Seattle, Washington, Proposition 1A and 1B, Funding Source for Social Housing Developer Measure (February 2025)

From Ballotpedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Seattle Proposition 1A and 1B

Flag of Washington.png

Election date

February 11, 2025

Topic
City tax and Local housing policy
Status

ApprovedApproved

Type
Initiative


Seattle Proposition 1A and 1B was on the ballot as an initiative in Seattle on February 11, 2025. It was approved. Proposition 1A was a citizen-initiated measure, Initiative 137, and the Seattle City Council referred Proposition 1B to the ballot as an alternative measure. Voters approved Proposition 1A.

Voters first decided on Question 1, which asked whether to use revenue from taxes on payroll expenses in order to fund the development and maintenance of social housing in Seattle. Voters then decided on Question 2, which asked voters to choose between Proposition 1A (Initiative 137) and Proposition 1B (City Ordinance 127101).

Question 1

A "yes" vote supported using revenue from taxes on payroll expenses in order to fund the development and maintenance of social housing in Seattle—either by: 

  • establishing a new tax of 5% on annual compensation above $1,000,000 paid in Seattle to any employee, as proposed by Proposition 1A (Initiative 137), or
  • using existing payroll expense tax revenues to allocate $10,000,000 from the next five annual budgets, as proposed by Proposition 1B (City Ordinance 127101).

A "no" vote opposed using revenue from taxes on payroll expenses in order to fund the development and maintenance of social housing in Seattle.


Question 2

Voting for "Proposition 1A" supported implementing Initiative 137, which was designed to establish a new tax of 5% on annual compensation above $1,000,000 paid in Seattle to any employee in order to fund social housing
Voting for "Proposition 1B" supported implementing the city council's proposed alternative measure, which was designed to use existing payroll expense tax revenues to allocate $10,000,000 from the next five annual budgets


Question 1 required a simple majority for approval, while Question 2 required the highest amount of votes for approval.

Election results

Below, "Yes" votes corresponds to votes for "Either" and "No" votes correspond to votes for "Neither."

Seattle Proposition 1A and 1B

Result Votes Percentage

Approved Yes

137,857 72.99%
No 51,010 27.01%
Results are officially certified.
Source


Seattle Proposition Nos. 1A and 1B
ResultVotesPercentage
Approveda Proposition 1A 112,126 63.13%%
Defeatedd Proposition 1B 65,497 36.87%%

Text of measure

Ballot title

The ballot title for Proposition 1A and 1B was as follows:

City of Seattle

Proposition Nos. 1A and 1B Proposition 1A (submitted by Initiative Petition No. 137) and Proposition 1B (alternative proposed by the Seattle Council and Mayor) concern payroll expense tax funding for the Social Housing Developer.

Proposition 1A would impose a tax on payroll expenses for employers doing business in Seattle. The tax rate would be 5% on annual compensation above $1,000,000 paid in Seattle to any employee. Proceeds would support the Social Housing Developer, a public development authority created to develop, own, and maintain social housing in Seattle. The tax imposed would be in addition to the City’s payroll expense tax levied under Seattle Municipal Code Chapter 5.38.

As an alternative, the Seattle City Council and Mayor have proposed Proposition 1B (Ordinance 127101), which would allocate $10,000,000 of existing payroll expense tax revenues from the next five annual budgets to fund the Social Housing Developer. Proceeds would support the acquisition and development of social housing in Seattle. The Developer would have to apply and meet certain conditions as determined by the City before the award of funds. If no allocated funds are awarded within three years of their initial allocation, they would be available to support other affordable housing projects.

1. Should either of these measures be enacted into law?

Yes

No

2. Regardless of whether you voted yes or no above, if one of these measures is enacted, which one should it be?

Proposition 1A

Proposition 1B

Full Text

The full text of this measure is available here.


Measure design

Proposition 1A

The measure was designed to establish an additional tax on payroll expenses for employers doing business in Seattle, in addition to the existing payroll expense tax as of 2025. Under the measure, the tax rate would be 5% on annual compensation above $1,000,000 paid in Seattle to any employee, and any revenue from the tax would go to fund the Social Housing Developer, a public development authority created to develop and maintain social housing in Seattle.[1]

Proposition 1B

The proposed alternative was designed to amend the existing payroll expense tax to allocate $10,000,000 of revenues from the next five annual budgets in order to fund the Social Housing Developer, a public development authority created to develop and maintain social housing in Seattle. Under the proposal, the Developer would have to apply and meet certain conditions determined by the city before awarded funds. Under the proposal, if no allocated funds were awarded within three years of allocation, they would be available to support other affordable housing projects.[2]

Support for Proposition 1A

Let’s Build Social Housing (Yes on Prop 1A), a committee supported by House Our Neighbors, was leading the campaign in support of Proposal 1A.[3]

Supporters

  • AFSCME/WFSE Council 28[4]
  • AFSCME/WFSE Local 304[4]
  • IBEW 46[4]
  • MLK Labor[4]
  • Seattle Education Association[4]
  • Seattle's Building Trades Unions[4]
  • UAW 4121[4]
  • UFCW 3000[4]
  • Washington Working Families Party[4]
  • Washington Community Action Network[4]
  • Tenants Union of Washington State[4]
  • Transit Riders Union[4]
  • Seattle Green Party[4]
  • Seattle Democratic Socialists of America[4]
  • Faith Action Network[4]

Officials

Arguments

  • Let's Build Social Housing said, "Employers who purchase the labor of highly compensated workers above a $1 million in total compensation will pay a 5% marginal tax. Employers pay the social housing payroll tax, not employees. The money from the excess compensation tax can be used to construct and acquire buildings for social housing, fund operations and maintenance of buildings, and staff up the Seattle Social Housing Developer (SSHD). This initiative will create an annual, dedicated revenue stream for social housing in Seattle. This revenue stream can then be bonded on to accelerate production of social housing."[3]
  • The Urbanist Elections Committee said, "Seattle’s housing crisis is daunting, and it warrants both additional resources and thoughtful experimentation with new models of providing that housing. Prop 1A does just that by adding a new tax on the megarich to fund its mixed-income housing creation model. The excess compensation tax would only hit companies who compensate individual employees above $1 million and would generate roughly $53 million per year by taxing the wealthiest businesses who operate in Seattle. That’s enough dedicated revenue to get land acquisition and social housing construction started."[5]

Support for Proposition 1B

Supporters

  • Seattle Metropolitan Chamber of Commerce[6]
  • Downtown Seattle Association[7]

Officials

  • Councilmember Maritza Rivera[7]
  • Councilmember Bob Kettle[7]
  • Councilmemer Cathy Moore[7]
  • Councilmember Tanya Woo[7]

Arguments

  • Councilmember Maritza Rivera said, "[Prop 1B] balances the need for innovation with the need for accountability. It also allows the Seattle Social Housing Developer, a new public development authority, the opportunity to show what they can build here in Seattle. But it won’t give a blank check to another new agency that does not have the experience creating housing."[7]
  • John Fox, Alice Woldt, Gary Clark, the Reverend David Bloom, George Howland, Jr. and Joe Martin said, "The council’s alternative is still generous, committing $10 million annually to SSHD but from existing revenue sources and for five years only. In addition, any money that the city appropriates and SSHD does not use within three years would be returned to the City of Seattle’s Office of Housing and made available to all the nonprofits seeking funds for their low-income housing projects. The council’s alternative is a ‘pilot project’, not a cookie jar always open regardless of performance—something far more appropriate for a start-up housing developer."[8]

Path to the ballot

On June 24, 2024, House Our Neighbors submitted 37,819 signatures to Seattle’s Office of the City Clerk to get Initiative 137 on the ballot. The initiative cleared the requirement of 26,521 valid signatures. Initiative 137 was referred to the ballot by the Seattle City Council on September 19, 2024. The Council proposed an alternative, City Ordinance 127101, which was also referred to the ballot. Councilmembers voted 6 to 1 to run an alternative ballot measure against Initiative 137, with Councilmember Tammy Morales voting No.[9]

How to cast a vote

See also: Voting in Washington

See below to learn more about current voter registration rules, identification requirements, and poll times in Washington.

How to vote in Washington


See also


Footnotes

  1. City of Seattle, "Resolution 32148," accessed January 8, 2025
  2. City of Seattle, "Ordinance 127101," accessed January 8, 2025
  3. 3.0 3.1 Let's Build Social Housing, "Homepage," accessed January 8, 2025
  4. 4.00 4.01 4.02 4.03 4.04 4.05 4.06 4.07 4.08 4.09 4.10 4.11 4.12 4.13 4.14 4.15 4.16 4.17 4.18 4.19 4.20 4.21 4.22 Let's Build Social Housing, "Endorsements," accessed January 8, 2025
  5. The Urbanist, "The Urbanist Endorses Seattle Prop 1A to Fund Social Housing," accessed January 8, 2025
  6. Seattle Metropolitan Chamber of Commerce, "Homepage," accessed January 8, 2025
  7. 7.0 7.1 7.2 7.3 7.4 7.5 Cascade PBS, "Seattle Council pushes alternative to social-housing tax," September 20, 2024
  8. Cascade PBS, "A Better Alternative," September 18, 2024
  9. Seattle City Clerk, "CB 120864," accessed January 8, 2025
  10. Washington Secretary of State, “Frequently Asked Questions on Voting by Mail,” accessed March 31, 2026
  11. 11.0 11.1 11.2 Washington Secretary of State, "Voter Eligibility," accessed March 31, 2026
  12. Washington Secretary of State, "Register to Vote in Washington," accessed March 31, 2026
  13. Washington State Legislature, "Wash. Rev. Code § 29A.08.140," accessed March 31, 2026
  14. 14.0 14.1 The Hill, "Wash. gov signs universal voter registration law," March 20, 2018
  15. 15.0 15.1 Washington Secretary of State, "Automatic Voter Registration (AVR)," accessed March 31, 2026
  16. Washington Secretary of State, "Same-Day Registration," accessed March 31, 2026
  17. My Edmonds News, "30-day residency requirement for WA voter registration struck down," July 16, 2024
  18. Washington Secretary of State, "Washington State Voter Registration Form," accessed March 31, 2026
  19. Under federal law, the national mail voter registration application (a version of which is in use in all states with voter registration systems) requires applicants to indicate that they are U.S. citizens in order to complete an application to vote in state or federal elections, but does not require voters to provide documentary proof of citizenship. According to the U.S. Department of Justice, the application "may require only the minimum amount of information necessary to prevent duplicate voter registrations and permit State officials both to determine the eligibility of the applicant to vote and to administer the voting process."
  20. Florida's law takes effect on January 1, 2027
  21. Washington State Legislature, "Wash. Rev. Code § 29A.40.160," accessed March 31, 2026
  22. Note: This text is quoted verbatim from the original source. Any inconsistencies are attributable to the original source.