SEATTLE — Sharp divisions emerged Wednesday as Seattle residents, housing advocates and environmental activists sparred over a proposal that would dramatically reshape the city’s land-use appeals process.

At issue is legislation proposed by Seattle City Councilmember Eddie Lin. The bill would eliminate State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) appeals to the city’s Hearing Examiner for major legislative actions, including Comprehensive Plan amendments and development regulations.

It prompted impassioned testimony at a public hearing before the Seattle City Council’s Land Use Committee, which Lin chairs.

Lin said his bill would prevent costly delays that have slowed housing production and climate-focused planning. Opponents countered that it would strip residents of one of their few affordable avenues for holding city government accountable on environmental issues before projects move forward.

Lin said that concentrating new housing in dense, walkable neighborhoods near transit reduces suburban sprawl, preserves forests and farmland, lowers greenhouse gas emissions and limits pollution harmful to salmon and orcas.

Lin said Seattle can achieve both affordable housing and a healthy urban tree canopy through thoughtful planning. However, having projects repeatedly delayed by appeals that ultimately have little legal standing is something the city cannot afford, Lin said.

Over the past several years, Washington lawmakers have expanded exemptions within SEPA specifically to reduce red tape for housing production. But Seattle’s municipal code still allows administrative appeals on many actions that state law has already exempted.

Although those appeals are frequently dismissed because of state law, city officials said the process itself can significantly delay legislation.

Under Lin’s proposal, residents could no longer file administrative SEPA appeals before the Hearing Examiner for major legislative actions. Instead, challenges would have to be brought before the Washington Growth Management Hearings Board or King County Superior Court.

During the public hearing, opponents said such a change would effectively place environmental appeals beyond the reach of many residents because pursuing litigation requires attorneys and substantially higher costs.

Several speakers warned that raising the financial barrier to appeals would disproportionately silence neighborhoods and community groups with limited resources.

Environmental advocates also argued the legislation removes an important layer of independent oversight before major decisions become law. They said appeals have historically uncovered flaws in Environmental Impact Statements, revealed previously undisclosed information and prompted improvements before projects advance.

The debate is expected to intensify as Seattle prepares for the next phase of updating its Comprehensive Plan under Mayor Katie Wilson’s administration. The forthcoming environmental review of the plan, which includes proposals for taller and denser development across the city, is likely to make the question of who can challenge environmental reviews a central issue in the coming year.

No vote was taken following Wednesday’s public hearing. The legislation will return to the City Council for further consideration.

New York — 

The eight-story, 150-unit Elara at the Market looks like just another sleek apartment building in Seattle’s trendy Belltown neighborhood.

Blocks from Pike Place Market, the Elara opened six years ago with a lush private courtyard, a gym and wine storage lockers. The building is full of Amazon workers who pay more than $2,000 a month for a one-bedroom to live near the company’s headquarters.

But this upscale building with a rooftop deck overlooking the Puget Sound recently transformed into something more likely to conjure images of high-rise public housing in the US or Soviet-style concrete housing blocks: government-owned housing for low-and middle-income renters.

Seattle believes the affordable housing model has left a void for middle-class households that earn too much to qualify for housing lotteries, but too little to pay for a market-rate apartment. The city’s solution is to create a social-housing model inspired by Vienna, where roughly half of residents across a wide range of incomes live in government-subsidized homes.

It’s not the traditional public housing the federal government built for low-income households during the 20th century. It’s also not affordable housing, privately-owned developments built with government subsidies and tax credits in exchange for below-market rents.

The Seattle Social Housing Developer (SSHD), the city’s newly established public development authority, purchased the Elara for $61 million this month from a private owner.

While many cities and states are trying to climb out of the housing crisis by cutting regulations and relaxing zoning laws to entice private developers, a growing movement on the left wants the public sector to build social housing. The acquisition is the first step in Seattle’s effort to buy more than 1,000 apartments and build 600 new units of social housing for mixed-income households over the next five years.

Roughly 15 of the Elara’s units are vacant. The social developer held a lottery to fill them for people making up to 50% of area median income — $65,000 for a two-person household. It also froze rents on existing market-rate tenants for two years. Nobody’s being evicted, but as apartments turn over, they will be filled with lower and middle-income renters.

Bilal Durrani, who works as a manager at Amazon and has lived in a 600-square-foot, one-bedroom apartment at the Elara for a year, was surprised when he received a letter in the mail from his new landlord.

He wondered if public ownership would affect his rent or change who lives in the building.

He’s glad the building’s new owner froze his rent and eliminated storage fees. He’s happy to be a guinea pig in Seattle’s experiment — at least for now — and hopeful that social housing may help people struggling to afford the city.

“People always get freaked out when the government steps in, but I’m glad the city is doing something,” he said.

‘Wasted three years and $60 million’

Social housing has won strong political support on the left in Seattle in response to soaring housing costs. The average home value doubled from 2012 to 2022 to $945,000, while rents grew 75% to roughly $1,800 a month.

Voters in 2023 approved a ballot measure establishing a public developer to construct social housing for people earning up to 120% of area median income — roughly $138,000 for a single person.

Last year, voters approved a dedicated “social housing tax” to finance the effort, levied on businesses like Amazon and Microsoft who pay employees more than $1 million in salary annually. Revenue from the tax will fund the social developer’s acquisitions and development, and rents for higher-income tenants will subsidize lower-income neighbors.

But many development experts and business advocates in Seattle have criticized the social developer’s strategy. They say it’s ineffective, led by activists without experience developing housing, and siphons off resources that could go to building housing for people with lower incomes.

The tax generated $115 million this year, and critics believe that funding should go to building new homes or preserving existing affordable apartments for lower-income renters. Dozens of nonprofit and for-profit affordable housing providers in Seattle are reporting losses and have sold off their properties, risking that they become market-rate apartments.

“I think the Seattle Social Housing Developer should develop social housing,” said Jamie Madden, an affordable housing development consultant in Seattle and the author of “Bittersweet Lane: Creating Home(s) in the American Affordable Housing Crisis.” “They have wasted three years and $60 million and delivered rent control for residents who are not low income and 15 new apartments.”

Seattle’s model represents a sharp break from how the federal government has funded affordable housing in America since the 1980s: the federal Low-Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC), which awards tax credits to private companies that construct housing for lower-income residents.

Social housing advocates believe this model is broken. LIHTC funding is limited every year, and projects financed with the credits have strict income eligibility limits. Tenants with incomes above 80% of area median income typically don’t qualify. Credits also typically expire after 15 or 30 years, at which point the building’s owner can start charging market rents.

Montgomery County, Maryland, an affluent suburb of Washington DC, pioneered the social housing model Seattle and other US cities are trying to replicate.

Montgomery County has used a $100 million fund to finance construction of new mixed-income, mixed-use developments. These projects do not require LIHTC credits or other affordable housing subsidies. The first building, the Laureate, opened in 2023 with a courtyard pool, theater and a gym.

“We were very inspired by them,” said Tiffani McCoy, the interim director of the Seattle Social Housing Developer.

But Seattle’s social housing push has had growing pains since it was formed in 2023. The social developer’s board has turned over and it fired its first CEO in January, installing McCoy.

The social developer wanted to acquire a high-end building in a hot neighborhood to dispel the idea that people who make less money “should only have access too lower-quality housing,” McCoy said. It was also less risky than buying a struggling property behind on millions of dollars of repairs.

But ultimately, McCoy said it’s about thinking about housing as a public good like libraries and roads.

“We don’t want to rely on the private market, which is ultimately there to create a profit off renters,” said McCoy. “We need a model in this country, like other countries across the world, that creates housing as public infrastructure.”

SEATTLE — Seattle Mayor Katie Wilson is wading into a series of high-profile Democratic primaries, backing progressive challengers against longtime state lawmakers in a move that could test both her political reach and Seattle’s relationship with Olympia.

Wilson has endorsed several local candidates, including Ron Davis in the 46th Legislative District and Hannah Sabio Howell in the 43rd District. Both are running from the left against veteran Democratic legislators, including Senate Majority Leader Jamie Pedersen.

The endorsements come as Democrats in Washington state face a series of intraparty challenges, with younger and more progressive candidates arguing that longtime lawmakers have not moved quickly enough on affordability, housing, taxation and social services.

Political analyst Sandeep Kaushik called Wilson’s decision “a high-risk roll of the dice,” saying she is not only challenging veteran Seattle Democrats but also potentially putting at risk the city’s relationship with state leaders in Olympia.

“It’s definitely going to be” a test of her political influence, Kaushik said, noting that Pedersen can point to a long list of progressive credentials, including work on LGBTQ rights and the state’s new millionaires’ tax.

Wilson’s endorsements follow a national trend in which progressive candidates have tried to build momentum by challenging establishment Democrats in deeply blue areas. Kaushik said the timing did not appear coincidental, coming shortly after New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani endorsed several candidates who went on to win their races. But he also noted a key difference: Wilson won Seattle’s mayoral race by a much narrower margin and has faced a bumpier start in office.

Davis, who is running against Rep. Gerry Pollet in the 46th District, said he entered the race after working on statewide housing legislation and deciding Olympia was a place where he could make a larger impact.

“Urgency” has been missing in Olympia, Davis said, arguing that too many lawmakers treat the job as a side role while families struggle with the cost of living. He said he wants the state to move faster on housing, transit, Sound Transit accountability, and progressive taxation.

Davis said Wilson’s endorsement matters because of her role in Seattle’s JumpStart payroll tax and broader progressive organizing.

“Katie Wilson is one of the people who has done more to bring taxation on the rich in Washington state than anyone else,” Davis said, calling JumpStart a measure that “broke the legal dam” for other forms of progressive taxation.

Davis also defended a challenge from the left after Democrats delivered the millionaires’ tax, saying internal competition is healthy and necessary.

“I think it’s needed,” Davis said. “There needs to be disagreement, and there needs to not be a cling to the status quo.”

According to a Washington Public Disclosure Commission candidate finance chart, Democrat William Dreher has raised about $258,000 in the race and spent $21,000. Davis has raised about $140,000 and spent $26,000.

Pollet has raised about $96,000 and spent $14,000.

Kaushik noted that Dreher, a prosecutor who worked on cases connected to the Jan. 6 attack on the US. Capitol, makes that race a three-way contest.

In the 43rd District, Sabio-Howell is challenging Pedersen, one of the most powerful Democrats in the Legislature. Sabio-Howell said she is running because the affordability crisis has worsened under current leadership.

“I believe in Washington’s potential to be the best place in the country to build good lives if we can afford it,” Sabio Howell said. “Status quo leaders, career politicians who have been in office as the crisis of affordability has only gotten worse, are not the people who are going to make an affordable future possible.”

Sabio Howell acknowledged the millionaires tax as a “historic win,” but argued it came only after a severe budget deficit forced lawmakers to act. She said progressive leadership from the 43rd District should have pushed for the policy earlier.

She also rejected arguments from large employers that Washington has reached a tipping point on taxes, comparing the current debate to warnings made during the fight for a $15 minimum wage. Sabio-Howell said voters have repeatedly shown support for funding social services through measures such as the capital gains tax, the Climate Commitment Act and the Long Term Care Act.

Sabio-Howell said Wilson’s endorsement aligns with her campaign’s focus on affordability, housing, schools, public transit and shifting political power away from corporate interests.

The fundraising gap in the 43rd District remains significant. The PDC chart shows Pedersen has raised about $348,000 and spent $77,000. Sabio-Howell has raised about $82,000 and spent $23,000. A third candidate, Heather-Marie P. Wilson, reported no contributions or expenditures on the chart.

Wilson did not return a request for comment.

The Washington State Labor Council also issued a statement, “Jamie Pedersen is the most progressive Senate Majority Leader we have ever had, delivering on major progressive priorities like progressive tax reform and rent stabilization when previous majority leaders couldn’t. If he is not re-elected, the next majority leader will most likely be less progressive and less willing to tackle the toughest problems. Campaigning is an extended job interview and Pedersen has demonstrated he can do the job effectively and in-line with his district’s values. Our unions and community allies should be united in fighting back against a right-wing authoritarian government, not divided against legislators like Jamie Pedersen and Gerry Pollet, who have strong progressive voting records. We have a common foe: the conservative forces in Washington seeking to take over our State Supreme Court, attack our trans community, and repeal the Millionaire Tax and force deep cuts to education and healthcare.”

His campaign also cited a statement from Katy Ozog, the Executive Director of the Washington Senate Democratic Campaign, “Jamie Pedersen is the most progressive Senate Majority Leader in state history, and the author of landmark legislation like the Millionaires Tax, a champion for affordability measures like rent stabilization, and a leader in the fight for LGBTQ+ equality. He is proud to be the only candidate in the race to have sole endorsements from labor unions and Planned Parenthood.”

Kaushik said the broader picture is a Democratic Party “at war with itself” in Washington, with younger, outsider candidates challenging incumbents they view as part of a failed establishment.

“The mayor doesn’t see herself as just another typical Democratic politician,” Kaushik said. “She very much sees herself as part of and a leader of a movement, a progressive political movement that really aims to take over and change the Democratic Party.”

Whether Wilson’s endorsement can help deliver victories for those challengers remains uncertain. Her allies see the move as part of a broader push for progressive leadership at every level of government. Her critics may view it as an unnecessary risk at a time when Seattle still depends on Olympia for housing, transportation, public safety, and budget support.

For now, the races offer a clear test of whether Wilson’s narrow mayoral victory has grown into broader political power or whether longtime Democratic incumbents can withstand a challenge from their own left flank.