expertise—24 in Seattle—in business, insolvency and environmental law. Pete combines diverse professional experience with a commitment to equality and justice, having chaired Seattle’s first Office of Professional Accountability Review Board. Thanks to his leadership, last year 29 improvements were made to the Seattle Police Department’s misconduct investigation system.
Pete will bring transparency, accountability and a spirit of public service to the City Attorney’s Office.
No New Jail; Genuine Public Safety
Pete will work to avoid the shame of building a new jail while closing neighborhood schools, seeking alternatives to incarceration for nonviolent misdemeanors. He will fully support mental health and community courts, and expand crime reduction programs like Clean Dreams. Pete will emphasize tough sentencing for real criminals—those who threaten our personal safety and property.
Sound Legal Counsel—Saving Money and Protecting Our Quality of Life
From loss of the Sonics to managing our First Responders, Seattle cannot afford misguided lawsuits. Environmental and labor rules require enforcement, while money-wasting nightclub “stings” expose taxpayers to civil liability. Seattle needs a City Attorney who understands legal strategy, risk management and the art of settlement.
The Right Priorities
As your City Attorney, Pete will be an advocate for the people of Seattle, not just City Hall. A proven leader committed to public service, Pete will make you—the citizen—his most important client.
The Seattle Times says Holmes has “excellent experience to become a city attorney — one sensitive to the people's rights as well as the needs of their government.”
The Broadest Support
King County and the 11th, 36th, 37th and 43rd LD Democrats; Metropolitan Democratic Club; State Senators Ed Murray and Ken Jacobsen; State Representatives Scott White, Mary Lou Dickerson, Eric Pettigrew, and Bob Hasegawa; City Councilmember Nick Licata and Peter Steinbrueck; IATSE Local 15 and IBEW Local 46.
The need for change doesn’t stop in the Mayor’s Office: Pete Holmes will bring reform and fresh focus to the City Attorney’s Office, too!
This statement was provided by the candidate, who is solely responsible for the contents therein.
Rated "OUTSTANDING" by the Municipal League. Richard Conlin is an innovative neighborhood leader who puts his experience to work for all of Seattle. He listens and creates opportunities to get things done that make a difference in our lives. He works hard to ensure that Seattle makes effective decisions to protect and improve our communities and our environment. Richard Conlin makes change happen.
“Thank you for the honor of serving as your Councilmember. Tough times require experienced leadership and a fresh approach for our future. You can depend on me to do everything I can to bring economic health back to Seattle, take care of those who are left out and left behind, and move Seattle to a new and greener economy.
My work demonstrates that Seattle can make smart choices to have great neighborhoods and a thriving downtown, connected by transit, bicycle, and pedestrian ways and well maintained roads. I have a record of accomplishment -- initiating new programs to reduce waste, creating affordable housing, fighting hunger and supporting community gardens through my Local Food Action Initiative, and keeping transportation improvements on track.
I share your commitment to our neighborhoods. We’ve worked together to make sure people all around Seattle have parks, community centers, libraries, and excellent fire and police services – and that you get value from every dollar the City spends.
My wife Sue Ann and I have lived in Madrona for 28 years. Our three children graduated from Seattle Public Schools. I ask for your vote, and pledge to continue working with you and for you to keep Seattle a place we are proud to call home.”
My priorities include:
Bring back Seattle’s economy, create jobs, and support local businesses.
Work for effective human services, clean air and water, and alternatives to dependence on imported oil.
Get light rail to Northgate, the airport, and the Eastside.
Make government open and transparent.
Replace the Alaskan Way Viaduct and SR520 Bridge before disaster happens.
Require fiscal accountability on all projects.
Endorsed By:
Sierra Club, Washington Conservation Voters, Cascade Bicycle Club
Seattle Police Management Association
King County Labor Council, SEIU, many other unions
Recommended by the Alki Foundation (Chamber of Commerce)
King County Democratic Party, all Democratic Legislative Districts voting to date
Allied Arts
Seattle-King County Association of Realtors
Business, community, and human services leaders
This statement was provided by the candidate, who is solely responsible for the contents therein.
I am running for City Council to bring an effective, decisive and pragmatic approach to City Hall. The City Council has a reputation for advancing policies that have little to do with the "kitchen table" issues most families face in our city. Families and working Seattleites are hurting: our local economy isn't creating jobs, our city is plagued by rising crime and we continue to idle in traffic. The current City Council does not have a vision to tackle these big issues, nor a plan to get us moving again.
My values are your progressive Seattle values. On the City Council, I will work for:
Economic Opportunity to make it through these tough times and lay the foundation in which our small businesses can thrive and grow the next great economy—one that will provide a better quality of life throughout the city.
Affordable, Safe Neighborhoods, because we must make sure Seattle continues to be a great place to live and raise our families. This means building enough housing stock to keep prices affordable. It means creating safe, walkable communities with vibrant business districts. And it means protecting the character of our neighborhoods by involving our communities in the planning process from the start.
Transportation Solutions, because it's time for Seattle to plan and build the infrastructure that will serve this city for the next century, with safe and reliable transportation options connecting our walkable communities to each other and to a strong and thriving downtown core. Unlike the debate on the viaduct replacement, I’ll make sure citizens are heard on transportation solutions to meet the needs of everyone.
I believe it's time for the city to create a strategic plan to support small businesses and spur their growth. Having worked as a Solutions Architect for the last six years, I know how to deliver projects on time and within budget. I have a track record of cutting through the red tape and reducing costs.
I am a third generation Seattle native. My partner and I are raising twins adopted from a drug-addicted mother and we live in West Seattle’s green-built High Point neighborhood.
Endorsed by: King County Democrats, 11th District Democrats, 34th District Democrats, 37th District Democrats, ILWU Local 52, Senator Joe McDermott, Senator Ed Murray, Representative Sharon Nelson, Representative Marko Liias and Honorable Dawn Mason.
For a change, Vote David Ginsberg for Seattle City Council.
This statement was provided by the candidate, who is solely responsible for the contents therein.
Seattle needs a strong, proven leader who will unite people to solve problems. Sally Bagshaw is that leader, working and volunteering for three decades on issues that matter.
Sally is a former public school mom and small business advocate. She retired as Chief Civil Deputy in the King County Prosecutor’s Office, where she led a division of nearly 100 lawyers and legal staff. Earlier in her career she was head of KC-Metro’s Legal Department, served as Minority and Women’s Business Officer for the University of Washington and worked as an Assistant Attorney General at both the UW and WSU.
Throughout her career, Sally has gotten results: she is the leader who advocates for innovative criminal justice programs, supports strong public schools, protects neighborhoods and parks, and works to end traffic gridlock.
Sally has earned broad support throughout the city because she listens. She will bring her record of positive management, dedication to her community and compassion for people to City Council.
For a Stronger Economy…
Sally will help diversify and strengthen Seattle’s economy, encouraging growing industries like biotechnology and clean energy. She will make the city a better partner with business and labor to protect and increase family wage jobs.
…Vital Neighborhoods…
A longtime neighborhood leader, Sally will promote diverse, affordable and well-designed neighborhoods to support our quality of life.
…Excellent Schools…
Sally will coordinate with the Seattle Public Schools to wisely use our resources. There’s no excuse for overcrowding some schools while displacing kids from their neighborhoods.
…Parks and Open Space Protection…
Sally will follow through on city commitments to fund parks, protect streams and open spaces, and clean Puget Sound.
…Safe Streets…
Sally will push for more foot patrols to reduce crime, and work closely with former colleagues at the County to wisely use our public resources.
…Protecting the Vulnerable
Sally started an award-winning legal clinic in King County for homeless women. She will fight to maintain strong human services.
Endorsements!
Sally is rated OUTSTANDING by the Municipal League. She is endorsed by a broad range of organizations including Seattle Firefighters; Alki Foundation; Washington Conservation Voters; King County Labor Council; Allied Arts; Building and Construction Trades Council; Cascade Bicycle Club; Carpenters; Painters and Allied Trades; Plumbers and Pipefitters; Seattle Police Officers’ Guild; Women’s Political Caucus and more. Over 30 local elected officials endorse Sally. See the entire list at www.SallyBagshaw.com.
This statement was provided by the candidate, who is solely responsible for the contents therein.
For too long, politicians in this city have ignored the will of the people with wrongheaded and costly projects:
The most expensive option for replacing the viaduct, with huge possible cost overruns
$50 million for a street car for South Lake Union with few riders
A $300 million fix for Mercer Street without improving traffic flow
A possible $200 million for a new city jail while we are closing schools.
My priorities:
Make a serious commitment to protecting and increasing our supply of affordable housing
Develop a regional transportation plan that connects our neighborhoods with more bus routes
Replace the expensive redo of Mercer and redirect our resources to rebuilding our neighborhood infrastructure
Create a City initiative to increase living wage jobs
Protect neighborhood trees, watersheds, and open space
I have worked for 30 years as a social justice advocate in Seattle to make sure all voices are heard. As Deputy Director of the Church Council of Greater Seattle, I led an urban program committed to building and preserving low-income housing, providing shelter for those who are homeless, working for social change, and advocating for human rights. I co-founded the Downtown Emergency Service Center, Common Ground, the Seattle Displacement Coalition, and the Interfaith Task Force on Homelessness. I have also served as an organizer and board member for Real Change. Recently, I have taken my experience to the classroom as adjunct faculty at Antioch University-Seattle, teaching courses on community organizing, homelessness, and spirituality & social action.
My endorsements:
The 11th, 36th, 37th, 43rd, and 46th District Democrats, The King County Democrats, Metropolitan Democratic Club, UFCW Local 21, SEIU Local 6, ILWU Local 52, I.A.T.S.E. Local 15, Inland Boatman’s Union, SEAMEC, Seattle Gay News, Publicola, United African Public Affairs Committee of Washington State, King County Councilmember Larry Gossett, Seattle Councilmember Nick Licata, Former Councilmember Peter Steinbrueck, Former Seattle City Councilmember Dolores Sibonga, State House Speaker Frank Chopp, State Representatives Bob Hasegawa, Zack Hudgins, Eric Pettigrew, Sharon Tomiko Santos…and many others.
We have a progressive tradition in Seattle and strong sense of community in our neighborhoods. We need to keep that character alive and well in the 21st Century.
I will work with you to keep our progressive values, strengthen our neighborhoods, and refocus our priorities on essential city government services. I ask for your vote.
This statement was provided by the candidate, who is solely responsible for the contents therein.
Jessie Israel – new ideas, new energy and a new approach to the problems facing our community
Issues of environmental protection, public safety, and transit loom large for Seattle. It has taken 40 years to complete the first phase of light rail. 40 years too long.
Yet with the clock ticking, our City Council has been bogged down in minutia, mired in process, and distracted by tangents -- banning circuses, opposing wars, establishing poet laureates.
You deserve a City Council that works for you. Not just asking questions, but finding solutions. It’s time for a new generation of pragmatic, proactive leadership.
Jessie Israel – a proven track record of getting things done
Jessie is a leader who finds smart, innovative solutions. As an entrepreneur within King County Parks, she helped save 25,000 acres of parkland when 80% of the budget was cut. Those parks – from Cougar Mountain to the Burke Gilman - are still open today.
Jessie’s background includes: King County Parks executive; Center for Women & Democracy operations manager; consultant for Central Area, Eastlake, Denny Triangle, Wallingford neighborhood plans; Boards of Directors for City Year, Ballard Food Bank and the Women’s Political Caucus; Peace Corps, West Africa; Seattle University graduate.
Jessie Israel – priorities that matter
Jessie will make sure Seattle’s City Council delivers on the basics, with a vision toward our future success.
Environment: Smart investments in energy efficiency and the environment that will create jobs and attract a new, clean energy economy to Seattle.
Public Safety: Increasing neighborhood patrols, funding the gang unit, and tackling the increasingly hostile environment in downtown’s public spaces while prioritizing real solutions to our human services needs.
Reliable Transportation: A long-term vision for moving people and goods with light rail, buses, bicycle paths, sidewalks, and maintaining roadways.
Jessie Israel – a leader we can work with and trust
Jessie is endorsed by: Seattle Times • Washington Conservation Voters • Women’s Political Caucus • Cascade Bicycle Club • Alki Foundation (of the Greater Seattle Chamber of Commerce) • Seattle Firefighters Local 27 • Seattle Police Officers Guild • King County Realtors • Rental Housing Association • Building Trades Council • Union of Painters and Allied Trades • 34th District Democrats • King County Young Democrats • West Seattle Democratic Women • Allied Arts • Friends of Seattle • Seattle Transit Blog • and the Municipal League rates Jessie: Very Good!
This statement was provided by the candidate, who is solely responsible for the contents therein.
People With Nick Licata
2518 South Brandon Court
Seattle WA 98108 Votelicata09@gmail.com
www.nicklicata2009.com
Video Voters' Guide Statement
Written Voters' Guide Statement
Dear Voter,
With your support I look forward to working with a new Mayor and City Council. Some things will not change. I will continue as a strong, effective, and tireless leader with the common sense to ask questions before the bill comes due.
Seattle’s citizens have come to expect that perspective and vision from me. I take my role as a legislator and representative of the people to heart. It is a job that I feel honored to do working everyday in pursuit of the common good.
My consistent record of promoting legislation that benefits communities throughout Seattle includes:
Amending the Mayor’s public safety budget to add new police officers for the first time since the late 1970's;
Funding critical transportation improvements for the Spokane Street Project-ensuring West Seattle mobility when Alaskan Way Viaduct work begins;
Developing a $3 million Strategic Pedestrian Safety Initiative including $1.5 million for new sidewalks and sidewalk repair;
But when public dollars are proposed for projects that make vague promises without clear evidence I will continue to ask the tough questions, and get results.
The Seattle Weekly says about my work on the council: “He’s often the lone voice of dissent when his City Council colleagues are willing to sign off on questionable public policy.”
Our city faces challenges and requires creative and tested leadership to resolve the many demands on limited resources. I will use my energy to ensure true progressive public benefits:
Better public transportation through more reliable bus service
Safer neighborhoods through more foot and bike police patrols, while speaking out to protect civil rights
A healthier more sustainable environment -sidewalks, bike lanes, green building codes and community gardens
Pursuing policies to help small local business thrive
Providing more affordable housing for those most in need
Promoting vibrant cultural institutions, libraries and community centers, major art institutions and neighborhood cultural districts.
My vision for a prosperous and sustainable Seattle has earned diverse endorsements - 15 of Seattle’s state legislators, County Councilmembers Bob Ferguson and Larry Gossett, former Governors Mike Lowry and Albert Rosellini, local unions representing the Teamsters, Service Employees, Police, Transit Operators, and the sole endorsement of the Sierra Club.
I’d appreciate your vote too. Join me in making Seattle a city that grows with grace, respect and fairness towards all.
Sincerely,
Councilmember Nick Licata
This statement was provided by the candidate, who is solely responsible for the contents therein.
I believe Seattle is a beautiful city with wonderful neighborhoods, great diversity, and rich culture.
But critical needs aren’t being met.
We need affordable housing for families, schools that serve our children, and transportation that’s efficient and reliable.
Is it any surprise that our city faces a $72 million budget deficit when not one current Council member has experience or training in finance?
I'm running for City Council because Seattle needs someone who understands the issues and has the financial background to make a difference. I earned my MBA at the University of Washington and have 10 years experience as Chief Financial Officer of a Seattle law firm. I would be the only Council member with the fiscal knowledge to bring real oversight to the city’s budget process.
Oversight must start with the $4 billion downtown deep-bore tunnel to replace the Alaskan Way Viaduct.
The deep-bore tunnel is a bad deal for Seattle. It doesn’t connect to downtown and it won’t serve 60 percent of the people who use the viaduct today. It won’t meet our long-term transportation needs.
We’ve already rejected the tunnel — 70 percent of Seattle voters said no in the 2007 election. But politicians want to build it anyway and stick us with the bill, through higher taxes or increased rates and fees.
As a City Council member I will fight for better alternatives. I know how because I’ve done it before.
As Chair of the Sierra Club, I stood up to politicians who said we had to build 182 miles of new highways to get light rail. Together we rejected that plan. Today, we’re laying the foundation for cost effective and sustainable transportation.
As a former CFO, I know we can have smart policies that are good for the economy, nurture our communities, and protect our environment.
The future for Seattle that I envision includes:
No downtown deep-bore tunnel.
Affordable housing, so teachers and firefighters can live in the communities they serve.
Reliable transportation, where people can get around with just a transit pass or a bicycle.
Great neighborhood schools, so every child can get a good education — no matter where they live.
Job opportunities through smart policies that enable businesses to thrive.
Please vote for me, Mike O’Brien, for Seattle City Council position 8. I will represent your interests and work for the priorities we all care about most.
This statement was provided by the candidate, who is solely responsible for the contents therein.
I’m running for City Council to make sure your tax dollars are used wisely.
Keeping Seattle affordable is near to my heart. I want all our children to be able to live here when they grow up. Much of my work has involved creating or preserving affordable housing by successfully bringing together non-profits, government and investors.
Growing up in Seattle, I learned about housing from the ground up, beginning with my first job as an apartment house janitor. After Terry and I got married we lived modestly and saved enough over the years to buy four apartment buildings. We keep rents reasonable and provide nice places to live for our terrific tenants.
Jobs & the Economy
The City must work better to keep high-paying jobs here and attract new industries. I’ll make sure we create opportunity, rebuilding a job-growing economy.
The Viaduct Replacement
Some say don’t build a tunnel, just tear down the Viaduct -- dumping 110,000 cars and trucks a day into downtown traffic. The tunnel wasn’t my first choice. But the state funding is in place to build it. We have to do something. Let’s get started.
Seniors, homeowners and renters must not be stuck with the bill. Opening up the waterfront will be a goldmine for developers and downtown property-owners. I will make sure they pay any cost overruns.
Actively Involved Citizen
For many years I have actively served on boards or as a volunteer, including:
Friends of the Cedar River Watershed
Children’s Hospital Citizen’s Advisory Committee
Church Council’s Interfaith Task Force on Homelessness
Thornton Creek Alliance
Fort Lewis, working with wounded Soldiers
Tabor 100, empowering minority-owned businesses
AIDS Housing of Washington
As a past Community Council president, I know how hard it is for neighborhoods to have their voices heard at City Hall. If elected, I’ll listen. My door will always be open.
Rated “Outstanding” by the Municipal League
“[Robert Rosencrantz] has made numerous outstanding contributions requiring skills related to the office, is a path-finding and respected leader, and brings knowledge and creativity to issues facing the office.”
I’m Robert Rosencrantz. I ask for your vote.
Endorsed by: Speaker of the House Frank Chopp, Ruth Woo, Rev. Dr. Samuel McKinney, Vivian McLean, Representative Sharon Tomiko Santos, Representative Eric Pettigrew, Senator Ed Murray, Ellen Ferguson, Senator Ken Jacobsen, Bobby Forch, Representative Jamie Pedersen, Jordan Royer, and many others.
This statement was provided by the candidate, who is solely responsible for the contents therein.
The City of Seattle’s Proposition 1 concerns a seven-year property-tax increase for low-income housing assistance.
This proposition would fund affordable housing and other housing needs of low-income households. It authorizes collection of regular property taxes above limits otherwise allowed by state law. It allows $145,000,000 in additional taxes over seven years beginning in 2010, limited to $20,714,286 annually. In 2010, the increase would be up to $0.17 per $1,000 of assessed value. The City’s total regular property-tax rate would not exceed the state law limit of $3.60 per $1,000 of assessed value.
Should this housing levy be approved?
Yes .....
No .....
Those in favor shall vote "Yes"; those opposed shall mark their ballots "No".
Proposition Number 1 would authorize a seven-year property tax increase to finance low-income housing, and otherwise provide for the housing needs of low-income households. The proposition defines low-income households based on guidelines published by the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development. Most programs funded by the proposed levy serve households earning less than $17,700 for a single person and $20,250 for a family of two, or 30 percent of Seattle area median income.
Some form of housing levy has been in effect since 1981. The last housing levy passed in 2002 and expires this year. If approved, Proposition Number 1 would increase taxes levied in 2009 through 2015 and collected in 2010 through 2016. It would authorize Seattle to raise up to $145 million in additional property taxes over the seven-year period to pay for levy programs. The City could levy no more than $20,714,286 in additional taxes each year.
Proposition 1 includes a list of anticipated levy programs. These are:
Rental Production and Preservation. The City anticipates spending $104 million to construct or preserve an estimated 1670 affordable rental housing units. At least 60 percent of the program funding would be reserved for households at or below 30 percent of area median income. In 2009, 30 percent of area median income for a family of two is approximately $20,250. In addition, no more than 10 percent of program funding would be used for households earning 61 to 80 percent of area median income.
Operating and Maintenance. The City anticipates spending $14.4 million to assist an estimated 220 low-income households by providing support to owners of Levy-funded housing for 20 years. This program is aimed at residents whose incomes are at or below 30 percent of area median income.
Rental Assistance. The City anticipates spending about $4.2 million over seven years to provide rental assistance to an estimated 605 households each year. The program is intended to prevent eviction and homelessness, and help families earning no more than 50 percent of area median income. In 2009, 50 percent of area median income for a family of two is approximately $33,700.
Homebuyer Assistance. The City anticipates spending up to $9.09 million to assist an estimated 180 first-time low-income homebuyers. Among other things, this program is intended to promote long-term housing affordability. This assistance would go to homebuyers earning less than 80 percent of area median income, which, for a family of two, is approximately $51,200.
Acquisition and Opportunity Loans. The City anticipates spending $6.5 million for short-term loans to buy buildings or land for housing developments for an estimated 175 low-income households. Levy funds not yet needed for other levy programs will be used. Because this is a loan, the City expects that the $6.5 million will be repaid and that the money will be available for other levy programs.
Administration. About $13.3 million in levy funds will be spent on the administration of all programs except the Operation and Maintenance Program. The Operation and Maintenance Program administrative costs will be paid with interest earnings on the levy funds and other revenues.
The City Council described these anticipated programs in Ordinance number 123013. The City Council could change the programs, consistent with the basic purposes of the proposition. The Council could add or delete programs, or change the amount of money for any program.
Administrative and Financial Plans covering all levy programs would be periodically submitted to the City Council for its review. Each plan would include amounts allocated to programs, criteria for funding projects, guidelines for loans or grants, requirements for project sponsors, progress and performance reports, program reviews to ensure that levy funds are used for their stated purposes, and guidelines for use of program income and investment earnings. The City Council could also request that the Plans include other information. Upon review, the Council could approve or modify the Plans.
The proposition also would create an oversight committee to monitor and report on the progress of the levy programs. The committee would report on levy program accomplishments and problems. It would also make recommendations on the Administrative and Financial Plans and on actions to be taken, including additions or deletions of programs or amounts of money allocated to programs. Committee members would serve without compensation.
Proposition 1 would authorize the collection of more property taxes than would otherwise be allowed by the limits imposed under RCW 84.55. That state law generally limits the increase in property tax revenue to one percent over the highest amount that the City could have received in the prior year.
The taxes authorized by Proposition 1 would be in addition to the maximum regular property taxes to which the City would have been limited under state law without the proposition, plus any other authorized levy lid lifts. In the first year of collection (2010), the additional tax rate associated with the tax increase authorized by Proposition 1 for any property owner would be approximately 17 cents per thousand dollars of assessed value. The City’s total regular property-tax rate would not exceed the state law limit of $3.60 per $1,000 of assessed value. Taxes levied in 2017 for collection in 2018, and later tax levies, would be calculated as if Proposition 1 had not been passed.
Ordinance Number 123013, which placed Proposition 1 on the ballot, is reprinted in full in this voters’ pamphlet.
VOTE YES! HELP SENIORS AND THE MOST VULNERABLE
Since 1981, Seattle voters have provided housing for the most vulnerable in our city through the Housing Levy: low-income families, SENIORS, victims of domestic violence and people who are DISABLED or homeless. These apartments are guaranteed to be affordable for at least 50 years, helping tens of thousands of families and individuals.
NOW MORE THAN EVER: VOTE YES! TO RENEW THE HOUSING LEVY
In a time of economic insecurity, our investment in affordable housing is critical. The Housing Levy keeps people in their homes who have lost their job or suffered other life emergencies. Levy-funded housing connects people to job training, counseling and other services to get their lives back on track.
SEATTLE HOUSING LEVY: EXCEEDING GOALS
The current Housing Levy, passed by voters in 2002, exceeded its goals. The funding you supported preserved and constructed nearly 2000 apartments and helped over 4000 families with emergency rental assistance.
LEVERAGING INVESTMENTS, CREATING FAMILY WAGE JOBS
For every Housing Levy dollar, more than $3.00 are matched from other sources like foundations, banks, state and federal governments—stretching dollars to help more people. This money is invested in our neighborhoods by rehabbing apartment buildings and constructing new housing that meets green standards.
VOTE YES! FOR A PROVEN SUCCESS
Seattle voters have consistently supported past housing levies, and this year it is perhaps the most important vote we will take. In a time of economic insecurity, more of our neighbors are vulnerable and our investment in affordable housing is critical. The $145 million proposal will cost the typical Seattle homeowner $5.50 per month, most of which we are already paying through the current Housing Levy.
Supported by: Senior Services, YWCA, Habitat for Humanity, Jubilee Women’s Center, Urban League, King County Democrats, SEIU 1199 NW, UFCW Local 21, Downtown Seattle Association, Key Bank, Uwajimaya, Capitol Hill Chamber of Commerce, Cascade Land Conservancy, Mayor Nickels, former Mayors Charles Royer and Norman Rice, Mayoral Candidates Mallahan and McGinn, and all 9 City Council Members.
Vote YES on Proposition 1!
-Denise Klein, Senior Services
-Michael Ramos, Church Council of Greater Seattle
-John Littel, Northwest Carpenters Union
Rebuttal to Statement For Proposition 1
We can't afford endless property tax increases, especially in the worst recession in 70 years.
Check the Bureau of Labor Statistics' Inflation Calculator:
$86,000,000 in 2002 (the current Housing Levy amount) is the equivalent of less than $103,000,000 today. That's a $42,000,000 tax increase, AFTER inflation!
The proponents' campaign is funded by the same levy recipients who will dominate the sham "Oversight Committee" -- the agencies and their employees, government employees, and bailed-out banks. (We are not accepting ANY campaign contributions!)
A NO vote won't end all these government programs, but it WILL persuade the City Council and the new Mayor to offer a reasonable renewal, without tripled overhead. It should also tell them to restrain themselves when they adopt their next budget and submit their future annual tax increase referenda.
KIRK ROBBINS Queen Anne Community Organizer, homeowner and taxpayer; DORIS BURNS Montlake Senior Citizen, homeowner and taxpayer; ANTONY LEO Ballard Environmental Specialist, homeowner and taxpayer.
A 68% middle-class tax increase during a recession? Who are they kidding?
"Administration" -- OVERHEAD -- UP from $4,258,000 to $13,262,000? More than triple! What's that going to do for the rest of us?
The 2002 Housing Levy took $86,000,000. This one would take $145,000,000 -- a 68.6% Tax Increase, in seven years! That's not about inflation, which was more like 2% per year. It's the relentless increase in property taxes, even while our incomes and home values fall.
There's an "Oversight Committee" in the ordinance, Section 9. It encourages conflicts of interest -- employees of the businesses which will receive levy money are welcome on the committee. That isn't oversight -- it's a cartel. And you can bet that the donors to the pro-levy campaign will select their employees -- they're on the current committee now, along with a guy from Washington Mutual.
The housing bubble is over. Rents and home prices are falling. Government departments are tightening their belts, getting by with less -- just like the rest of us. Even if you got a raise this year, your neighbors probably didn't -- especially if their money was in a 401(k).
City government is still awarding tax breaks for developers who set aside some "affordable" units. This isn't always very efficient, but at least it doesn't involve triple overhead!
This levy would do some good for some people, but it's too big an increase for a recession. This industry can get by on less than a 68% raise, and their bureaucrats don't need a Triple. Encourage the City Council to submit a smaller levy -- vote NO on this fat one.
KIRK ROBBINS Queen Anne Community Organizer, homeowner and taxpayer; DORIS BURNS Montlake Senior Citizen, homeowner and taxpayer; ANTONY LEO Ballard Environmental Specialist, homeowner and taxpayer.
Rebuttal to Statement Against Proposition 1
The Housing Levy protects seniors, people who are disabled or homeless, victims of domestic violence, and vulnerable families--those most in need in a challenging economy.
Opponents are mistaken. Median home prices rose 73% between 2002 and 2008 and rents increased 21% since 2004 and have moderated only slightly. Despite the recession, the cost of housing outpaces income for many low-income working families, and fixed-income seniors.
Larger proposals were rejected to keep programs targeted and maintain the same goals as the current Housing Levy. No new staff positions are created by this levy. For $2.00 more per month, the Housing Levy creates family-wage jobs, drives economic revitalization, and helps Seattle residents meet their basic housing needs.
Senior advocates, neighborhood leaders, unions, business leaders, and people across Seattle support the Housing Levy.
Vote Yes on Proposition 1.
-Denise Klein, Senior Services
-Michael Ramos, Church Council of Greater Seattle
-John Littel, Northwest Carpenters Union
AN ORDINANCE relating to low-income housing; requesting that a special election be held concurrent with the November 2009 general election for submission to the qualified electors of the City of a proposition to lift the limit on regular property taxes under Chapter 84.55 RCW in order to authorize the City to levy additional taxes for low-income housing for up to seven (7) years; providing for interim financing pending tax receipts; creating a levy oversight committee; providing for implementation of programs with funds derived from the taxes authorized; and ratifying and confirming certain prior acts.
WHEREAS, the $86,000,000 housing levy authorized in Ordinance 120823 and approved by the voters in 2002 (the "2002 Levy") expires with the collection of 2009 property taxes; and
WHEREAS, the 2002 levy had a production goal of 1,718 rental units, and as of December 2008 the City has approved 2002 Levy funding for the production or preservation of 1,814 rental units, as well as assisted 211 first-time homebuyers and 4,146 renter households at risk of homelessness; and
WHEREAS, the $59,211,000 housing levy authorized in Ordinance 117711 and approved by the voters in 1995 had a production goal of 1,360 units, and over 2,632 units were actually produced or preserved by leveraging other funds; and
WHEREAS, the $49,975,000 housing levy authorized in Ordinance 112904 and approved by the voters in 1986 had a production goal of 1,000 units, and over 1,800 units were actually produced or preserved by leveraging other funds; and
WHEREAS, the $48,178,000 low-income elderly and handicapped housing bond issue authorized in Ordinance 110124 and approved by the voters in 1981 had a production goal of 1,000 units, and 1,198 units were actually produced or preserved; and
WHEREAS, substantial need remains for additional low-income housing and assistance to help low-income persons access housing they can afford, as documented in the Housing Appendix to the Comprehensive Plan and the City’s 2009-2012 Consolidated Plan; and
WHEREAS, Chapter 84.55 RCW generally limits the dollar amount of regular property taxes that a city may levy in any year, but RCW 84.55.050 allows a city to levy taxes exceeding such limit by majority approval of the voters, and allows a city to include in the ballot proposition a limit on the purpose for which the additional taxes levied will be used and to provide for the expiration of the additional taxing authority; and
WHEREAS, RCW 35.21.685 authorizes a city to assist in the development or preservation of publicly or privately owned housing for persons of low income by providing loans or grants of general municipal funds to the owners or developers of the housing, including loans or grants to finance the acquisition, construction or rehabilitation of low-income housing;
NOW THEREFORE,
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY OF SEATTLE AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Findings. The City Council makes the following findings and declares as follows:
A. The City of Seattle has insufficient safe, sanitary, and decent housing affordable to low-income households to meet the present and anticipated needs of such households, as documented in the Housing Appendix to the Comprehensive Plan and the City's 2009-2012 Consolidated Plan.
B. Affordable rental housing for low-income households, including the homeless, other persons with special needs, families and seniors, often requires a commitment of City funds for development or preservation, or other forms of assistance.
C. Promoting home ownership through loans to low-income first-time homebuyers, coupled with homeownership counseling, helps create financial stability for families and mixed income neighborhoods.
D. Providing funding for acquisition or preservation of buildings or property for low-income housing is critical to take advantage of current housing market conditions.
E. Providing funding to help develop, preserve and finance housing affordable to low-income renters and homebuyers helps create jobs and generate significant income received by construction workers and local business owners.
F. The additional taxes to be levied under this ordinance will enable the City to provide for the housing needs of low-income households and thereby to fulfill the purposes of federal, State, County and City laws and policies, including without limitation the federal HOME Investment Partnerships Act, the State Growth Management Act ("GMA"), the Countywide Policies adopted under GMA, and the City's Comprehensive Plan.
Section 2. Definitions. The following terms used in this ordinance shall have the definitions stated below unless the context otherwise clearly requires:
"Low-income housing" means housing that will serve "low-income households."
"Household" means a single person, family or unrelated persons living together.
"Low-income household" means a household with income less than or equal to eighty percent (80%) of median income.
“Median income” means annual median family income for the statistical area or division thereof including Seattle for which median family income is published from time to time by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, or successor agency, with adjustments according to household size in a manner determined by the Director of Housing, provided that if an Administrative and Financial Plan adopted under Section 6 of this ordinance shall adopt a substitute definition of “median income,” the substitute definition shall apply.
To the extent permitted by applicable State law, income determinations may take into account such exclusions, adjustments and rules of computation as may be prescribed or used under federal housing laws, regulations or policies for purposes of establishing income limits, or as may be established in City planning documents consistent with federal laws, regulations or policies.
Section 3. Proposition to Authorize Levy of Additional Regular Property Taxes.
The City submits to the qualified electors of the City a proposition as authorized by RCW 84.55.050(1), to exceed the levy limitation on regular property taxes contained in RCW Chapter 84.55 for property taxes levied in 2009 through 2015 for collection in 2010 through 2016, respectively, raising up to $145,000,000 in aggregate over a period of up to seven years. The proposition shall be limited so that the City shall not levy more than $20,714,286 in additional taxes each year. All the levy proceeds shall be used for the purposes specified in Section 5.A. of this ordinance. The taxes authorized by this proposition will be in addition to the maximum amount of regular property taxes the City would have been limited to by RCW 84.55.010 in the absence of voter approval under this ordinance, plus other authorized lid lifts. If the voters approve the proposition submitted by this ordinance, the maximum total dollar rate for City of Seattle regular property taxes for collection in 2010 shall be a total maximum of $ 3.60 per thousand dollars of assessed valuation. The dollar amount of the City’s levy of regular property taxes in 2009 for collection in 2010, including the increase authorized under this section, shall be used for the purpose of computing the limitations for subsequent levies provided for in RCW Chapter 84.55, through and including the levy of taxes in 2015 for collection in 2016. Pursuant to RCW 84.55.050(5), the maximum regular property taxes that may be levied in 2016 for collection in 2017 and in later years shall be computed as if the limit on regular property taxes had not been increased under this ordinance.
Section 4. Levy Revenues.
A. Unless otherwise directed by ordinance, all revenues collected from the additional taxes authorized pursuant to this ordinance shall be deposited in the Low-Income Housing Fund to be used to finance housing for low-income households and otherwise to provide for the housing needs of such households. The Director of Executive Administration is authorized to create other subfunds or accounts within the Low-Income Housing Fund as may be needed or appropriate to implement the purposes of this ordinance.
B. Pending expenditure for the purposes authorized in this ordinance, amounts deposited in the Low-Income Housing Fund pursuant to this ordinance may be invested in any investments permitted by applicable law. All investment earnings on the balances shall be deposited into the Low-Income Housing Fund. Amounts received by the City from payments with respect to loans, recovery of grants, insurance proceeds or proceeds of sale or disposition of property ("program income") shall be deposited into the Low-Income Housing Fund unless otherwise specified by ordinance. The Director of Housing shall use any investment earnings and program income derived from revenues collected from the additional taxes authorized pursuant to this ordinance consistent with the provisions of any Administrative and Financial Plan (“A & F Plan”) adopted by the City Council under Section 6 of this ordinance.
Section 5. Administration; Use of Proceeds.
A. The levy funds shall be used to finance affordable housing for low-income households, and otherwise to provide for the housing needs of low-income households.
B. The City Office of Housing, or such other department as may be designated by ordinance, shall administer programs funded with the additional taxes authorized pursuant to this ordinance. Programs adopted by the City Council for use of the funds derived under this ordinance shall be referred to as "Levy Programs." Levy Programs shall be implemented consistent with Administrative and Financial Plans, adopted by the City Council under Section 6 of this ordinance.
C. Anticipated Levy Programs are shown in Exhibit 1, attached hereto. The City Council, upon recommendation of the Oversight Committee described in Section 9 of this ordinance, or upon recommendation of the Mayor, or on its own motion, may review the timing of the allocations to particular Levy Programs and make changes to the programs, including additions and deletions of programs and/or in the amount of funds allocated to any program, consistent with the basic purposes of this ordinance and applicable law. Administration funding shown on Exhibit 1 is intended to be used for administration of the use of levy proceeds for all programs except the Operating and Maintenance Program. Administration funding for the Operating and Maintenance Program, for the monitoring of funded projects over their lives, and for any use of loan repayments, may come from investment earnings or program income.
Section 6. Administrative and Financial Plans.
A. Every two years, or at such other intervals as the City Council may specify, the Director of Housing, or other department head as may be designated by the Mayor, shall prepare an A & F Plan covering all of the Levy Programs. Such plans shall cover periods commencing in 2010 and continuing through 2016, and thereafter if so specified by the City Council.
B. Unless otherwise requested by the City Council, each A & F Plan shall include: amounts allocated to programs, which may vary from year to year in order to respond to changing housing market conditions, leveraging opportunities or other circumstances; criteria for evaluating and selecting projects; guidelines for loans or grants, including any fees to be collected to defray costs; requirements for project sponsors; progress and performance reports on ongoing projects and for each Levy Program; program reviews to ensure that levy funds are used for their stated purposes; and guidelines for use of program income and investment earnings. An A & F Plan may include such other information as the Mayor or Director of Housing may deem appropriate or the City Council may request.
C. The A & F Plan shall be submitted to the City Council for its approval, with such modifications as the City Council may require. For purposes of future updates of the A & F Plan, all criteria, guidelines, and requirements contained in a previously approved A & F Plan shall remain in effect pending approval by City Council of a new A & F Plan, unless otherwise provided by ordinance.
Section 7. Appropriations and Funding Approvals. The City Council shall appropriate from the Low-Income Housing Fund, as part of the City budget or supplementally, such monies derived from the levies authorized in this ordinance as it deems necessary to carry out the Levy Programs. The Director of Housing or other department head as may be designated by the Mayor or City Council, or the designee of such director (any such director or designee is hereinafter referred to as "Director"), is authorized, for and on behalf of the City, to select projects for funding and to approve, make and modify loans, grants or other expenditures to carry out the Levy Programs, provided that such authority is subject to the appropriation of sufficient funds. The Director and his or her designees are further authorized, for and on behalf of the City, to execute and deliver such documents and instruments as he or she may determine to be necessary or appropriate to implement the financing of specific projects or to otherwise carry out the Levy Programs.
Section 8. Bonds and Notes. To the extent permitted by applicable law the City may issue bonds, notes or other evidences of indebtedness payable wholly or in part from the proceeds of the additional taxes authorized under this ordinance, and apply such tax proceeds to the payment of principal of, interest on, and premium (if any) on such bonds, notes or other evidences of indebtedness and to the payment of costs associated with them.
Section 9. Oversight Committee.
A. Conditioned upon voter approval of the ballot proposition submitted by this ordinance, there is established an Oversight Committee for the purpose of monitoring the progress of Levy Programs and reporting to the Mayor and City Council on the progress of Levy Programs. The Committee shall inform the Mayor and the City Council of Levy Program accomplishments and problems and make recommendations on the A & F Plans and on actions to be taken, including additions to or deletions of programs or amounts of funds allocated to the several programs, so that Levy Programs may be conducted in a timely and efficient manner. The Committee may elect officers and establish rules of procedure, including rules establishing what shall constitute a quorum. The Director of Housing or such other department head as may be designated by the Mayor shall provide the Committee such information as is necessary for the Committee to determine the status of individual programs and projects. The Oversight Committee shall consist of thirteen (13) voting members, selected as follows: one (1) shall be a City employee appointed by the Mayor or his designee; one (1) shall be a City employee appointed by the City Council; the remainder shall be persons outside City government, of whom six (6) shall be appointed by the Mayor, and five (5) by the City Council. The appointing authority shall remove any member who is absent from two or more consecutive meetings without cause. The appointing authority may remove any member for other good cause shown or to ensure compliance with subsection B of this section.
B. At all times no more than three (3) Committee members appointed by the Mayor and no more than two (2) Committee members appointed by the City Council shall be an officer, director, board member, trustee, partner or employee of an entity that receives or competes for funding under this ordinance; or be a member of the immediate family of, or an individual residing with, an officer, director, board member, trustee, partner or employee of an entity that receives or competes for funding under this ordinance; or be a person seeking or having an arrangement concerning future employment with an entity that receives or competes for funding under this ordinance. For the purposes of this ordinance an individual’s “immediate family” means his or her spouse, domestic partner, child, child of a spouse or domestic partner, brother-in-law, sister-in-law, parent, parent of a spouse or domestic partner, a person for whom the individual acts as a guardian, or a person claimed as a dependent on the individual’s most recent federal income tax return. Subject to the preceding sentence and applicable law, an individual serving as an officer, director, board member, trustee, partner or employee of an entity that receives or competes for funding under this ordinance, or who has an interest in such an entity, shall not thereby be disqualified from serving on the Committee, but shall fully disclose any such relationships and shall not vote on any matter in which the interest of such entity is directly involved. For purposes of this section, “entity” does not include a City department or office.
C. Upon the resignation, retirement, death, incapacity or removal of a Committee member, the authority appointing such member may appoint a replacement for the balance of the term. Committee members shall serve without compensation.
D. The City Council shall prescribe by ordinance or resolution the terms of office of Committee members, which may be staggered to provide continuity, and the initial committee members shall be selected within six months after voter approval of the proposition submitted by this ordinance. The City Council may prescribe such other rules relating to the operation of the Committee as shall be necessary or appropriate.
E. The Oversight Committee shall continue in existence through 2016, and thereafter if so provided by ordinance.
Section 10. Election - Ballot Title. The City Council directs that the City Clerk file this ordinance with the Director of Elections of King County, Washington, as ex officio supervisor of elections, requesting that the Director of Elections call and conduct a special election in the City in conjunction with the state general election to be held on November 3, 2009, for the purpose of submitting to the qualified electors of the City the proposition set forth in this ordinance. The City Clerk is directed to certify to the King County Director of Elections the ballot title approved by the City Attorney in accordance with his responsibilities under RCW 29A.26.071. The following ballot title is submitted to the City Attorney for his consideration:
Seattle’s Proposition 1 concerns increased property taxes for 7 years for low-income housing assistance.
This proposition would fund affordable housing and provide for other housing needs of low-income households, as provided in Ordinance XXX. It would authorize collection of regular property taxes above RCW 84.55 limitations. This proposition allows $145,000,000 in additional taxes over seven years beginning in 2010, limited to $20,714,286 annually. The 2010 regular tax rate would be limited to $3.60 per $1,000 assessed value, including about $.17 in additional taxes.
Should this levy lid lift be approved?
Yes
No
Those in favor shall vote “Yes”; those opposed shall mark their ballots “No”.
Section 11. Severability. If any one or more provisions of this ordinance shall for any reason be held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect any other provision of this ordinance or the levy of additional taxes authorized, but this ordinance shall be construed and enforced as if such invalid provisions had not been contained herein, except that if any provision shall be held invalid by reason of its extent or the range of persons eligible to benefit therefrom, then such provision shall be deemed to be in effect to the extent permitted by law and to benefit only such class of persons as may lawfully be granted the benefit thereof.
Section 12. Ratification. The City Clerk’s certification to the King County Director of Elections of the proposition referred to in Section 10 and any other acts taken after the passage of this ordinance and consistent with its authority, are ratified and confirmed.
Section 13. Effectiveness. Those portions of this ordinance providing for the submission of a ballot proposition to the voters shall take effect and be in force immediately upon the approval by the Mayor; or if returned to the Council by the Mayor unsigned, then immediately upon its return; or if not approved and returned by the Mayor within 10 days after presentation, then on the 11th day after its presentation to the Mayor; or if vetoed by the Mayor, then immediately after its passage over his veto. All provisions of this ordinance that have not taken effect on an earlier date shall take effect and be in force thirty (30) days from and after the Mayor’s approval of this ordinance, but if this ordinance shall not be approved and returned by the Mayor within ten (10) days after presentation, such provisions shall take effect as provided by Municipal Code Section 1.04.020.
Passed by the City Council the ____ day of ________________________, 2009, and signed by me in open session in authentication of its passage this
_____ day of ___________________, 2009.
_________________________________
President __________of the City Council
Approved by me this ____ day of _____________________, 2009.
_________________________________
Gregory J. Nickels, Mayor
Filed by me this ____ day of __________________________, 2009.
____________________________________
City Clerk
(Seal)
Chinese
