ELECTION 2016: Mayor wants housing-levy vote in August

If the City Council goes along with Mayor Murray‘s request, you’ll vote on the renewed/increased Housing Levy in August – until now, there hadn’t been a decision about whether it would be on the primary or general ballot. From the announcement, just out of the WSB inbox:

Building on over 30 years of success, today Mayor Ed Murray delivered his proposal to City Council to replace and expand the Seattle Housing Levy in 2016. His $290 million proposal follows three months of stakeholder and community engagement to discuss the levy and hear what the community’s priorities are for this affordable housing resource.

“Expanding the Housing Levy is the most important thing we will do this year to support affordability in Seattle,” said Mayor Murray. “The levy is a powerful resource to build more affordable homes for low-income families and help people at risk for falling into homelessness. We value an equitable and diverse city and we will renew our commitment to affordable housing.”

The Mayor is recommending the Housing Levy be placed on the August ballot.

The City Council has created a select committee, chaired by Councilmember Tim Burgess, to consider the Mayor’s proposal. A public hearing on the proposal will take place at City Hall on April 4, 2016 at 5:30 p.m. …

Read the rest of this morning’s announcement here.

Two West Seattle meetings with briefings about and discussion of the levy have already been held. We covered both. Here are our reports:

February 23rd meeting (with video)
February 3rd Southwest District Council meeting

68 Replies to "ELECTION 2016: Mayor wants housing-levy vote in August"

  • Pile-o-Rox March 3, 2016 (11:18 am)

    Sorry Mayor Murray, but you, and the entire city counsel, have shown yourselves to be entirely incompetent in this area and completely out of touch with everyone but the special interests that have your ear.




    What do we have to show for the half a Billion you spent on homelessness this past decade? Nothing but a pile of garbage full of needles.


    Until Murray and the rest of the city counsel realize that throwing money at something without a real plan is not only a waste but a detriment, we will continue this cycle. I know Murray thinks there’s an endless supply of other people’s cash; but that’s just not the case.


    Want a real solution to homelessness? It is easy and compassionate. Create and maintain adequate shelters with employment search and addiction counseling requirements.  Those who are willing to try to better themselves can find help in spades; those who don’t can move along and take up a sidewalk or patch of dirt somewhere else. Otherwise, we are just flushing money down the toilet.


    We have all seen the Seattle Times article about how there are shelters in Seattle (right next to the jungle in fact) that have not been at capacity in over a decade. In a recent outreach effort, upward of 80 people in the jungle were offered shelter for 6 months, on the condition that they take part in addiction counseling. You know how many takers there were – ZERO. Enough said.


    In short, stop being part of the problem Mayor Murray. You are in over your head and although you are no doubt well intentioned and have a good heart, you do not have a clue what you are doing. 






    • WSB March 3, 2016 (11:45 am)

      Please note that, as we have pointed out in previous discussions, most of the levy money is NOT about homelessness. Follow the link after the quoted passage for the full breakdown.

      The Times column you mention is about one shelter/rehab center, and the Salvation Army operators’ views on the city’s policy. You can include a link in any comment here on WSB and it should hotlink, as was the case pre-overhaul. Anyway, it’s a Danny Westneat column from last week: http://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/some-shelter-beds-go-empty-even-right-next-to-seattles-jungle-encampment – TR

  • Rick March 3, 2016 (12:07 pm)

    Barracks and chow halls worked just fine when I was in the military back in the early 70’s.  Of course I had to follow a few rules but it wasn’t all that bad.  Add some mental health/addiction counseling and I think you might have a plan.

  • Seattlite March 3, 2016 (12:50 pm)

    No way will this get my vote.  Seattle is corrupted through extremely inept leadership.  Mr. Ed and the city clowncil have no clue how to make the homeless productive, self-sustaining citizens.  King County voters need to really think before voting for this proposal.  Seattle leaders don’t have King County voters best interest at heart.  Families who have lost their jobs, housing and are in transition to getting new jobs and housing are the ones to help because they truly want to be productive and self-sustaining.  Drug addicts, alcoholics will need to be under constant monitoring (think how much that will cost the tax payers) or they will most certainly abuse their drug of choice and the tax payers’ dollars used to house them. The mentally ill are the ones that need permanent help through facilities  equipped to care for their mental illnesses…depending on their level of mental illness they may or may not become productive and self-sustaining. 

  • trickycoolj March 3, 2016 (12:54 pm)

    Maintain existing apartments, does that mean actually do maintenance at the apartments around High Point? They’re not going to keep around their critical market rate buyers that are contributing their property taxes if they continue to let the rest of the low-income rentals go to shambles.

    • WSB March 3, 2016 (1:23 pm)

      The Housing Authority, which as you know is the owner of High Point, is separate from the city Office of Housing, they’ve reiterated.

  • Ms. Sparkles March 3, 2016 (1:06 pm)

    I agree Pile-O-Rox.  I know the levy isn’t just to address homelessness, it focuses on affordable housing, but like how the city is (mis)-addressing homelessness, their affordable housing plan is just as illconceived.  

    They want to double the amount they collect to buy land to build housing  instead of reigning in the destruction of current affordable housing.  The city wants its growth, but is too….scared? weak? ….I’m not sure what, but too something to stand up to the builders and create & enforce parameters for growth that maintains affordability.

    The 12 year property tax break to builders who maintain a token  amount of affordable units is insulting to the rest of the property owners.

    No.  No,no, no, no, NO!

    • AMD March 3, 2016 (2:23 pm)

      Short of building a wall around Seattle and telling people they can’t move here until someone moves out, we need more housing in general.  Low income and otherwise.  I love, LOVE old homes and the history in them as much as anyone and it kills me to see them torn down, but that doesn’t change the fact that a lot of people are moving to the area.  It’s supply and demand.  The prices are going to keep going up and push more people away from being able to afford to live here unless there is more supply across the board.

  • AMC March 3, 2016 (1:31 pm)

    Absolutely not! Keep raising property taxes, and homeowners will be driven out of Seattle too! I am so sick of property taxes always get foot with the bill. Beginning to wonder if its worth being a homeowner in Seattle…

    • sam-c March 3, 2016 (2:35 pm)

      Yes, they’re going to drive the middle class out of Seattle  I’ve been making extra payments to my escrow account when I can afford it – $ 20 here, $ 30 there.

  • JayDee March 3, 2016 (1:46 pm)

    They should schedule the Levy vote for the general election, not another mid-summer or winter election.

  • Disgruntled in Seaview March 3, 2016 (1:57 pm)

    Absolutely NO to Mayor Murray’s levy-crazed administration. Murray is trying to stuff this onto a ballot that only his minions and sycophants will drop in the ballot box (read The Stranger lately?). He’s too afraid to put it on the November ballot and suffer the scrutiny that this type of levy demands.

    How ironic that Mayor Murray wants to create affordable housing by taxing property owners out of their homes.  Shame on you Mayor Murray. 

    Pile – O – Rox you are right on target.

  • Rick March 3, 2016 (2:00 pm)

     I’m surprised they’re not scheduling the election  between 10:00PM&6:00AM  and 10:00PM&6:00AM  to achieve their desired results. But of course, it will probably pass anyway. Seems to happen a lot here. 

  • Fiwa Jcbbb March 3, 2016 (2:15 pm)

    I’m not so interested in making the homeless live up to Pile-O-Rox’s moral standards. People who for whatever reason want to live outside of them will continue to do so despite the scathing  judgements of Pile and others. But you can’t just have them ****ing everywhere, it’s unsanitary. Seems like a few Porta Potties or a park/prison style restroom here and there would go a long way toward that, and be a hell of a lot cheaper than building shelters with Pile monitoring who can come in.

    Then there is our current crop of politician who always want to facilitate their perception of the right thing with ever-more property taxes.
    Funny how these people admit wealth disparity is ruining America, then embrace the nation’s most regressive tax system at every turn. It’ll only create more homeless people, and if I end up being one of them, I’m gonna need a drink. See you under the freeway…

  • BL March 3, 2016 (2:18 pm)

    I am one who thinks that taxes should be paid to fund many public services and quality of public life projects.  BUT, we need an income tax in this state or some other tax that EVERYONE shares. It is downright unfair that our taxes to fund so many things come from property owners and we have 10% sales rate. It is as simple as that in my mind.

    I lived in a state that had city, state and federal tax and I pay way more in this Washington for less. I am not voting for anything anymore until I can move on from this injustice. I think we should be required to have the debate about an income tax every time they come to us with a property tax raise.

    • DarkHawke March 3, 2016 (9:36 pm)

      What makes you think that property taxes aren’t payed by EVERYONE?  Even if you don’t own, landlords are hardly going to shell out of their own pockets to pay the higher taxes.  They pass on the increases at lease-renewal time.  Same thing with increasing business taxes; the customers pay business taxes, not the business owner.

      A state income tax WILL NOT be more fair, because there will ALWAYS be someone who insists that the “working poor” won’t have to pay.  In that case, we would truly have people voting for tax increases who won’t have “skin in the game,” as they say.  And it’s simply nonsensical to give ANY government one more way into your wallet when they’re irresponsible with the money they already take out of it!  There are only two real solutions: keep voting down tax increases and keep voting out incumbents until we finally get folks who get the message that they can’t run their pie-in-the-sky pet programs on our backs anymore.

  • tm7302 March 3, 2016 (2:24 pm)

    Thanks Mayor Murray for reaching yet again into the never ending wallet of Seattleites…

    • ChannelingLewisBlack March 4, 2016 (8:58 am)

      Not reaching into the wallets of all Seattlelites, just the suckers that bought SFRs.  Renters and big landlords don’t have the same equations.  Spare me the lectures of “everyone pays property taxes”

  • John March 3, 2016 (2:33 pm)

    No Way!  I just received by property tax statement and it’s now $5,400/yr.  That’s for my 6,000 sf lot located about 3 blocks south of Jefferson square.  Are you kidding me?  After 30 years of hard work I finally own my home and now I’m paying Seattle $450/month to live there.

    This needs to stop! 

    • AMD March 3, 2016 (3:11 pm)

      Seattle levies aren’t the primary reason your taxes are going up.  Unincorporated King County pays higher property taxes and they aren’t paying any of the Seattle levies.  Your payments are what they are and rising quickly because the property you’re on is pretty valuable and quickly climbing in value.

      I’m not saying you have to love the levy or vote for it, I just think it’s better to be informed about the issue before voting.  If your opposition is purely about the taxes, rest assured that the increase over the existing levy will be about the same as a cup of coffee at Starbucks every month.

      • Jakers March 3, 2016 (8:39 pm)

        You are quite correct, you should be informed before you enter the voting booth.


        This is the best breakdown of the levy increases that I have seen.  You’ll note that before the potential increase in the housing levy the amount of property tax paid in 2016 will almost double.  (This does not include the recent increase in the school levy that, as per usual, passed)  This is not due to the increase in property values, but in the increased levy rate.  

        Just think…almost double the money, but the city isn’t going to do anything different than the same tired things that have failed before.  But hey!  All the holier-than-thou’s and weekend warriors for the cause can vote yes and then tell each other how they’re making a difference by paying more taxes!  And meanwhile the people at the bottom will get worse and worse off, and the people in the middle will sink lower and lower…

        Good plan, right?

  • Jissy March 3, 2016 (2:57 pm)

    Rox: wanna go in on some yard signs with me in anticipation of this Levy and I’m sure the many more to come?  Not to mention his re-election?  I propose “Mr. Mayor: NOT. ONE. DOLLAR. MORE!”   I can front some dough if others will join me.

    • tm7302 March 4, 2016 (5:47 pm)

      Sounds like a great idea!

  • wetone March 3, 2016 (3:00 pm)

    Hey now,  good old Mayor Murray needs to fund  Kubly’s Pronto bike program, and many others like the : fancy colored crosswalks,  road patches that disappears when wet,  funding multiple levy’s per yr,  giving bigger tax breaks to developers,  installing utilities for the jungle folks. The list just goes on and on.  If this passes it just gives him more funds to shuffle around till the next levy, as his poor choices with spending continue. Pushing a large majority of tax payers down another notch.

     Mayor Murray’s  ATM = Seattle’s tax payers, time to take his card away….

  • anonyme March 3, 2016 (3:15 pm)

    I am completely mystified as to who this Mayor or this City Council represents.  Not law abiding taxpayers, that’s for damn sure.

  • Les March 3, 2016 (3:18 pm)

    Hell No ! My property taxes have already  increased 23% over what I paid in 2015`

    How about affordable housing for the law abiding people that that work very hard every day of their lives  

    • Nora March 3, 2016 (5:25 pm)

      I feel lucky now. Mine only went up 13%!

  • thee March 3, 2016 (3:20 pm)

    Any comment from Lisa? No? Not yet? Is she busy replenishing the ink for the city/developer rubber stamp commission?

    C’mon Lisa, pay attention to your neighborhood!

  • Mark32 March 3, 2016 (3:22 pm)

    Sadly, it’ll pass. 

    Seattle voters love to pay taxes!


  • KT March 3, 2016 (3:53 pm)

    Let me guess, you get much less voter participation with an August ballot item so that increases his chances of getting this thru?????

    • sam-c March 3, 2016 (4:00 pm)


    • DarkHawke March 3, 2016 (9:42 pm)

      Yes, and that’s added to the mail-only voting, which has (surprise, surprise) itself depressed voter turnout.  The local politicos ain’t stupid, WE ARE for letting them get away with this distortion of what used to be an effective election system.  Oh, and don’t forget the decades-ago relaxation of levy rules regarding the total voting electorate and REQUIRING a 60% majority, instead of a simple majority.

  • Mark schletty March 3, 2016 (3:55 pm)

    We desperately need either an initiative or the state legislature to force property tax levies onto the November general election ballots. Having levies voted on in special elections is unconscionable.   It virtually guarantees that committed, relatively small, special interest groups will always get what they want.  Blame it on a lazy uninformed electorate if you wish, but the politicians who set these special elections know that it is just the way it works.

    • Jon Wright March 3, 2016 (5:20 pm)

      But doesn’t it also mean that committed, relatively small opposition groups can put the kibosh on something they don’t want?

    • DarkHawke March 3, 2016 (9:47 pm)

      We should also restore: in-person voting, to encourage participation and diminish fraud; the old 60% supermajority for tax levies, instead of allowing them to pass with a simple majority; and the requirement that a fairly healthy percentage of those who voted in the last general election have to vote either yes or no for the levy, or it doesn’t pass even WITH 60% approval.  It ought to be EXTREMELY hard for government to raise taxes on the populace, even with their participation.  If the faucet always runs full blast, you have no incentive to conserve water.

  • Keith March 3, 2016 (4:19 pm)

    I can’t wait to vote YES on this.  I don’t pay nearly enough in taxes.

  • Les March 3, 2016 (4:24 pm)

    Keith,  you don’t need to wait mail a check today.

  • Pile-o-Rox March 3, 2016 (4:42 pm)

    Fiwa Jcbbb,  I am
    interested in what moral judgment you think I am passing?

    Is it the notion that people who want
    a hand out should at least try to be employed?

    Wow, you are right, I am quite
    the ogre.

    Or wait, that people who want a hand out should not be addicted to

    Again, quite the ogre.

    Really, it appears you are the one making moral judgment my

  • george March 3, 2016 (4:44 pm)

    All you landlords b sure to pass any tax increase to renters.  Homeowners r taking all the burden in this city.  Nothing wrong with taxing, but everyone has to share the burden.

  • Roxy March 3, 2016 (4:54 pm)

    Well said, Pile. At this rate I will be taxed out of my house and joining the jungle. Still trying to figure out if the school levies were included in my $330 property tax increase on my 700sf house. Looks like I’ll be forced out of Seattle when I retire in a few years. I support several Real Change vendors weekly and I know I don’t have any answers for the problem. It’s tough once you hit a bump in the road. The way back is long and arduous even with out substances.

  • West Seattle Hipster March 3, 2016 (5:12 pm)

    ” Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.”   – Al Einstein




  • West Seattle since 1979 March 3, 2016 (5:28 pm)

    George: They will, as they should. To be honest, I’m getting a little tired of the assumption that property tax increases don’t affect renters. Also, have you seen how high rents are nowadays? 

  • jim March 3, 2016 (5:29 pm)

    Shouldn’t the mayor lay out why the last levy (2005), “The Ten Year Plan To End Homelessness” failed so miserably and where the monies were spent before trying to soak the tax payers once again?   

  • Junctionite March 3, 2016 (5:39 pm)

    Nope! My property taxes went up 15% in a single year, my pay only 2%.  I need a break! Voting no!!!

  • Recovering Urbanist March 3, 2016 (7:12 pm)

    Unfortunately, for all the voters here who are opposed to these never-ending levies to fund special projects and line developers pockets, there is a Joey, Kimmy, and David out there voting yes because they want Seattle to be just like San Francisco. Note that San Fran says it addresses affordability too, yet it’s one of the dirtiest urine covered cities in the country. Next you’ll get your notice for eminent domain so they can build the light rail (WSTC comment section folks in the know say it’ll be necessary in West Seattle), and you’ll get your biggest increase yet in property taxes for ST3. If you are concerned about a $290 million levy, how will a $15-30 billion levy impact your bill (as called for by Transpo Choices and others)? Not to mention Pronto bailouts, HALA upzones, and a Port Commission that won’t invest in electric hookups for boats thereby gassing us out of this neighborhood. Sigh.

    • Seattlite March 3, 2016 (7:54 pm)

      Exactly.  Seattle is being setup to totally crush the middleclass, leaving poor and rich voters.  Seattle used to be known as a clean city (litter free, etc.).  now it’s a mess due to the lack of leadership for a growing city like Seattle.  Greedy developers and politicians have created the lackluster, dirty Seattle of today…what a shame.

  • Diane March 3, 2016 (7:52 pm)

    renters are already paying more than our fair share of the increased property taxes; have you seen the insane rent increases???  my landlord has specified in past 3 yrs rent increase notices that it is due to increased property taxes; and I got zero COL pay increase this year (Social Security Retirement)

    • ChannelingLewisBlack March 4, 2016 (9:06 am)

      Rent is determined by the market, so your blame is not on the landlord, who is conveniently using this as an excuse to raise and not looking like a profiteer.  It is with Amazon, Microsoft and the other employers that drew 140k people into the city.  The trend reverses, and your rent will go down next time your lease is up.  Has nothing to do with property taxes.  It’s a sham that landlords and the city are using…as long as we don’t have rent control, the market determines rents.

  • New thinking needed March 3, 2016 (9:35 pm)


    Has it correct – the public outhouse is unsanitary and stinky!!! I visited Pioneer Square on a sunny January Sunday afternoon- the whole place reeked of urine and it was quite disgusting to have that odor constantly hanging in the air for most of the blocks down there…… Pet and humans alike contribute to this issue.

  • AJ March 3, 2016 (9:38 pm)

    Pure manipulation so that two major property tax levees (this as ST3) aren’t up for voting at the same time. 

  • canton March 3, 2016 (10:21 pm)

    How bout a levy exemption for retired folks on SS? My father has worked his whole life, to pay off his house. Now, would have to apply for gvmt subsidies because of ridiculous tax increases. So… They are asking him through property taxes, to subsidize those that cannot afford to live here, even though this tax would possibly send him packing?? Who’s running this nuthouse?

  • canton March 3, 2016 (10:32 pm)

    Is there anyway to force this to November ballot, so it doesn’t skate by?

    • WSB March 3, 2016 (11:38 pm)

      The City Council has to agree to send it to the ballot. Deluge your City Councilmembers – you elect three, D-1 (Lisa Herbold) and two at-large, (Lorena González and Tim Burgess) – with your opinion on the levy and when it should go to voters. Also note in the announcement above, there is an official public hearing in early April before final decisions are made. – TR

  • TheKing March 3, 2016 (11:47 pm)

    Nope. The “wealth redistribution” has gone too far. The hard working middle class would like to leave their children something…..anything. You are greedy, senseless politicians spending like drunken sailors.

  • ChannelingLewisBlack March 4, 2016 (9:08 am)

    33% tax increase on a 30% increase in “valuation”.  There is NO need for a levy much less a levy increase in that perspective – I’m thinking my property didn’t cause a 33% increase in city expenditures.

    Herald’s perspective on the bike fiasco gives me hope – write her!

  • Mickymse March 4, 2016 (10:39 am)

    There are sure a lot of uneducated folks posting here…

    1) This is not a levy for homelessness. While it includes a SMALL amount of dollars for services to those at risk of homelessness, the vast majority of the money goes to building or maintaining affordable housing.

    2) While we have voted for a number of levy increases in the last couple of years, your taxes are being driven up by the increase in your property’s VALUE. While I’m not in the most desired neighborhood in West Seattle, I am still paying LESS in taxes than I was in 2009 because our value hasn’t recovered to pre-recession levels yet.

    3) Putting this on the August ballot when fewer and more conservative voters turnout is actually BAD for the levy. It’s not an attempt to “hide” it or “sneak it past” homeowners.

    4) Property owners pay for the services that Seattle provides, and you don’t get to pick and choose only the ones you like and not pay for the ones that others like. So congratulations to those of you who have paid off your mortgages, but that doesn’t mean you shouldn’t be having to pay taxes — unless of course you’d like to stay inside your house and stop using the roads, sidewalks, parks, libraries, etc. that everyone else is paying for.

    • Ms. Sparkles March 4, 2016 (1:23 pm)

      Mickymse –  I don’t see the opposition here as being against paying for “roads, sidewalks, parks, libraries, ect.”  The opposition is to a levy for affordable housing, which is double the previous levy amounts for the same cause,  to address a problem that is now worse than ever.  Yes the majority of the property tax increases in valuation – but that also means each already passed levy is getting more for their cut.  This levy is ask for a 100% increase of its previous cut, on our value based increased assessments – that’s double the money they’re asking for.

      If the city hasn’t gotten this right in the last 20 years – what are they offering as evidence that they will suddenly get it right with double the money?  What explanation have they offered for why they haven’t shifted more of this burden to developers?  What are their specific action plans that are different from what they have done in the past – which obviously isn’t working?

      This isn’t just about too much tax, it’s about too much status quo and too little accountability 

  • West Seattle since 1979 March 4, 2016 (12:06 pm)

    Mickeymse, thanks for providing a different perspective.

  • Pile-o-Rox March 4, 2016 (12:17 pm)

     Mickymse      -“There are sure a lot of uneducated folks posting here.”

     Thanks for being the unelected arbiter of education. Perhaps you should take a look at the rules of conduct for this site before lobbing insults.


    In terms of information and education, I’ve got it in spades.


    I assume you – oh great educated one – are aware that a majority of studies show that rent control and similar measures actual hurt the poor (other than the very few who obtain the direct benefit). See, e.g., http://www.businessinsider.com/does-rent-control-work-no-it-actually-increases-rent-prices-for-most-people-2015-9?r=UK&IR=T

     Just like other issues that our city think sound good to throw money at, this is a bad idea because it is not well thought out. 


    And no – increased taxes are not by and large a product of increased value. Not sure where you are getting your information; but the increase is almost exclusively tied to increased levy measures.  See, e.g., http://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/data/seattle-property-taxes-are-we-gouging-ourselves/

    As the sixth most taxed city in the top 50 in the U.S., I think enough is enough. 



    • WSB March 4, 2016 (12:34 pm)

      I followed your link. Second to last line in that story, Gene Balk writes: “Seattle property taxes are high because our homes are worth so much, not because we’re being gouged by an excessively high rate.”

      • Pile-o-Rox March 4, 2016 (12:45 pm)

        Yes, WSB – that is why they are high in a relative sense.


        But the statement by Mickymse  had to do with the INCREASE in the rate, not the overall rate (“your taxes are being driven up by the increase in your property’s VALUE”).


        As correctly noted in the article, “[a] main driver of that increase is a host of property-tax levies approved by voters over the years.”




        • sam-c March 4, 2016 (12:53 pm)

          The graphic at the article really is interesting.  It includes a note: 

          “Note: This graphic shows only voter-approved property-tax dollars paid to the city. Numbers are adjusted for inflation.”

          so does that mean that those levy comparisons are all ‘equal’ regardless of property value? Is the value of your house constant in that graph (even if it’s not in real life) ? Ie, your house is worth $400,000 in 1995 and you paid $ 27 on voter approved levies; now in 2016, your house is worth $ 400,000 and you’re paying $ 228.50 in voter approved levies.   Is that what the disclaimer means?

  • TnT March 4, 2016 (4:10 pm)

    Please take a few minutes to learn about the housing levy and its 30 year history of creating affordable housing. The city has lots of information at http://www.seattle.gov/housing/levy

    The levy has funded over 12,500 apartments that are affordable for 50 years and has exceeded its goals every time. That’s a pretty strong record of success.

  • Craig March 4, 2016 (5:05 pm)

    In an interesting op-ed in the Seattle Times this week, King County Assessor John Wilson writes…  “Voter-approved ballot measures are the main driver of higher property taxes.”


    Also, as the county website explains, an increase in value does not necessarily mean a higher property tax.  Your assessed value determines your share of the total tax to be collected, relative to everyone else.  Excluding voter approved measures, total taxes collected can only increase by 1% each year.



  • Ex-Westwood Resident March 4, 2016 (7:02 pm)

    You gotta love Seattle!!!

    They complain about the cost of housing, yet they pass any and all levies that raise property taxes.

    Then they pass regulations that also raise the cost of housing.

    Yes, I realize that “Supply and Demand” and the popularity of the Puget Sound area have a lot to do with it, but the Clowncil and their tax raises are also to blame!!!

  • Lonnie March 8, 2016 (3:09 pm)

    Count the ways: After receiving my property tax bill last month, I would like to know how  painting community crosswalks, painting bus lanes, granting developers grand tax breaks, BERTHA and funding bankrupt bike rental programs  while  crime runs away benefits the overall city.  Life long loyal residents are being reluctantly forced out.   No way will I vote for this.

Sorry, comment time is over.