I know, I’ve heard it again and again. We need to support “pro-growth” and “pro-housing” candidates. I’ve said before, over and over, about elections in Seattle won’t change things. In some ways, the upcoming election might make things even worse. The fact is, that unless and until, we change the narrative in Seattle about housing — that more of it makes it more expensive and that price is set by greed, not supply and demand — we will never get any candidates that will make a difference in how housing policy is made. Danny Westneat isn’t a columnist that I always agree with in terms of view point on the city or in his analysis. But I think he’s right about what happened last week: not much. In his latest column he says this,

That’s the general take-away from early primary election returns Tuesday for the Seattle City Council. The hype fizzled. It wasn’t a backlash — at least not as sweeping as the critics and the  hundreds of thousands of dollars of attack mailers  had banked on.

The biggest overall winner is … the status quo?

What’s also sort of amusing is all the money former Councilmember Tim Burgess and the Seattle Chamber of Commerce dredged out of the business community only to have two winners, an incumbent, Councilmember Debora Juarez, and someone who is an avowed NIMBY, Alex Pedersen. Really? The Chamber once again shows its great skill at wasting lots and lots of money.

The way it looks today is that proponents of really bad policies will have a majority on the City Council. Regardless of how smart and well spoken you might think they are, Councilmembers Lorena Gonzalez and Teresa Mosqueda don’t believe or like business or development or land lord interests. Gonzalez wants higher office (Attorney General) and Mosequeda is simply an elected labor organizer. Juarez, if she’s returned, seems like she could stand up against the rest of the Council — she opposed the “head tax” — but she always votes for their schemes anyway (like the tax on jobs). So that’s three votes. Add to that mix Councilmember Herbold who wants impact fees and an income tax. That’s four votes. And if Councilmember Sawant returns, not an unlikely scenario, there’s five.

But what if she doesn’t and your Sawant obsession isn’t cured? Tammy Morales will give a solid vote for more taxes, more fees, and fewer incentives for housing development and management.

And what about Dan Strauss as a replacement for lefty Robin Hood Mike O’Brien? Here’s what the Stranger said about Strauss who has the most votes coming out of the primary:

A bright, affable young guy who everyone seems to know. Sort of like a younger Mike O’Brien without the baggage that apparently comes with being Mike O’Brien. (We’ll miss you, buddy.)

Yeah. Just what we need on the City Council, another bright, affable young guy who makes destructive and horrible housing policy. Perfect. There’s another vote.

And what about Alex Pedersen? His answers to questions sound really good, but during the run up to the passage of Mandatory Housing Affordability (MHA) Pedersen sided with his angry neighbors against MHA, but not because it makes new housing infeasible, raises prices, and is illegal but because the fees aren’t high enough. But nobody bothered in the questionnaire I read to ask this specific question, only broad general questions. The fact is that Pedersen is very likely to carry the water of angry neighbors on new for-profit housing, making it harder and more expensive to build and to also support non-profits endless appetite for cash.

So without considering what happens in the more moderate District 7 or District 6 (Dan Strauss and Heidi Wills (former police office Jim Pugel and Andrew Lewis) Gonzalez, Mosqueda, Juarez, Herbold, Sawant, Morales, Pedersen, are looking like they will be on the Council. Add The Stranger supported Strauss and you’ve got 8 people who in one way or another have demonstrated that they won’t reduce regulation on housing and are likely to support more.

My message to you if you’re reading this is don’t give any more money if you have to the Chamber or Burgess’ PAC. You’re just throwing it away at best and at worst, you’re possibly going to be supporting someone that is going to cast votes against your rational self interest in your business providing people with housing. Give the money to us instead. Please. If you want to know what we’ll do with it, please read my posts about changing the narrative. That’s what you should be investing in today. Otherwise, you’re going be looking at the same or worse behavior from City Hall.

Photo from the Seattle Times