ELECTION 2023: Approval margin widens for ‘social housing’ I-135

The second set of results is in from the special election on Seattle Initiative 135 to create an entity to develop “social housing.” Last night, “yes” was almost six percentage points ahead of “no”; today, that’s widened:

Yes – 53.96% – 64,345
No – 46.04% – 54,900

The ballots counted so far represent almost 25 percent of Seattle voters; 33 percent of the ballots sent have been received as of this afternoon.

28 Replies to "ELECTION 2023: Approval margin widens for 'social housing' I-135"

  • Question Authority February 15, 2023 (8:12 pm)

    So sad, rather than investing in existing programs this boondoggle will rob those of funding and create just another level of waste and mismanagement with no set cost.

    • 1994 February 15, 2023 (10:30 pm)

      Agreed. We, tax payers, already subsidize a lot of housing in the city & county.  I am counting on more ‘no’ votes to come in.

      • derek February 16, 2023 (9:42 am)

        Seattle: We need more social housing! Also Seattle: No we don’t!

        • Julian February 16, 2023 (8:12 pm)

          Seattle needs solutions that will work not additional government bloat that is poorly designed and will not solve any problems

      • April February 16, 2023 (11:16 am)


      • Ivan Weiss February 17, 2023 (6:25 pm)

        The lead is up to 57 percent today (Friday), so this one’s done and dusted.

    • Authority February 16, 2023 (8:32 am)

      Existing programs have clearly worked

    • DC February 16, 2023 (8:35 am)

      The existing programs have failed. Miserably. This model has worked in other countries and could work here. It is worth trying and will hopefully save us money in the long run.

      • Julian February 16, 2023 (8:14 pm)

        It will not work and comparing other countries “social housing” that relies on significant taxes to this initiative is comparing apples to oranges

  • Wseattleite February 16, 2023 (7:42 am)

    Lol. Seattle continues its lunacy. This will be a financial burden over time that most people cannot even fathom, and it will not do much at all to do whatever people think it will do.  Another round of “unintended consequences” coming to your future. Activists crying over the state of affairs, and saying “all we need is two more decimal places in our funding to fix our problems”

  • Alki resident February 16, 2023 (7:59 am)

    According to the ST- the first $750,00.00 required to be paid by the Seattle taxpayers will be used for an office and 2 full time employees for the first 18 months. Another tax-payer funded boondoggle indeed! 

  • Scarlett February 16, 2023 (8:12 am)

    There is  zero evidence that I-135 will siphon off funds from other subsidized housing.  Give that cliched argument a rest.  

    • Julian February 16, 2023 (8:14 pm)

      It will fight for funds from the city council…did you look into this initiative at all?

  • Scarlett February 16, 2023 (8:32 am)

    In creating a PDA I-135 is much like the social housing, or public utility, that one finds in countries like Sweden.  (Interestingly enough, the first of its kind in the the U.S.  the original and innovative Yesler Terrace was based on a Swedish model of worker housing.)  It will be open to everyone of all incomes to avoid the stigma of being a “ghetto” and hopefully it will be self-sustaining to a large degree. There is no evidence that this PDA will siphon off money from other subsidized housing as the SHA is largely federally funded.  This is pretty tame stuff, people, chill out. 

    • Julian February 16, 2023 (8:16 pm)

      No it’s government bloat that is not similar at all to other countries.  I wish people would educate themselves and live in reality with the rest of us.  Sadly that will never happen

  • Tim February 16, 2023 (8:52 am)

    Uninformed Seattle voters continue their downward spiral. Hopefully we learn something from this catastrophe.

  • skeeter February 16, 2023 (9:16 am)

    What I don’t understand is this initiative includes the City of Seattle providing logistical, administrative, legal, etc support.  The city says they are already stretched thin with high demands and inadequate revenue.  Can anyone just make an initiative and the costs of the initiative are borne by the city?

  • Scarlett February 16, 2023 (10:27 am)

    What ever happened to conservative intellectualism?  It’s now just a recitation of stale, humorless cant.  I don’t carry water for any ideology or political party, but the deterioration of conservative thinking, with a few exceptions, has been particularly alarming.
    What do we know?  We know that housing has become unaffordable for millions, and not just the homeless but for many, many Americans who are working and one paycheck away from being homeless.   This is where we are at right now, right outside your window.   Those of you who have had stable housing for years don’t seem to be able to identify with this crisis or you don’t want to.
    What is the solution?  Self-described conservative’s remedy is to work harder, be more frugal, or move to a more affordable area of the country.  The problem people are not serfs, they can’t be asked to toil in perpetuity with little hope of a future where they can rest their old, tired bones.  Not only is this un-Christian, this is a subhuman mentality.  They can’t be expected to pack up up like carpetbaggers, leave everything, and be shooed out the city they know.  And, on top of that,  there is really no affordable housing anywhere, based on local rents and AMI.   This is a national crisis.

    Not a single person here is against personal responsibility, of making something of your life, of working hard and being frugal.  But these are odious, small-minded lectures when many are struggling.     Yes, city, state and the feds are already heavily invested in supported housing and one could argue they do more and more efficiently.   But don’t throw the baby out with the bath water.   I-135 does not appear to be a financial sinkhole, only requiring start-up funding from the city.  Never forget you might in line for subsidized housing sometime in the future.  

    • WW Resident February 16, 2023 (1:28 pm)

      All you can spout off is conservative this conservative that. Has it ever crossed your mind that people are sick of these failing policies where hundreds of millions of dollars are being sunk into? You’re like the person who claims socialism or communism hasn’t worked only because the right people haven’t implemented it yet

      • WestSeattleBadTakes February 16, 2023 (3:14 pm)

        To ignore conservatism today would be a great personal failing.

        It is flabbergasting that all you can muster in response to someone who called out an ideology that is bad for humanity AND gave an alternative viewpoint, is some whiny rant with nothing of your own.

        This is modern conservatism. Scream but offer nothing.

        • Julian February 18, 2023 (8:27 pm)

          Name checks out

      • Ivan Weiss February 17, 2023 (6:31 pm)

        If people are so “sick of these failing policies,” then why is this measure passing with 57 percent of the vote, and how come the margin has increased with every count? Oppose it if you want, that’s your right, but your assertion seems to be contrary to actual fact.

    • Julian February 16, 2023 (8:19 pm)

      It’s funny when people go off about intellectualism when they don’t actually live in the real world or understand how things work in general.  This initiative is unfunded and doomed from the get go.  Look into the numbers and see for yourself…

  • Fairmont February 16, 2023 (10:45 am)

    Clearly special elections are biased towards a certain demographic of voters. Engagement is so low it’s embarrassing. Either add a minimum engagement to ensure actually representation of the city or move these to the general election where people actually care more. This feels sneaky af.

    • Fairmont February 16, 2023 (10:52 am)

      Not the mention the cost for running these special elections. So wasteful.

    • WSB February 16, 2023 (11:12 am)

      One demographic breakout is already available. The largest age group that’s returned ballots so far is 65+. Click through to tab 6 of the ballot-return statistics.

      More than twice as many 55+ voters (77,000_ ballots in) participating than 18-34 (37,000+ ballots in).

      • Peter February 16, 2023 (12:25 pm)

        Chef’s kiss. 

    • Josh February 16, 2023 (12:12 pm)

      Maybe learn how these measures end up on the ballot rather than assuming a conspiracy. For one the time you get your signatures verified determines which ballot your initiative lands on. For two elections in odd years at odd times skew conservative given the most engaged voting block is 65 and over with younger blocks voting more progressively and less often in these elections. The authors of this initiative would have had an even wider margin in the affirmative if the initiative landed on any other ballot. There is nothing fishy going on here unless you think the initiative writers were trying to lose. 

Sorry, comment time is over.