Month: May 2018

Mandatory Housing Affordability is not the answer we’ve been hoping for: why we need a comprehensive strategy to stop displacement alongside MHA

Puget Sound Sage and many of our partners in South Communities Organizing for Racial and Regional Equity (South CORE) have been fighting and pushing for a strong inclusionary zoning policy in the City of Seattle since 2008. We have consistently pushed and a strong inclusionary zoning (IZ) policies in order to share in the benefit of increased land value created through public investment and increases in zoning capacity. For the most part, the City of Seattle has already upzoned downtown, South Lake Union, and many urban villages without getting much in return. But a strong IZ policy for the rest of the city could leverage the next wave of development to ensure our communities can prosper in place.

Although we support inclusionary housing and increasing housing supply to accommodate the growth of our region in principle, Mandatory Housing Affordability (MHA) in its current form, may cause more harm than good in specific neighborhoods. The low affordable housing/in-lieu fee required of developers will not adequately slow increasingly speculative land values in many neighborhoods, especially places that have been designated as high displacement risk. (These are neighborhoods that are at risk largely because of historic systems of institutional racism in housing and job markets.) In the current real estate market, any increased zoning capacity creates a tipping point for both price and speed of land sales, with purchase prices well over asking and appraised values. Local buyers, especially non-profit developers and community based groups, cannot compete in this kind of market, removing the most effective tool against displacement—community-driven and controlled development.

While MHA will hopefully create 6,000 new units of affordable housing over the next 10 years, easing the overall affordability crisis, it does little to address displacement in specific neighborhoods which are most at risk. MHA will help reduce the impacts of the affordable housing crisis for the future residents of Seattle, but the policy does nothing to prevent impending displacement and eventual houselessness of currently housed low-income communities and communities of color.

We believe the time to be bold is now. Over the years, Sage has consistently argued for a strong inclusionary zoning policy with specific anti-displacement focus, based on a racial justice analysis. Unfortunately, we get same message from a majority on Council and the Mayor’s office: if the policy “goes too far” we will get sued by developers, potentially resulting in state pre-emption or legal precedent that undermines any inclusionary policy. But there are many examples when Council has adopted legislation with known risks of litigation, including the First in Time policy, for-hire driver collective bargaining ordinance, and progressive income tax. The difference has been who is group threatening to sue – developers seem to always force the City into watering down legislation and not taking risks. The inconsistent application of this argument isn’t really about legal precedent or pre-emption in the case of MHA, but rather reveals who wields power in City Hall and ultimately determines the fate of communities of color and low-income people in our City.

Among 65 recommendations in HALA, one specifically calls for a comprehensive anti-displacement strategy. Since HALA, advocates have shaped and won important strategies like the Equitable Development Implementation Plan and subsequent Fund, but we still lack adequate funding source for the EDI to stem the tide of displacement. Additionally, existing policies and funds need to re-orient to complement and center the EDI support community-driven development. If we believe that self-determination is a core value of social and racial justice, we need MHA and all City policies to focus on helping marginalized communities thrive in place. So, alongside implementation of MHA through the citywide rezone, we need the City to create and adopt a comprehensive anti-displacement work plan.

We believe that housing is a human right, that low-income communities and communities of color have a right to self-determination, and that development without displacement is possible through community stewardship of land. MHA does not deliver on these values, which is why we support the following set of strategies that can make MHA better and compliment the City’s inclusionary housing strategy.

We urge the City to:

1. Re-evaluate the MHA percent designation for neighborhoods with high displacement risk. Just over the last year, land values have skyrocketed in neighborhoods with high displacement risk and low and medium cost neighborhood designations should be revised to match the rising cost of land.

2. At a minimum, direct in-lieu fees generated from neighborhoods with high displacement risk back to those neighborhoods as investments in affordable housing and community-driven anti-displacement projects.

3. Determine a permanent and adequate funding source for the Equitable Development Initiative beyond the $5 million per year brought in by the tax on short-term rentals. When the current real-estate cycle eventually slows, that fund will become even more critical in acquiring land exactly when the City budget will shrink.

4. Develop a district-wide online notification system to alert stakeholders to new development activity in their neighborhood. Community stakeholders can more effectively participate in shaping development plans that incorporate community and cultural institutions, provide adequate housing types, and preserve the businesses we depend on when we can communicate early and often with developers.

5. Commit to developing policy and funding to support affirmative marketing, right to return, or preference policies in neighborhoods with high displacement risk.

6. Create a comprehensive strategy to help keep low-income or fixed-income single family homeowners in place. Increasing maintenance costs and property taxes make it harder and harder for older homeowners, low-income homeowners, and homeowners of color to afford to stay in their homes, which are one of the only strategies residents have to build wealth and lift their families from poverty. The daily barrage of cash offers for homes, especially homes within existing urban villages or proposed urban villages, may solve the short term need for fast cash but ultimately threaten the stability of low-income homeowners and communities. Strategies should include:

– Develop a program to defer property taxes until sale of property.
– Fund and develop a canvas to inform homeowners of their alternatives and tradeoffs to selling their homes.
– Develop land-use and development strategies to allow homeowners to stay in their homes, but leverage the unused land on their property to both develop new affordable housing AND help homeowners pay property taxes and maintenance costs.

7. Create a temporary City-wide anti-displacement voucher program to help residents stay in place while MHA units are still under construction. This program could complement the City’s Rental Relocation and Inspection Ordinance, by increasing the income qualifications to 80% AMI and extending eligibility to renter or homeowners whose housing costs have increased more than 10% in a given year.

8. Update the Administrative and Finance plan for the Seattle Housing Levy and MHA fund distribution to match Equitable Development Initiative priorities and other community needs like incentivizing family sized units, produce more units at 30% and 40% AMI for families and households who don’t need wraparound services, and prioritize community ownership of land.

9. Develop and implement zoning overlay districts that preserve existing institutions and businesses and the residents who depend on them in neighborhoods with high displacement risk.

Mandatory Housing Affordability in its current form is not enough to keep the workers, families, residents, businesses, and community institutions at risk of displacement in place. We urge you to include these recommendations in the Companion Resolution to the Citywide Rezone and then begin work to implement them through actual legislation and budget deliberations later this year.

Why Immigrant and Refugee Businesses Are Being Displaced in Tukwila, and What We Can Do About It

Why are 15 small businesses serving immigrants and refugees being forced to move?

In November of 2017, the Mayor and Council of Tukwila voted to locate a new police station and criminal court – called the “Justice Center” – on four acres of land along Tukwila International Boulevard. In the same vote, they gave themselves both 1) the power to take the land from the owners and 2) the power to displace 15 businesses owned by immigrants and refugees located on this land.

These businesses serve many immigrant and refugee communities in Tukwila and across south King County, particularly Somalis and East Africans. Many of the business owners are also important leaders in the Muslim community.

How did the Mayor and Council decide the 15 small businesses must be displaced for the “Justice Center”?

Early proposal for siting the public safety building on the City Hall campus. City of Tukwila, 2015.

The City of Tukwila has been planning to update and expand many of its publicly owned buildings over the last five years. The City created a Public Safety Plan in 2016 to address structural problems with several fire stations, the police headquarters and the criminal court. In November of 2016, Tukwila voters barely approved (by 31 votes) a bond to raise property taxes and borrow money through a bond to pay for the Public Safety Plan.

Prior to the Plan, however, the City considered several locations for the Justice Center, including building it next to City Hall. Although this was a good alternative, they voted instead to build the Justice Center on a new site – which would likely require taking private land. The Mayor and Council eventually decided to build a new fire station headquarters next to City Hall.

After the bond was approved, the Mayor and Council set up a committee to advise where the new public safety buildings would be placed. No-one from Tukwila’s immigrant and refugee community was appointed to the committee. One of the criteria for choosing a site included “opportunity to catalyze private developments,” which has nothing to do with the function of a police station.

Map of parcels being taken by City of Tukwila. City of Tukwila 2017.

In October 2017, the committee recommended to the Mayor and Council the final sites for four new buildings, including the Justice Center. Most of the 15 affected immigrant and refugee businesses found out about losing their livelihoods only one week before the final vote on November 6th. Despite quickly organized opposition from the businesses and immigrant rights advocates, the Mayor and Council decided the businesses must go.

Unfortunately, cities in the United States have a long history of destroying communities built by people of color, especially black people, in order to construct highways, bridges, transit, offices, police stations, and other facilities. Even with this well-known history, the Mayor and Council have chosen to target the most vulnerable people and businesses in Tukwila for forced relocation, which will ripple throughout the community.

Who will be impacted by the City’s decision and how?

Abdidahir Sugulle is owner of Have a Nice Day Jewelry, one of the few places in King County for the Somali community to buy gold jewelry. The store is one to the 15 that will be forced to move.

The business owners are from Somalia, Korea, Mexico, and Vietnam. Many came to the U.S. because they were fleeing displacement from their home nations. Several have been in business for 10 or more years, including Marwa Restaurant that opened in 1998. Though their businesses are small from the outside, thousands of customers come from all over south King County to get goods and services that they cannot find elsewhere.

In fact, being located next to each other, along with other important places like Abu-Bakr Mosque, has helped grow a successful retail and food service center in an area of Tukwila that was mostly vacant 20 years ago1. It also means that if they do not stay together, they may fail on their own. Several business owners have said to the Mayor and Council that affordable space is hard to find, especially enough space to relocate together. They worry that they will have to move far away from Tukwila, which is becoming more expensive. It may mean that many go out of business.

But the impact will be larger than just the 15 business owners. This group of businesses provides critical services that allow for a thriving, intergenerational Muslim community in King County. Workers from the airport come at all hours of the day to eat and pray. Families come to shop all week after services or school at local mosques. Elders and community members without cars in Tukwila find respite and safety in these spaces. They are often the first businesses to make donations to the community. Displacing these businesses has been described as “cutting out the heart” of the community.

What does the displacement of businesses mean for the future?

City of Tukwila Comprehensive Plan and zoning map showing plans for regional and neighborhood commercial development along Tukwila Int’l Blvd.

Rents in Tukwila are going up with the rest of the county. For this reason, fewer immigrants and refugees are being resettled in the city. Gentrification is beginning in Tukwila, fueled in part by plans for new development.

The City’s Comprehensive Plan envisions the length of Tukwila International Boulevard from 160th to 139th redeveloped as high density buildings, up to four and six stories high2. The City encourages developers to replace older buildings, many rented by small businesses, with new larger ones.

As developers find Tukwila more attractive for the region’s booming economy, Tukwila’s thriving immigrant and refugee population community businesses could eventually be priced out. The loss of even a few of the businesses here could result in a domino effect, as other culturally important businesses and anchors also move out to follow displaced residents. We note also that the City of SeaTac is also displacing all of the East African businesses out of Bakaro Mall, another important small business center for the community and near to this site.

Are there alternatives to displacement?

The City of Tukwila has many options that would not involve displacing the 15 small businesses from the city.

1. The City could revisit the decision to build a brand new police station and criminal court on a new site. In recent years, communities of color across the country have risen in protest of mass incarceration and police violence, calling for alternatives to both policing and prosecution. Part of this movement has been resisting new police facilities that will just perpetuate criminalization of black and brown people. In Seattle, anti-incarceration organizations have fought two major facilities – a new County juvenile detention facility and a new police station in the city’s North Precinct. In the case of the North Precinct, the activists succeeded in stopping a $140 million new station and the City announced recently it would make do with modest upgrades to the existing station. Tukwila could plan for using less space, not more, over the next 25 years, in transitioning to policing alternatives.

2. At the very least, the City should delay taking any property and making progress on design for the new police station. The cost of the “Justice Center” has more than doubled from the $28 million told to voters in 2016, to $68 million. The funding gap for the Public Safety Plan, including the three fire stations and public works buildings, is now $77 million. To fill this gap, City staff are proposing to issue more debt (backed by existing taxes), delay other public projects, make cuts in the general budget, raising new taxes (like the gambling tax) that could otherwise go to public services, and delaying one of the new fire stations. The Justice Center should be put on hold until a solution can be found that does not penalize the communities of color for the City’s dramatic underestimation of costs.

3. The City should prioritize creating stable commercial space for the 15 businesses, and many more that may be displaced in the next few years from development pressures. All of the small immigrant and refugee businesses along Tukwila International Boulevard are at risk from redevelopment of buildings they rent, which tend to be older and lacking investment from property owners. The City already has experience partnering with local non-profits, to build affordable housing and community space, with the prime example being Tukwila Village. Instead of threatening the 15 small businesses with eviction, the City should be working with them to ensure they have affordable, quality commercial space in which they can stay co-located.

4. The City should help develop an overall plan to preserve Tukwila’s immigrant and refugee community, driven by community leaders and organizations. Under goal 3 of the City’s 2012 Strategic Plan, it states: 3. Cultivate the success of the City’s entrepreneurs and small businesses, including businesses owned by refugees, immigrants, and non-native English speakers. A new plan, specific to community preservation, should prioritize resources to help business and cultural organization thrive in place, and be factored into any other plan – including for public safety.

1 Somali Community Services Coalition, “Equity for All: Including East African Voice in Future Development,” March 2013. 

2 City of Tukwila Municipal Code, Title 18, Zoning.  The property to either side of this stretch of Tukwila International Boulevard is primarily zoned Regional Commercial or Neighborhood Commercial Center.