Well, I was going to use the word “bigotry” in the headline of this post. But that word doesn’t quite get at what’s going on in the postering campaign we first discovered was being planned about a week ago. It’s not that the word is too strong, but that current valance of the word bigotry is typically about beliefs or race or sexual orientation. What’s going on here is related, but it’s really an angry and bitter intolerance of anyone new. As Dominic Holden points out in his take down of the NIMBYs in Eastlake and elsewhere,

These activists are demonizing good people who need a place to live and essentially trying to push them out of town. The folks responsible for the “degradation of our neighborhoods” are the anti-housing activists.

Remember, density is people.

Here’s the language of the poster:

LOOK!

It’s Still Happening!
The degradation of our neighborhoods shows no sign of slowing down.

If you want to:
Stop the proliferation of out-of-scale and out-of-character buildings in established neighborhoods, maintain winter light and sunshine, reduce shadows, and preserve Seattle’s tree canopy and green space;

Speak-Up!

Aside from the hysteria and baiting in the language (degradation?) there are some things worth paying extra special attention to here. First is the term “established neighborhoods.”

Whenever someone uses a term like “established neighborhood” the first question one wants to ask is, “what would a disestablished neighborhood” look like? Hmmm. Maybe a poor neighborhood? The term “established” is so loaded with implied classism that it’s hard to avoid. The implication is clear from the language used by these NIMBYs: We got here first, we are ESTABLISHED! New people coming in are not established and therefore don’t count as much as we do. We matter, they don’t.

The second point I’d make is about the loss of sunshine. I’ll point out again the kinds of buildings across the street from the microhousing project in question.

I point this out because, if anyone’s morning sunshine is getting blocked, it’s the microhousing residents who are being shadowed. Because of the slope of this part of the hill, the multifamily housing on the other side of the block is killing the light and creating shadows. What do the NIMBYs propose we do about that?

And tree canopy? Microhousing doesn’t fell any trees when it gets built because it is almost always built on a lot that had another building on it first, in this case a house that been turned into an apartment building housing several people.

Finally, all good intentioned Seattlites should communicate to the Seattle City Council clearly that we are a city and a community that doesn’t tolerate code words and intolerance. If people have legitimate policy and quality of life concerns about new housing they should be listened to and yes, even compromised with if possible. But you can’t compromise with intolerance; it’s not possible and it’s not a good thing.

Urge the City Council that until opponents of new housing projects for people moving to the region have actual, real, and honest concerns that can be quantified, they shouldn’t be listened to or compromised with. Seattle Speaks Up hasn’t a single legitimate concern with mircohousing that hasn’t already been addressed. They are now resorting to fear mongering and code words. That’s not what Seattle is all about. I think that’s been established.

Speak up, and tell the City Council to disavow this kind of language and ask opponents of microhousing to stop using it.

sally.bagshaw@seattle.gov
tim.burgess@seattle.gov
sally.clark@seattle.gov
jean.godden@seattle.gov
bruce.harrell@seattle.gov
nick.licata@seattle.gov
mike.obrien@seattle.gov
tom.rasmussen@seattle.gov
Kshama.Sawant@seattle.gov