Ambitious Housing Reform Has a Real Shot This Year
Years Into a Housing Crisis, the State Might Let Us Build More Places to Live This Year!
Washington Democrats Defeat Transphobic Bills as Most LGBTQ Protections Clear Hurdles
If the Protections Ultimately Pass, We Could See Big Gains for the Community
Washington Takes Aim at the Gun Industry
We’re Banning Assault Weapons! Requiring Gun Permits! And Unleashing Bob Ferguson! Maybe!
How Washington Plans to Fix the Behavioral Health Crisis
Crisis Care, Not Jail, Is the Answer
Are We Going to Tax the Rich or What?
Probably Only If You Scream at Your State Reps for the Next Several Years
The Strangerâs 2023 Bill Tracker
A Big List of Promising and Not-So-Promising Proposals to Fix the State’s Polycrisis
The Strangerâs Big-Ass Preview of Washington's 2023 Legislative Session
Guns! Abortion! Housing! Police Reform! Health Care! Taxing the Rich! And Steamrolling the GOP! Or Not.
Get Jesus Out of Our Uteruses
Democrats Vow to Make Washington an Abortion Sanctuary
Washington's Next Police Reform Battle
Ending Qualified Immunity Won't Be Easy, but It's Necessary
Here we go: Wasting no time at all, Representatives Jessica Bateman (D-Olympia) and Andrew Barkis (R-Olympia) pre-filed a bill to tackle Washingtonâs housing crisis by legalizing the construction of lots and lots of housing.
If that sounds familiar, itâs because itâs exactly where we were last year, with bills that sought to end bans on âmissing middleâ housingâthat is, house-sized residences with multiple units in walkable neighborhoods. Last yearâs proposals would have overhauled state zoning codes to allow duplexes, triplexes, and fourplexes in areas that were previously restricted to single-residence sprawl, but the ensuing NIMBY freakout was enough to doom the bills and any hope of reform in 2022.
But now itâs a new year! Weâve got a new bill! And, crucially, weâve got new reasons to hope that this time will be different.
A Workgroup May Have Actually Worked. Sort of.Â
Last yearâs opposition to housing reform was spearheaded by the Association of Washington Cities (AWC), a corporation consisting of representatives from various cities and towns around the state. At the time, AWC Board of Director President and University Place Council Member Kent Keel explained that the cities were ânot opposed to housing," they just thought that "every town and city is unique, and solutions canât be one-size-fits-all.â
Numerous other suburban AWC members echoed that sentiment, while some members from cities expressed frustration at the organizationâs opposition to reform. So, whatâs changed?
âI heard that feedback, and I acted,â said Rep. Bateman. âI went to the AWC conference this summer. I met with their Legislative Priorities Committee. I talked about my bill from last year and why it was so important, and how Iâd be doing it again.â
For their part, AWC also spent much of 2022 preparing a more productive approach than simply stonewalling reforms.
âWe created a workgroup of city officials that kicked off in August,â said AWC lobbyist Carl Schroeder. The workgroup met over the course of several weeks to hammer out policy recommendations that would be acceptable to members from small towns (it included representatives from Pasco, Leavenworth, Port Orchard, Ridgefield, and more) and big cities (Seattle, Spokane, Olympia, Tacoma). In that time, they met with various legislators, developers, real estate groups, and housing organizations.
âI was not sure that AWC would get to a place of having solutions,â said Seattle City Council Member Dan Strauss, who supported Batemanâs bills last year and who served as a member of the group. But when it was time for the group to settle on some recommendations, he said, âI was kind of surprised. Itâs not bad.â
Not Bad, but Not GreatÂ
In a December 2, 2022 presentation to the House Local Government Committee, the AWC laid out its preferred solutions: A mix of allowing more density, eliminating costly and slow review processes, and throwing an absolute fuckton of money at the problem. âIncrease funding for low-income housing by at least $1 billion per year,â the presentation concludes. A familiar idea.Â
In terms of new housing, âwhat weâre going to need over the next twenty years is pretty staggering,â Schroeder said. The AWC wants to see more density around transit, which is a controversial proposition, since that choice can focus construction in areas with wide, unsafe streets and more air pollution. They also want to allow up to three units per lot near schools and parks, more state funding for local development and infrastructure, and a new real estate excise tax to fund subsidized housing.
Also, delightfully, âWe want to eliminate external design review boards that argue about brick patterns,â Schroeder said. âWeâd still maintain the ability to have design standards, but theyâd be applied at the permit counters.â
Thatâs music to the ears of Seattle City Council Member Teresa Mosqueda, who liked Batemanâs bills last year. âReduced regulations ⊠reduce barriers so that people can build more housing at a faster pace,â she said. Seattle recently exempted affordable housing from design review, which âwas a proven policy during COVID,â Mosqueda says. âWe saw more affordable housing come on faster, and itâs high quality.â
Bateman described the AWC's recommendations as âa good start," but she said "the scope of this housing crisis really demands us to be more ambitious than only allowing triplexes in only those areas [near schools and parks].â
And when it comes to funding, she backs a massive investment in the Housing Trust Fund: âA six-times increase in what weâre currently spendingâ is needed. She acknowledged that finding that money "will be a heavy liftâ but insisted that âwe need a million homes over the next twenty years, half of which are needed to be affordable.â
To that end, Bateman has big plans for multiple housing bills this legislative session. âThe House Democratic Caucus is making it a priority to address the housing crisis,â she said.Â
Builders Wanted
So, what are the chances that everyone will play nice and pass some meaningful reform this year? Bateman is cautious about taking a victory lap before the session even starts. âI think that peopleâs aversion to having more housing built around them will continue,â she said. But the crisis is only growing more dire, and âwe need a different strategy because itâs impacting constituents in every Legislative District across the state.âÂ
Schroeder raised a red flag over possible construction difficulties down the road. âOne thing we learned through this process is the building workforce is a big limiter here,â he said. According to the AWCâs research, builders would need to increase their workforce âby 20 to 25 percent over the top workforce theyâve ever had.â
And, of course, even if the gate is flung wide open to massive, dense developments, every city and town in the state will need money to manage that growth, subsidize housing, and build out city services for the influx of residents.
âWe need revenue for local jurisdictions to work on implementing the requirements,â Mosqueda said. But, she pointed out, the cost of not building is even higher: âThe number-one thing I hear from local businesses when I say âhow can I support you?â is, âworkers need housing in this city and they need access to child care.â ⊠Finding the opportunity to lift up the positive aspects of having more housing ⊠itâs a win-win for business, families, the local economy and the health of our communities.â