People need places to live so they don’t get wet. Or cold. Or any of the other myriad ills that can befall people when they are, say, homeless. Seattle voters will get the opportunity to address this by voting for Proposition 1, a renewal of Seattle’s low-income housing levy, which will roll out $145 million in aid over seven years starting in 2010.
The levy would pay for the construction of 1,670 new apartments, rental assistance for 3,025 families, and homebuyer assistance for 180 families in Seattle. The rest of the money would go toward short-term loans to buy land for affordable housing and money for operations and maintenance of existing low-income housing. Fully 60 percent of the levy will be targeted at people making less than 30 percent of Seattle’s median income, or around $17,700 for a one-person household. Another 30 percent will go to residents making up to $40,440 for a two-person household; and less than 10 percent will be reserved for people making up to 80 percent of median, or $51,200 for a two-person household.
That’s a lot of numbers, so look at it this way: For a modest investment, we get thousands of new units of housing (and construction jobs for the folks who will build them).
Seattle voters have passed the housing levy three times, in 1986, 1995, and 2002. This time, the levy will cost the average Seattle homeowner about $65 a year—the same tax level as the last housing levy. We think it’s well worth the investment.
PubliCola picks “yes” on Proposition 1.
Tweet
Right on Publicola.
We need Prop 1 in Seattle to continue progress toward the goal of providing everyone the opportunity to live in a safe, decent, and affordable home. Renewing the Seattle Housing Levy will help keep people on fixed incomes, those who can’t work due to a disability, or those working for low wages in housing that they can afford.
It will create jobs, leverage additional public and private money at a 3 to 1 ratio, and keep the most vulnerable people in Seattle out of homelessness and in housing.
Follow Publicola’s lead and VOTE YES on Prop 1!
Thanks for the love ‘cola! A lot of people need help staying in their home or finding an affordable place to live; people like seniors, those with disabilities, domestic violence survivors and working families.
Vote YES on Prop 1, renew the Housing Levy.
Along with the positive comments about what the Housing Levy will do, think of this: this is the 4th renewal of the levy. We already have lost more housing units than we’ve gained over the 4-year span of the 10 Year to End Homelessness. Just think of how much farther behind, very rapidly, we would become if we lost the Levy.
This is an average $5.50 a month in property tax. You’re already paying a little less than that (and I’m talking to renters too, who usually get charged for their owner’s tax). Pay it a little longer, please. It’s the best investment you can make to help people get housed. Someday you might need that housing.
“providing everyone the opportunity to live in a safe, decent, and affordable home”
Or destroy the city trying……even Pol Pot wasn’t that big an absolutist.
“10 Year to End Homelessnes”
After you do that, what’s next, winning the fight against gravity?
Willing the fight against illogical comments, perhaps.
Speaking of Pol Pot (but not really)…
One more thing to add to the Yes column for Prop 1 is that there are tons of soldiers coming back from Iraq and Afghanistan with horrendous physical and mental injuries that make it difficult to impossible for them to fully support themselves, now and possibly into the future.
The Seattle Housing Levy will help prevent the tragedy of another generation of America’s injured veterans being abandoned to the streets of our city. Housing Levy YES!
@Ian -
I missed the part in The Killing Fields where they built affordable housing. Maybe it was in the director’s cut?
Frankly we all do deserve the opportunity to live in a safe, decent, and affordable home. It doesn’t mean we all get to live in a 6,000 sq. foot house. It simply means that we should have housing in the city that people of all incomes can afford without breaking the bank. A home that allows us to buy food, pay the electricity, pay for transportation to work – you know that basics that make up the whole “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” thing.
Thanks Publicola. We need the Levy now more than ever, as folks are finding themselves homeless for the first time these days due to foreclosure and job loss because of the recession. $5.50 a month is a pretty modest investment for what we get in return. The Levy isn’t going to single-handedly solve homelessness, but it is a very important tool in the toolbox towards this goal. Losing it now would be devastating – thanks for urging folks to vote YES on PROP ONE.
@3, sarah68:
“We already have lost more housing units than we’ve gained over the 4-year span of the 10 Year to End Homelessness.”
Really? How is it that our population has grown from roughly 560,000 to 600,000 in the last 10 years while losing more housing units than we’ve gained? Is everyone just shacking up together? I have rarely seen dense housing torn down to be replaced with less dense housing. Not to mention former parking lots that have been turned into midrise or highrise apartments and condos. I simply have trouble believing your claim.
@T Chen:
I think she meant “low-income housing” as in we have lost more low-income housing than we have gained (i.e. fancy condo developments convert or knock down cheaper housing.) So in the end, we aren’t replenishing our stock.
If you want to decrease the cost of housing, you need to increase the supply. That means removing restrictions that make housing more expensive, such as unnecessary limits on height, requirements for parking for every unit, etc.
Seattle, acting alone, will never end homelessness. For every unit of free or subsidized housing we build, there will be yet another person seeking to live here.
@ T.Chen:
By that logic, one way to eliminate homelessness would be to allow the homeless to die of exposure in the streets.
Seattle has always done the right thing with the housing levy, lets do it again.
@13
Actually, my reasoning in post 12 would not lead to that result. But I’d love to see you run through the logical steps that led you that conclusion.
Under what circumstances would Publicola and the Seattle community withdraw support for a housing levy? This one is 68% higher than the last one. It has $13 million for administration! To write a few self-justifying reports and do some cost accounting? In good times, the message is that we need the housing levy because the cost of housing is increasing so rapidly. Now while housing costs are decreasing, we hear that it’s necessary because times are hard. If we have indeed lost more low-income housing units than the levies have replaced, then maybe we are using the wrong strategy. It seems that all arguments for the housing levy are faith-based, and not amenable to falsification.
Here is our strategy for housing in Seattle: upzone large areas of the city, encouraging the replacement of actually-affordable housing with upper-middle to luxury housing (Belltown). Subsidize housing destruction in preferred neighborhoods like South Lake Union with massive public subsidies for streetcar, Mercer Street beautification, and the rest, to turn an affordable neighborhood into a suburban office park. Then ask for housing levies to support the low-income housing agency complex.
I don’t see much progress, or any acheivable goal or general effect on homelessness or rents.