What lessons about government revenues and fiscal priorities from the wake of 2008 would you apply in responding to the Covid-19 crisis? (200 words or less)

The legislature punted on revenue in 09-10, in part due to the big federal stimulus package (ARRA). The 2010 midterms were devastating for Democrats, particularly in the Senate, making it impossible to pass revenue. With the “Majority Coalition Caucus” in place, Governor Gregoire and the legislature opted for deep budget cuts, especially to discretionary safety net programs. The failure to act more swiftly led to the devastating impacts we are seeing from the COVID emergency. It is essential we invest in systems that build resiliency for people across this state. Even with a significant modernization of the tax code, the revenue hole to fill is unprecedented, and will require federal assistance. We must apply an equity analysis to upcoming budget decisions, increase safety net programs, and push for a state-level expansion of unemployment to currently ineligible immigrant workers. We must continue to invest in public & behavioral health and ensure access to health care. Small businesses will need government to recover. It will be more daunting than any other budget endeavor our state has undertaken. But, if we lead with vision and persevere, we can build a more equitable economy that works for everyone, and not just the wealthy few.

Would you vote for a bill that ends the ban on rent control in Washington? Why or Why not? (50 words or less)

Yes. I introduced HB 2583 in 2018 and HB 2779 in 2020. The rent is too high for too many people, and the majority of evictions are due to inability to pay rent. Limits on year over year rent increases, and on fees, are one important tool in improving housing stability.

What role do you see the state playing in enacting land use reform, and what should that reform prioritize? (200 words or less)

Statewide land use policy can help ensure that all communities can have the amount and diversity of housing option needed to support vibrant and diverse communities. While some locally-informed land use policy is appropriate, acting on their own, local jurisdictions have failed to implement the full range of land use policies that support adequate affordability and equity in housing access. I introduced HB 2780 (2020) to create more housing options in traditionally single-family zones, and was an active co-sponsor of bills to expand urban housing supply (see 1797, 1923, 2343, and 2570 in 19-20). Land use policy alone does not address the deep affordability needs across the state. That is why I also support greater rent regulation, the strategic use of tax incentives such as the multi-family housing tax exemption, and direct rental assistance to ensure people with the greatest housing needs can access safe, healthy, affordable homes.

What should be the major components of a climate package? (50 words or less)

We need policies and investments that eliminate carbon across three primary sectors – energy, buildings and transportation – while simultaneously ensuring justice for the most impacted communities. A carbon pricing policy paired with investments in zero-emission infrastructure is the most effective tool to do this. Incentives and regulations also expedite carbon reductions.

What should be the top strategies for the state to fix the cycle of segregation, disinvestment, gentrification, and unaffordable housing in our cities? (200 words or less)

We need to: 1) increase our investment in building and operating publicly financed, accountable high-quality, rent controlled housing, 2) update zoning to support the creation of more diverse types of housing in all communities, 3) enhance tenant protections including capping fees and rent increases and requiring good cause to end all tenancies, 4) make massive investments in emergency and long-term rent assistance, particularly in light of the economic impacts of COVID. To do this, we must modernize our tax code.

What’s your roadmap to fixing educational inequities in Washington state? How can Washington state comply with its constitutional duties regarding education? (200 words or less)

We need to address inequities both inside and outside of the school system to ensure all students have equitable access to education. This requires modernizing our antiquated, regressive tax code. We need to begin with investments in early learning, and increase investments in K12 basic education including special education, and the support all students and families need for students to succeed, including family support counselors and nurses. Our districts are still over-reliant on local levies and PTA fundraisers to provide the basics, setting up inequities within and across districts. We must strengthen our safety net support for the lowest income families, including TANF cash stipends, SNAP food benefits, and rent assistance programs.

Do you think Washington state should have an income tax? If yes, what is the legislative path? If not, would you pursue any tax reform? (100 words or less)

Yes. Closing the tax break on capital gains will set up a legal test that informs how an income tax can be structured. Implementing a business tax on payroll of high earners is another important step to move WA to a more modern and diverse tax code. To rebalance our tax code, we need to reduce the sales tax rate which disproportionately harms low-income families, and scrap the business & occupation tax which burdens small businesses. We can replace these out-of-date sources with graduated personal and corporate income taxes, and expand the lower-rate sales tax beyond just goods to include services.

While California and Oregon have passed a clean fuels standard aiming to meet their climate goals, Washington did not, as the bill stalled out last session. Would you vote for it? If not, what is the route to meeting our climate goals? (150 words or less)

I’ve voted twice in the House for a clean fuels standard, and if re-elected, hope to do so again in 2021. After the failure of the bill in 2020, I joined many colleagues in signing a letter stating that the passage of a clean fuels bill will be a prerequisite for voting for a transportation revenue package. (https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/6780895/House-Dems-Clean-Fuels-Letter.pdf). Our need to address climate change is at least as urgent as our need to address our transportation infrastructure, if not moreso. We can and must do both.

What percentage of the state’s transportation budget should be for alternatives to cars, such as transit, biking, and pedestrian infrastructure? (100 words)

The silver lining in the disastrous state of our transportation budget is we can re-envision it. We dedicate only a small portion of the transportation budget to transit, in part due to the constitutional restrictions on use of gas tax. I’d approach it by setting multi-year targets to reduce car trips by increasing funding in transit, biking and pedestrian infrastructure. I don’t know what the right metrics are, but for example, Los Angeles, with a population that exceeds WA state, set a 10 year goal to reduce car trips by 20%. This requires more stakeholder input and political will building.

What should be a higher priority: electrifying personal vehicles or reducing the number of trips made in personal vehicles? Explain how to achieve your priority. (50 words).

Reducing personal vehicle trips is first priority. The huge anticipated shortfalls in the transportation budget call us to reconsider our entire approach. We should implement a road usage charge, congestion pricing, and increased registration fees on fossil fuel vehicles to vastly expand investments in transit, bike and pedestrian infrastructure.

The Urbanist Elections Committee’s take in LD43-1:

Incumbent badass Nicole Macri is essentially running unopposed, so this vote is really a no-brainer. Macri has sponsored a bevy of health-related bills aimed at rectifying inequities and protecting the vulnerable–not to mention sponsored several high profile attempts at serious land use reform. Macri introduced multiple bills to repeal the ban on rent control, and has committed to clean fuels as a necessity in the next transportation package. She takes a balanced rather than ideological approach, consistently links climate change, health, land use, livability, and transportation, and she brings a clear-eyed compassion that humbles us. Vote Macri.

The post 2020 Endorsement Questionnaire: Nicole Macri, LD43-1 first appeared on The Urbanist.

What lessons about government revenues and fiscal priorities from the wake of 2008 would you apply in responding to the Covid-19 crisis? (200 words or less)

There are several lessons to remember, as well as a significantly different context to the budget work now, compared to 2008:

• Major austerity cuts must be avoided, because it makes the economic recovery longer and deeper.
• Any serious cuts to basic human services, mental health care, education and other critical public services, will result in much human suffering, loss of life, loss of potential, and actually higher costs over time.
• The state is likely to receive some federal assistance, but it probably won’t be nearly enough.
• The current Governor is much more open to new revenue options.
• The very large funding and revenue increases we enacted for Basic Education cannot be reduced since it is constitutionally protected.
• The legislature is much more progressive on many issues, including the budget and revenue.
• We must have significant new, progressive revenue to plug the budget shortfalls, and lay the groundwork for future investments we should make.

I am currently leading coalitions to propose specific new, progressive revenue sources to fund the unmet needs of our people, including early learning and child care, as well as foundational public health, behavioral health, community clinics, and other health care priorities.

Would you vote for a bill that ends the ban on rent control in Washington? Why or Why not? (50 words or less)

Yes. Seattle’s affordable housing crisis is not new — I was a co-founder of the Seattle Tenants Union, in response to the reduction of affordable housing years ago.  Since then, housing in our region has become much less affordable for many. I support allowing local jurisdictions to set their own policies. 

What role do you see the state playing in enacting land use reform, and what should that reform prioritize? (200 words or less)

We need affordable, transit-oriented and low-carbon land use development across the Seattle region.  I support density requirements to reduce car-oriented sprawl, accommodate growth along light rail and bus Rapid Ride routes for Transit Oriented Development.

This is not just talk.  I initiated the Home and Hope program that is successfully identifying and acquiring over 20 sites, in Seattle and King County, of under-utilized public and non-profit properties, for affordable housing and other community services in Transit Oriented Development.  A few examples:

• Cedar Crossing, a project in the Roosevelt neighborhood.  I arranged state and local funding for Mercy Housing and Bellwether Housing to build 245 new affordable homes and a new early learning center immediately above Sound Transit’s light rail station.
• On Capitol Hill / First Hill at Madison and Boyleston, I passed state legislation to transfer surplus public property at no cost, and I allocated state funding to Plymouth Housing and Bellwether Housing, to build a 17-story tower with 350 apartments (120 for homeless seniors).
• Next to the Mt. Baker light rail station, I transferred 4 acres of state land at no cost to City of Seattle to build 400+ affordable homes, an early learning center, and more. 

What should be the major components of a climate package? (50 words or less)

In 2019, as Speaker, I enacted the 100% clean electricity mandate, and had the House pass the Clean Fuel Standard.  We must work to electrify cars and buses, and increase transit funding. I support environmental justice for low income and communities of color, and increased energy standards for buildings.

What should be the top strategies for the state to fix the cycle of segregation, disinvestment, gentrification, and unaffordable housing in our cities? (200 words or less)

Strategies should include community organizing, local and state laws, funding for low-income housing, and development of specific projects to reverse disinvestment and displacement.

For years, I fought against redlining and racial discrimination in the housing market (I was a co-founder of the Seattle Coalition Against Redlining). I’ve helped fund over 300 rent-restricted apartment buildings in Seattle and secured over $2 billion for low-income housing statewide. 

An example of my work, I led the effort to build 350 homes for low-wage workers and homeless folks at Sand Point.  Now, 1000 people, all low-income and mostly people of color, live in the community predominantly white and well-off.  Northeast Seattle used to have “restrictive covenants” to ban people of color living there.

As part of the Home and Hope program, we are acquiring and helping develop 20 major sites for low-income people and communities of color, with a preference for people being displaced by private development.  

Many low-income renters are still being displaced.  I strongly supported Representative Nicole Macri’s work to pass a major tenant protection bill, which extends grace periods and restricts landlord’s ability to evict tenants  —  especially important for renters of color, who are disproportionately being evicted. 

What’s your roadmap to fixing educational inequities in Washington state? How can Washington state comply with its constitutional duties regarding education? (200 words or less)

I’m proud of my work to add billions of dollars in new state funding for basic education, provide free college and university tuition for all low-income students, and allow undocumented immigrant students to receive state aid. 

Going forward, we must expand funding for special education in our public schools and work towards lower class sizes, with additional counselors and school nurses.  We must also expand early learning to ensure every student has access to affordable pre-K education, which is crucial to long term educational success. We should extend free and reduced college tuition to more Washington families, especially middle-income families who still struggle to afford the rising cost of higher education. We should provide low-interest loans to college students, relieving families of burdensome high-interest debt.

As we face an unprecedented budget shortfall, my priority is to protect the hard-fought investments in public education we’ve made in recent years. School districts across the state are also struggling to adapt to new health measures and online learning programs. The COVID-19 pandemic has the potential to compound our state’s existing inequalities. I am working with state leaders, teachers’ unions, and parents to appropriate the funds necessary to protect and improve our education system.

Do you think Washington state should have an income tax? If yes, what is the legislative path? If not, would you pursue any tax reform? (100 words or less)

Yes. We must reform our tax system, among the most regressive in the country. I’ve consistently supported progressive taxation, including the capital gains tax. I enacted taxes on corporations (including Amazon) to fund free college and university tuition for all low-income students; on wealthy estates to fund the Educational Legacy Trust; on oil companies to clean up toxic sites; on big banks to fund public services, etc.  We should work the votes towards an income tax. I am leading efforts to enact three progressive revenue sources for early learning and child care, public health, and expanded health care for all.

While California and Oregon have passed a clean fuels standard aiming to meet their climate goals, Washington did not, as the bill stalled out last session. Would you vote for it? If not, what is the route to meeting our climate goals? (150 words or less)

Yes!  As Speaker, I worked closely with Representative Joe Fitzgibbon and got it approved by the House, but the Senate did not concur.  It is essential that we greatly reduce transportation emissions, which are the biggest carbon source in our state.  Next session, revenue for transportation will be considered, which must include passage of the Clean Fuel standard.  We must work to electrify cars and buses to reduce transportation emissions.  This is especially critical for low income communities and communities of color, which have been disproportionately exposed to pollution and are especially vulnerable to the effects of climate change. Ultimately, we must increase funding for low-carbon and low-cost transportation modes, like transit, cycling, and walking, which will not only reduce emissions but also increase mobility.  A key part of meeting our climate goals is implementation of the 100% clean electricity mandate, which I helped pass the legislature in 2019. 

What percentage of the state’s transportation budget should be for alternatives to cars, such as transit, biking, and pedestrian infrastructure? (100 words)

To start, we should double the percentage for public transit and infrastructure for bikes and pedestrians. Less on highways, more on alternatives.  As Speaker, I helped lead efforts to greatly increase funding for Metro Transit and Sound Transit 3.  As a non-profit Director, I started Seattle Personal Transit (now Solid Ground) a door-to-door paratransit ACCESS program for disabled people who can’t walk to a bus stop.  I worked with Executive Constantine to have Sound Transit provide surplus property and “air rights” along rail stations, at little cost, for affordable housing and transit-oriented development. Going forward, we must limit highway expansion. 

What should be a higher priority: electrifying personal vehicles or reducing the number of trips made in personal vehicles? Explain how to achieve your priority. (50 words).

Although we must do both, reducing our reliance on personal cars and boosting transit ridership could help more in the near-term.  With the COVID crisis, tele-commuting is now commonplace, and can be made permanent in part.  Transit will not only reduce emissions, but also promote walkable, higher-density, and affordable neighborhoods. 

The Urbanist Elections Committee’s Take: Vote Lascelles

Read our full endorsements post here.

The post 2020 Endorsement Questionnaire: Frank Chopp, LD43-2 first appeared on The Urbanist.

What lessons about government revenues and fiscal priorities from the wake of 2008 would you apply in responding to the Covid-19 crisis? (200 words or less)

The 2008 Financial Crisis further concentrated wealth amongst a privileged few while critical services and investments were cut, both prolonging the crisis and imposing an unfair burden on those least able to bear them. We must not fall into the austerity trap once more. Instead we need to use the COVID-19 crisis to critically assess how we can make our State both fairer and more resilient. To do that, we need to address our revenue streams. Our tax code was already problematic– the most regressive in the nation– but during COVID the over-reliance on sales tax makes a bad problem even worse. As fewer people are spending, our state budget is projected to take huge hits in revenue. Now more than ever, we need extensive tax reform as we aim to shift away from our reliance on sales and property tax and introduce new equitable and sustainable revenue streams. It is only by creating these progressive revenue streams that we can actually realistically provide the social safety nets required for recovery. We also cannot settle for a patchwork of small taxes that fund individual projects– this is the most pressing moment to actually address our tax code as a whole.

Would you vote for a bill that ends the ban on rent control in Washington? Why or Why not? (50 words or less)

Yes. Providing predictability in housing costs is critical. Whereas those paying a mortgage have clear expectations regarding future expenses, renters don’t have this clarity. Everyone deserves transparency regarding future housing costs. With this comes security and the ability to live without the fear of eviction coming from an unforeseen rent increase.

What role do you see the state playing in enacting land use reform, and what should that reform prioritize? (200 words or less)

Just as Oregon preceded Washington in adopting a Growth Management Act they have preceded Washington in rezoning around transit and eliminating single-family zones. However, we should go further. The segregation of land uses is often arbitrary at best or outright racist at worst, hindering the creation of diverse communities so many of us aspire to live in. Form-based codes dictated by transit frequency should be the standard, while build by-right should supplant our current process-centric approach. Generally, we should be employing smart growth land development policies. We need to work toward a future where we have dense, climate-friendly neighborhoods that are walkable/rollable with shared green spaces. Development around transit needs to catalyze the creation of distinct, new sustainable communities. We need higher standards of sub-area planning that capture the value being created by light rail to maximize the public benefit. While station planning will remain a distinctly local affair, there should be minimum development standards regarding density, accessibility, and sustainability. Furthermore, the private landowners who see massive increases in land values should start paying their fair share. For this reason, Land Value Taxes and Tax Incremental Financing are both tools deserving further exploration.

What should be the major components of a climate package? (50 words or less)

Given vehicles emissions are the largest source of pollution they should receive the most focus. Walking, bicycle, and bus infrastructure provide the greatest returns per dollar invested while increasing accessibility for all. We also need to focus on carbon sequestration, greening our building codes, and building out green energy infrastructure.

What should be the top strategies for the state to fix the cycle of segregation, disinvestment, gentrification, and unaffordable housing in our cities? (200 words or less)

Zoning reform needs to be the first priority. However, it’s imperative we recognize that this alone will not create the volume of housing necessary to relieve our current crisis or address historical inequities, particularly redlining. The transference of surplus land by Sound Transit to non-profit developers was a good start. However, the public sector needs to start taking a more active role. Internationally, they frequently purchase property in bulk around future stations, then finance transit improvements and public housing via the development of these properties, effectively capturing the increased value due to transit. These agencies deliver affordable housing at scale with little to no public subsidy. Furthermore, by the public owning the land, existing members of the community can be guaranteed a spot at the table in planning future developments. We need stronger public development authorities that can, at a minimum, land-bank and ideally develop properties. Centro de la Raza stands out as an example of the existing community benefiting and being integrated throughout the development process. Unfortunately, this remains the exception. We also need to employ strategies for community preference in affordable housing, as racial minorities and LGBTQ+ individuals are often the first to be pushed out by gentrification.

What’s your roadmap to fixing educational inequities in Washington state? How can Washington state comply with its constitutional duties regarding education? (200 words or less)

Washington’s education system is and has been in a serious funding crisis. For decades, it’s been grossly underfunded, creating an unsustainable and inequitable public school system. Despite McCleary, our funding system remains broken. We increased property taxes, but Republicans demanded a cap on local levies and Democratic leadership caved to their demands, leading to our schools losing millions of dollars each year. There continues to be huge gaps in school funding across the board, but especially in our lower income areas, meaning our most marginalized communities are hurting the most. Additionally, a system where property taxes make up a significant portion of funding is always going to be inherently inequitable. In a state with so much wealth, our schools should be flourishing, properly funded, and prioritized by our legislatures. Instead, many of our schools can’t afford essential staff like nurses, guidance counselors, and adequate Special Education staff or classroom supplies like notebooks and textbooks. We need progressive taxation now to fully fund schools, and we need to use a model similar to Massachusetts where education funding is weighted by student need. This is widely regarded as the best education funding system in the country for dealing with inequities.

Do you think Washington state should have an income tax? If yes, what is the legislative path? If not, would you pursue any tax reform? (100 words or less)

Yes. I believe that we need an income tax, but there are other taxes– namely, a capital gains tax and a wealth tax– that we can focus on introducing first that could clear the way, legally. Court challenges to particularly capital gains have the potential to overthrow the constitutionality issue with a progressive income. Beyond that, both the B&O tax and the way property taxes are assessed and capped are worth revisiting. We also can potentially get creative with land value taxes or flat income taxes with significant tax credits to make them functionally the same as progressive income taxes.

While California and Oregon have passed a clean fuels standard aiming to meet their climate goals, Washington did not, as the bill stalled out last session. Would you vote for it? If not, what is the route to meeting our climate goals? (150 words or less)

Yes, I would support a clean fuels standard. However, there are additional ways we could make progress in meeting our climate goals. One is shifting from a level of service standard to reducing vehicle miles traveled in the environmental review process. The easiest way to reduce emissions is to reduce vehicle use, and given over half of vehicle trips are less than 3 miles, there’s opportunity. To do so, we need to make alternatives more competitive in terms of time and experience. Just as we have Highways of Statewide Significance, which dictate standards on major arterials, we need to similarly identify and adopt standards in critical corridors for bicycles and transit. Too often Rapid Ride and bicycle projects are diluted for local concerns or receive different prioritization depending upon jurisdiction, compromising the network. It is time the state starts enforcing a strategic transit and bike network across boundaries.

What percentage of the state’s transportation budget should be for alternatives to cars, such as transit, biking, and pedestrian infrastructure? (100 words)

The operating budget needs expansion across most programs to ensure we are maximizing the use and lifespan of our existing facilities. The capital budget is where there needs to be a significant reprioritization of funding. Given COVID’s impact on gas tax revenues, we may have an opportunity to scrutinize past expansion commitments. Where possible, these projects should be canceled. Next, we must identify the long-term needs of transit, biking, and pedestrian infrastructure and commit to full funding. I cannot predict what these budget percentages would be, but I can guarantee the allocation will be radically different from the status quo.

What should be a higher priority: electrifying personal vehicles or reducing the number of trips made in personal vehicles? Explain how to achieve your priority. (50 words).

Electric cars still cause congestion and crashes while consuming huge amounts of space and resources. Better land use planning while improving alternatives would significantly reduce vehicle demand and emissions. However, we need to invest in expanded charging infrastructure to decarbonize those trips that cannot be eliminated.

The Urbanist Elections Committee’s LD43-2 Take: Vote Lascelles

Read our full endorsements here.

The post 2020 Endorsement Questionnaire: Jessi Murray, LD43-2 first appeared on The Urbanist.

This year we are considering selected candidates running for US Congress, Washington State Legislature, and King County Prosecuting Attorney. We are publishing the questionnaires in full, concluding with our official general election endorsements in mid-October.

The following questionnaire was submitted by Dan Harder (R) running for State Senate in Legislative District 43. Harder’s opponent, incumbent Jamie Pedersen (D), did not submit a questionnaire .

***

Rapid Fire

Do you consider yourself an urbanist?

Yes.

Do you support an income tax?

No.

Short Answer

How do we keep Sound Transit 3 (ST3) timelines on track given that the Trump administration is slow-walking or eliminating grants for transit projects and construction costs are skyrocketing?

Cancel ST3 projects that are less than 50% complete as of today, and allow private financing of the remaining projects, require rapid completion of projects.

What is your position on the Sound Transit car-tab tax? Would you support a plan that cuts Sound Transit’s budget?

Absolutely. Sound Transit is out of control and unresponsive to taxpayers.

How will you leverage state resources to increase affordable housing?

By requiring immediate and cost effective congestion relief to be the primary focus of WSDOT and RTA improvement projects, requiring short horizons for project completions and reducing excessive design requirements and requirements for absurd studies that artificially increase costs and funnel money to anti-commuter special interests. Reducing congestion will reduce the demand for housing in the city and make housing more affordable.

Washington is ranked as having the most regressive tax code in the nation. Rich households pay a much lower effective tax rate than poor households. What, if anything, do you propose to do about that?

Much of that is due to disparities in property taxes to fund education, as well as the inherent issue with using sales tax as a primary source of revenue, and recently imposed sales taxes on alcohol and sugary drinks. The recent McCleary fix will help resolve the regressive nature of property taxes that result in low rates for wealthy areas. I would consider means-tested exemptions to sales tax to help poor families. I would revoke the recent tax on sugary drinks and ban other such sin taxes on food. I support I-1634.

How should our state address climate change and would you back a carbon tax bill similar to what Governor Inslee has proposed? 

I will not support any carbon tax, income tax or other new source of tax revenue for the state. The carbon tax will do nothing to prevent climate change, it is simply a virtue signal and grab for revenue and power. I support strong enforcement of pollution laws and better management of forests to reduce wildfires.

Would you vote to permit local transit agencies and police departments to implement camera enforcement of transit lanes in order to keep buses moving through traffic bottlenecks? Why or why not?

No. I support eliminating bottlenecks for all vehicles, not just transit. Working parents should not be made to suffer in favor of the rich who work in the city and can afford housing near local transit hubs.

How can we protect and preserve the open spaces in Washington State?

I support better management of state forests, and full funding of state parks and recreation areas. I support enforcing vagrancy laws and making parks and open spaces safe for families.

What is your favorite mode of transportation and why?

My V-8 Jeep.

The next time the state legislature crafts a major transportation funding package, what do you want to see in it?

As said above, prioritization of vehicle congestion reduction, on a per-dollar basis. Elimination of wasteful ST3 projects that do nothing to reduce congestion. Reduction of regulations that make projects more expensive. Allow private financing to reduce costs, and require speedy completion to reduce costs and quickly achieve intended results.

The post 2018 Endorsement Questionnaire: Dan Harder first appeared on The Urbanist.

This year we are considering selected candidates running for US Congress, Washington State Legislature, and King County Prosecuting Attorney. We are publishing the questionnaires in full, concluding with our official general election endorsements in mid-October.

The following questionnaire was submitted by Nicole Macri running for Legislative District 43A. Macri also submitted a questionnaire in 2016,  garnered our endorsement, and won the seat. Macri’s opponent this time around, John Peoples, did not submit a questionnaire.

***

Rapid Fire

Do you consider yourself an urbanist?

Yes.

Do you support an income tax?

Yes.

Short Answer

How do we keep Sound Transit 3 (ST3) timelines on track given that the Trump administration is slow-walking or eliminating grants for transit projects and construction costs are skyrocketing?

Most importantly, the legislature must protect current Sound Transit funding. As with any use of the public’s funds, Sound Transit’s staff and board must closely monitor and manage its revenues and expenses in real time. If trade-offs are required, they must prioritize the timely creation of light rail infrastructure. Sound Transit should keep the legislature informed of unanticipated shortfalls which significantly delay projects, so we can better work together on potential solutions.

What is your position on the Sound Transit car-tab tax? Would you support a plan that cuts Sound Transit’s budget?

During the 2018 legislative session, I helped defeat efforts to strip Sound Transit 3 of millions of dollars, ensuring vital transit projects may continue on schedule.

It’s not clear if this issue will return for consideration in 2019. I will only support changing the MVET fee schedule to better align with actual car value depreciation rates if the legislature simultaneously and fully backfills the projected funding shortfall this would induce with some other dedicated and equitable source of funds.

With tens of thousands of people moving to our region over the past few years, I am committed to realizing the vision for fast and efficient transit. I will continue to work to protect the promise made to voters when they approved Sound Transit 3 in 2016.

How will you leverage state resources to increase affordable housing?

I’ve spent much of my adult life working on the challenges of housing affordability and homelessness. These problems are now at crisis levels across the state. Today in King County, more than 100,000 low-income households spend more than half their income to cover their housing costs. And, high housing costs are challenging more middle-income working families. This crisis is also not impacting people equally, as renters and people of color are more likely to be overburdened by housing costs, and at greater risk for displacement.

I was proud to be at the forefront of legislative efforts in 2018 that yielded the most action and resource to address these problems in over ten years. However, we are not bringing resources commensurate with the scope of the problem. Legislators must act urgently in 2019 to dramatically increase state investment in the creation of low-income housing, support communities to speed up construction and remove impediments to affordability, and increase renter protections to prevent displacement and homelessness. I will be sponsoring a number of bills and budget actions next session to do just that.

Washington is ranked as having the most regressive tax code in the nation. Rich households pay a much lower effective tax rate than poor households. What, if anything, do you propose to do about that?

Working with our community’s most vulnerable residents through my job outside the legislature, I see how our inadequate state budget fails to meet basic community needs, and the impacts our regressive tax structure has on everyday people.

Legislators need to take bold action to clean up and rebalance our inequitable tax code so we can invest in the things that help all communities thrive. We need balanced, accountable and shared revenue sources that are stable and sufficient. We should reduce taxes for Washington households with middle and low incomes, protect small businesses, and ensure the wealthiest individuals and corporations contribute to the vitality of our state.

I support policies that promote equity in our tax structure, including the implementation of an income tax and reducing our disproportionate reliance on sales and property taxes to meet basic infrastructure needs.

In the short term, I support the implementation of a capital gains tax, the strategic elimination of corporate tax breaks and other loopholes that do not have a demonstrated public benefit, and the implementation of sunsets on existing tax exemptions to ensure routine re-examination by the legislature to ensure continued alignment with state priorities.

How should our state address climate change and would you back a carbon tax bill similar to what Governor Inslee has proposed? 

I have spent my life fighting for justice, safety, and equity and there is no crisis that more directly challenges those values than climate change. Washington State is positioned to be at the forefront of reducing carbon emissions. We must raise revenue to make the investments necessary to transition from a fossil fuel economy to a renewable energy economy. We need to make sure that the communities who are most impacted by the negative consequences of climate change receive the resources they need and also make sure that there is a just transition for workers who earn their livings in the fossil fuel economy.

I support I-1631, and am working for its success on the ballot this November. I remain committed to having the legislature set aggressive targets to get Washington to 100% fossil-free electricity, and dramatically cleaning up our carbon output through transportation. I supported Governor Inslee’s plan, but prefer I-1631, which invests a greater proportion of proceeds into an equitable transition from fossil fuels. 

Would you vote to permit local transit agencies and police departments to implement camera enforcement of transit lanes in order to keep buses moving through traffic bottlenecks? Why or why not?

Similar to toll transponders and other technologies that have the capacity to track our comings and goings, I support camera enforcement if it includes some reasonable protections to ensure it is used only for the intended purpose. It is not difficult to imagine real-life examples of harm caused by misuse of data, especially on marginalized people.

For instance, just a few months ago, we learned about unauthorized sharing of identifying information by the Washington Department of Licensing (DOL) with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), and how it likely contributed to the detainment and deportation of Washington residents. The legislature should take action to ensure protection of identifying information, and transparency from local government agencies regarding their collection and use of this data.

How can we protect and preserve the open spaces in Washington State?

We need to make adequate capital investments that protect Department of Natural Resources, Department of Fish & Wildlife, and State Park lands. We must protect the Growth Management Act from constant attacks in the legislature, and provide support to local governments to do adequate planning for growth. We need to invest in infrastructure in ways that incentives density in cities and towns, protects agricultural and open spaces, and prevents sprawl. Finally and most importantly, we must engage the communities who are most impacted by pollution and environmental degradation, and who have the greatest barriers to accessing open spaces across our state, to develop policies that ensure the benefits of density and open space are evenly distributed. 

What is your favorite mode of transportation and why?

I love light rail. I’m fortunate to live a short walk from the Capitol Hill station. For me, it’s convenient, more predictable, and faster than most other modes of transportation for my routine travels through town. I walk quite a bit, and like having the flexibility to switch between transportation modes, depending on where I’m going and when I need to get there. I ride the bus nearly every day, and occasionally use rideshares to get quickly from point to point when my schedule and destinations don’t match up with public transit. 

The next time the state legislature crafts a major transportation funding package, what do you want to see in it?

We must continue to work toward a sustainable and equitable transportation system that expands infrastructure for transit, bikes, sidewalks and other options and connects people to opportunity. I support approaches that protect family wage jobs across multiple sectors and areas of the state. This includes doing thoughtful multi-modal transportation planning that considers both commuter and commercial needs.

Fossil fuel-based transportation is the leading contributor of dangerous greenhouse gas emissions in our state. With 1,000 people moving to the Puget Sound region each week, and the disastrous impacts of climate change manifesting more quickly than many had anticipated, the legislature must take action to expand no- or low-carbon transportation options, including transit.

We must use targeted strategies to reach universal goals and focus on equity over equality, and ensure communities that have historically been oppressed and marginalized can achieve equity in access and opportunity. This is only possible when historically marginalized communities can influence policy and funding decisions before they are enacted. For me, this is best done by establishing authentic, long-term relationships with communities who are often “absent from the table” when policies are designed and debated. 

The post 2018 Endorsement Questionnaire: Nicole Macri first appeared on The Urbanist.

Regional Proposition 1 (Sound Transit 3): Approve

Regional Proposition 1 (also known as Sound Transit 3) would be a massive investment in the Puget Sound transit system. It would deliver grade-separated light rail to West Seattle Junction by 2030 and to Ballard, Lower Queen Anne, Denny Triangle, and Interbay by 2035, and open up various parts of the city and region to transit-oriented development, spurring plans to remake land in an urban image, to make more city to go around. Approve this measure to make our transportation system more resilient and our land use pattern more sustainable.

First let’s talk about the price tag. $54 billion is quoted often by opponents to scare folks out of voting for it. They don’t often mention that only half comes from local taxes and that the other half is leveraged through other sources including federal funds. Federal dollars are not fungible money. We either invest and return more of our federal tax dollars to our state thereby generating jobs, or get a bout of fiscal conservatism and let our federal money be spent by the likes of South Carolina, North Dakota, and Florida–who each receive more than four times what they contribute. Meanwhile, Washington state is on the other end of the spectrum, ranking 16th lowest in federal investment per state tax dollar. We are more of a giver than a taker when it comes to federal taxes. ST3 would ensure more federal investment.

The plan may not be exactly how some armchair transit planners would draw it, but such is life when North King County will account for only one third of revenue and one third of investment, give or take. And to its credit, ST3 manages to connect places in the suburbs that seem destined to urbanize. For all its eccentricities, Snohomish County’s Paine Field alignment does manage to hit most of the county’s densest neighborhoods.

Pierce and South King County do not boast great walkshed density along the light rail line but do offer some real opportunities to change that, such as near Federal Way Transit Center. Getting Tacoma light rail access to the airport will improve the city’s draw and help it shoulder more growth, too.

Bus rapid transit (BRT) boosters have suggested BRT could deliver sooner and spread its tentacles deeper into the suburbs. The thing they seem to forget is that ST3 delivers 49 miles of BRT by 2024 on two key corridors: I-405 and SR-522. That was the right decision in those corridors. But in corridors that need the greater capacity, ST3 makes the wise 100-year investment in light rail. Remember: one light rail line can move the equivalent of a 16-lane freeway filled with single-occupant vehicles. That’s why you should vote to approve Regional Proposition 1.

Visit the campaign website here.

Initiative 1433: Approve

For the better part of the 20th century, the goal of urbanism was to prove that cars and suburbs had not made cities obsolete. Today, we face the opposite problem: how can we ensure that cities have enough room for everyone who wants to live or work in them?

Seattle’s adoption of a $15/hour minimum wage and universal paid sick/safe time was an important victory, but inequality does not stop at Seattle’s borders. Workers in Bellevue, Shoreline, and Renton (and Everett, Tacoma, and Spokane, for that matter) face similar challenges as Seattleites in finding jobs that pay enough to cover the high cost of housing.

I-1433 will raise Washington State’s minimum wage to $13.50/hour over the next four years, and provide workers with up to seven days of paid sick leave per year. While $13.50 falls short of a living wage by some standards, it’s a substantial increase from the current $9.47. The increase will make it that much easier for Washington’s poorest workers to make ends meet.

If you’re still not convinced, consider that infectious diseases travel more quickly when people are closer together. Do you really want your lunch prepared by a coughing, sneezing employee who couldn’t afford to take a day of unpaid leave? Vote to approve I-1433.

Visit the campaign website here.

Initiative 124: Approve

I-124 is targeted at improving conditions for all hotel employees that work in the city, but especially women housekeepers. This measure takes several steps towards helping workers in a field that is predominately women from communities of color. Read our previous coverage on the issue here.

The initiative covers four primary issues:

• Worker protections from assault and sexual harassment;
• Reducing workplace injury;
• Access to affordable medical care; and
• Job security.

Highlights of the protections required through this initiative include panic buttons, requirements for employers to track sexual assaults, protecting senior staff when hotel ownership management changes, limiting workloads for staff, and providing access to healthcare insurance with costs no more than 6% of annual income.

I-124 is endorsed by multiple local political chapters, a broad coalition of social justice, racial justice and gender justice organizations, and multiple local unions.

The Urbanist is committed to welcoming, equitable cities. For our cities to grow successfully, we must do more to make sure workers feel safe and comfortable. We urge Seattle voters to support workplace safety, security, and health on their November ballot by approving Initiative 124.

Visit the campaign website here.

Initiative 1491: Approve

For cities to be successful, they must be livable. To be livable, they must be safe. To be safe, our communities need tools to protect the most vulnerable among us.

From family violence, to suicide, to mass shootings, gun violence tears our communities apart. Initiative 1491 creates extreme risk protection orders, giving law enforcement and families the power to ask a judge to temporarily suspend a person’s access to firearms if there is documented evidence that the person poses a serious threat to themselves or others.

With support from law enforcement, public health, mental health, domestic violence prevention, survivors, and faith leaders, this initiative is a crucial step towards creating safer communities. We proudly join this coalition and encourage our readers to approve Initiative 1491.

Visit the campaign website here.

43rd Legislative District: Nicole Macri

Nicole Macri was the clear standout of all of the excellent candidates running in the 43rd Legislative District, and The Urbanist happily carries our endorsement of her forward into the general election.

Nicole’s impressive coalition of supporters, from seven current members of the Seattle City Council, Mayor Ed Murray and former Mayor Mike McGinn, to a huge slate of progressive organizations like the Sierra Club, Emily’s List, and the Washington State Labor Council speaks volumes about the confidence that community leaders have in what she will be able to accomplish in Olympia.

But above all, The Urbanist is excited to send a smart housing policy wonk down to the state house to shake things up. Her fellow representative in the 43rd, Speaker Frank Chopp, also makes housing one of his leading issues, but some of his policy ideas could use a fresh perspective. Nicole’s experience with Housing First policies makes her an ideal candidate to elect during our state of emergency around the issue of homelessness.

That being said, we do not believe that Nicole will be a one-issue representative, and fully expect her to bring an urbanist’s sensibility to the table on a host of other statewide issues, from mitigating the effects of climate change, to approaching state transportation issues, to increased worker’s and union rights. We believe that Nicole is the best choice to represent the 43rd Legislative District for years to come. Vote Macri.

Read Nicole’s endorsement survey answers. Visit Nicole’s campaign website here.

7th Congressional District: Brady Walkinshaw

With the retirement of Jim McDermott, the 7th Congressional District will see a new representative for the first time since 1989. The next officeholder will likely hold the position for decades, making this a vitally important position for Seattle residents. The Urbanist is excited to endorse Brady Walkinshaw for Congress.

Walkinshaw has been a state representative for the 43rd Legislative District since 2013. He has a track record of bi-partisan cooperation and has sponsored legislation on renter protections, addressing drug addition, and criminal justice reform.

Through our questionnaire and interview process, Walkinshaw demonstrated his ability to take an urban agenda to the United States Congress. He opposes highway expansion in urban areas and is open to dedicating right-of-way to modes other than cars, including rail. He also showed a willingness to use the power of the federal government to rethink how zoning works and to push for more equitable and sustainable land use and housing frameworks. During the interview, he also mentioned the failure of the federal government to focus on urban priorities and indicated that the district should represent that need.

Walkinshaw says, “The American Dream is no longer a white picket fence on a few acres of land–it’s a condo in the midst of a bustling urban environment.” We encourage our readers to vote for Brady Walkinshaw because he will be an advocate for more equitable and sustainable cities. Vote Walkinshaw.

Read Brady’s endorsement survey answers. Visit Brady’s campaign website here. Pramila Jayapal was not eligible for endorsement because she did not respond to requests to complete the questionnaire. 

Voting members of the Elections Board consisted of Laura Bernstein, Scott Bonjukian, Ben Crowther, Aleksandra Culver, Ryan Packer, Owen Pickford, and Doug Trumm.

The post 2016 General Election Endorsements first appeared on The Urbanist.

For that reason, we are proud to release our endorsements for the 2016 primary election on four key local campaigns, including two ballot measures and two races. These votes will impact the vision of our waterfront, the affordability of our housing, the investments in our infrastructure, and our continued national leadership. We looked for the best policies and advocates to represent true urbanist values. You can read more about how we did that here.

We’d like to thank all of the candidates who participated in our endorsement process and hope our readers will find the information and thoughts below to be useful when casting their votes.

43rd Legislative District: Nicole Macri

The field of candidates in the 43rd Legislative District is very robust, and includes several candidates who present a strong case for themselves as urbanists. Nicole Macri, however, stands out in this field as having the strongest background to hit the ground running in the state legislature. As Deputy Director of the Downtown Emergency Service Center and President of the Board of Directors of the Low Income Housing Alliance, she has been on the front lines of Seattle’s housing crisis. Elevating one of Seattle’s key players in the fight against homelessness to the state level is a smart move. Seattle is in the middle of a state of emergency on homelessness, but this issue will only be solved regionally and systematically with the full involvement of all levels of government.

It is clear that Nicole has demonstrated the skillset necessary to succeed in Olympia, and her positions on a wide variety of urban issues, from her support for finding less volatile funding sources for public transit, to her endorsement of a carbon tax to help mitigate the effects of climate change, have earned her our endorsement. We see Nicole fighting for the 43rd Legislative District in the state legislature for years to come. Vote Macri.

Read Nicole’s endorsement survey answers. Visit Nicole’s campaign website here.

7th Congressional District: Brady Walkinshaw

With the retirement of Jim McDermott, the 7th Congressional District will see a new representative for the first time since 1989. The Urbanist endorses the candidacy of Brady Walkinshaw. Walkinshaw grew up in rural Washington and worked professionally on sustainable food systems. He was appointed to (then) Representative Jamie Pedersen’s seat in the state house in 2013 and then won election to the same seat in 2014.

Through his questionnaire and interview process, Walkinshaw showed his willingness to take an urban agenda to the United States Congress. In regards to highways, he voiced opposition to expansions in urban areas as well as a willingness to dedicate right-of-way to modes other than cars, including rail. He also is willing to rethink how zoning is done in cities. He showed a willingness to use the power of the federal government to push for more equitable and sustainable zoning and housing. During the interview, he also mentioned the failure of the federal government to focus on urban priorities and indicated that the district should represent that need.

We believe Walkinshaw would be an advocate for more equitable and sustainable cities and we encourage our readers to vote for him in the fall.

Read Brady’s endorsement survey answers. Visit Brady’s campaign website here. Pramila Jayapal was not eligible for endorsement because she did not respond to requests to complete the questionnaire. 

City of Seattle Proposition 1 (Housing Levy): Vote Yes

Proposition 1 will double the current housing levy and is a slam dunk. Seattle is in the midst of a severe housing crisis with many people becoming priced out of the city and record numbers of people experiencing homelessness. Renewing and doubling the housing levy is a tangible step to really help those who need it most. The 2009 Housing Levy invested $145 million over seven years. The 2016 levy would build upon the success of the last and invest $290 million over the next seven years. It includes:

• $243 million in the preservation and production of affordable rental units, with 60% of these funds focused on families and individuals living at 30% area median income or below;
• $11.5 million in homelessness prevention; and
• $9.5 million in assistance to low-income homeowners and homebuyers.

Opponents have raised concerns about how efficiently the City is spending levy dollars, but the reality is that rising construction costs and the skyrocketing price of land is affecting non-profit housing providers too, and we could very well end up paying a higher price per unit price than in previous levies. This isn’t grounds to oppose the bill measure; it’s a reflection of our current real estate market, the very reason we need the levy in the first place.

Seattle is a wealthy city. Doubling the housing levy is a statement that we won’t turn our back on making sure that all Seattleites can afford to live in the city, close to where they work and where services are. Vote YES on Seattle Proposition 1 (Housing Levy).

City of Seattle Initiative 123 (Viaduct Park): Vote No

We strongly oppose Initiative 123’s effort to derail a decade of progress on transforming Seattle’s waterfront. The plan would rebuild a 50-feet tall, one-mile long pedestrian bridge along the waterfront where the crumbling Alaskan Way Viaduct stands today. The main justification for the campaign? The views afforded by a piece of highway infrastructure that has divided Seattle from its bustling waterfront for more than 60 years.

Kate Martin, the campaign leader, ran for Seattle mayor in 2013 on a platform that included a vision of preserving the Alaskan Way Viaduct as a park akin to the High Line in New York—a project with a much different scale and context. Losing with less than two percent of the absolute vote total, the idea clearly didn’t resonate with the public. And an engineering study found that preserving the viaduct was impossible, prompting the campaign’s main backer, developer Martin Selig, to pull his support.

The proposal is now to rebuild the viaduct as a towering “garden bridge” that will require 1,000-feet long ramps and outdoor elevators to access. This would blockade the effort to reactivate our city’s waterfront with parks, pedestrian and bicycle promenades, and redevelopment of private properties.

Seattle’s waterfront designer, James Corner, designed the very same High Line that I-123 aspires to become. And even he calls the proposal a “dumb idea”. And in placing I-123 on the ballot, the Seattle City Council noted the measure is “…inconsistent with the Strategic Plan, Central Waterfront Concept Design and Framework Plan, and the Funding Plan for the Waterfront…and undermines the vision for Waterfront Seattle”.

That’s enough for us to endorse a NO vote on Initiative 123.

Read our previous articles (one, two) on the Park My Viaduct and I-123 campaign.

Voting members of the 2016 Primary Elections Board consisted of Owen Pickford, Ben Crowther, Scott Bonjukian, Doug Trumm, and Ryan Packer.

The post 2016 Primary Election Endorsements first appeared on The Urbanist.

Our endorsements last year covered all nine crowded City Council races. We interviewed 25 candidates and asked each the same five questions, publishing summaries of their answers for readers to review. But we heard loud and clear that readers wanted more direct quotes so they could judge candidates by their own words.

So this year we changed our process. Candidates were sent a survey covering a range of key issues, from climate change to homelessness and rent control. Each of these surveys was published verbatim. In total, six candidates from the 43^rd Legislative race were invited to participate and all six responded, including Dan Shih, Nicole Macri, Sameer Ranade, Thomas Pitchford, Scott Forbes, and Marcus Courtney. In the 7^th Congressional race, three major candidates were invited and two responded, including Brady Walkinshaw and Joe McDermott. Pramila Jayapal’s campaign did not respond to multiple attempted contacts and is therefore ineligible for endorsement.

While we recognize that surveys are better suited for publishing, they lack the same accountability as an in-person interview. Indeed, many campaigns direct paid staffers to complete surveys on their behalf as they’re inundated during endorsement season.

For that reason, we offered optional 30-minute in-person interviews to dig deeper. Six candidates accepted, including Sameer Ranade, Marcus Courtney, Brady Walkinshaw, Nicole Macri, Dan Shih, and Scott Forbes. Those who accepted were asked to repeat answers to original survey questions and asked new questions about issues like the looming I-5 replacement and new progressive revenue sources like a capital gains tax. The interviews also gave candidates a chance to speak candidly. Paired with the optional nature, records of these interviews will not be publicly available.

This week, the Elections Board met to decide our endorsement in both the 43^rd Legislative and 7^th Congressional races, along with Initiative 123 (Park My Viaduct) and Proposition 1 (Housing Levy). We will publish our official endorsements in each of these races next week. Come the general election in November, we may re-evaluate our positions in these races and take on new issues—top of the list being Sound Transit 3.

We are proud to be one of the few organizations to release candidate answers as part of our endorsement process because we believe it furthers our values of transparency, education, and accountability. We understand that there are many flavors of urbanism, just as there are flavors of the Democratic and Republican parties. Some prioritize certain values like environmentalism or social justice, while others are laser-focused on issues like public transit, biking, or zoning. For that reason, we expect some readers to arrive at different conclusions regarding their own votes. We hope only that our work can help guide them to their own conclusions.

The post Our 2016 Endorsement Process Explained first appeared on The Urbanist.

Over the next week or so, we’ll be releasing our surveys from candidates in the 43rd Legislative District (Representative Position 1) followed by candidates in the 7th Congressional District. In early July, our Elections Board will release Primary endorsements of The Urbanist covering both candidates and local issues.

The following is our full survey from Dan Shih, candidate for the 43rd Legislative District.

Do you consider yourself an urbanist? Why/Why not?

I am an urbanist, not just as a city dweller, and not just as a believer in urban living and smart city planning, but also as a believer in the magic of cities. Cities are a remarkable engine of growth, social interaction, and cultural development. Healthy cities bring together people with different skills, interests, and backgrounds, creating a critical mass that enhances opportunities for collaboration, sharing of ideas, and serendipitous interactions that often yield unexpected and novel outcomes. I have chosen to raise my three daughters in an urban environment because I value interaction over privacy, public amenity over self-sufficiency, and connectedness over disconnection.

What is your strategy for making housing more affordable both for very low-income and middle-class workers?

I would work to increase the amount of housing, make affordable housing a healthy proportion of that increase, and preserve existing affordable housing. This includes a sufficient allocation for the state’s critical Housing Trust Fund. In addition, I would look for opportunities to allow the state-owned land (or other government-owned land) to be dedicated to affordable housing. And I would prioritize such efforts in neighborhoods where diversity is most at risk of being lost. I would also work with our federal delegation to expand the federal Low Income Housing Tax Credit program, which is administered at the state level and is the single largest producer of affordable housing. In addition, I would look for ways to facilitate the availability of flexible, modest-cost capital (potentially using “social-impact bonds”) for affordable housing providers to bootstrap their projects and for down-payments on acquisitions. I would also work to improve the rental process, such as by making background checks transferrable between rental applications to reduce the costs to tenants and by prohibiting source-of-income discrimination.

What are your preferred policies for adapting to and mitigating climate change?

Focusing on policies where state action would be most fruitful (as opposed to federal or international actions), there are great opportunities for the state in transitioning toward a clean energy economy. Technological research is needed, and we have world-class universities here with the ability to drive innovation and to nurture a startup community to commercialize those innovations and create jobs.

First, we can foster clean-energy technologies by ensuring that our state’s power grid is supplied from them. And we can encourage (through subsidy or otherwise) the use of such technologies by private parties. For example, there are opportunities to generate solar power without dedicating land to it by encouraging the deployment of solar panels on big-box stores.

Second, we can price carbon pollution (and other greenhouse gases) to give appropriate incentives to reduce reliance on fossil fuels. There’s no better time to start with oil prices so low.

Third, we can reduce fossil fuel use in transportation by encouraging greater use of mass transit and electric vehicles. I support the use of gas taxes to fund mass transit and, if necessary, would amend the constitution to allow that.

What are your preferred policies for ending homelessness?

First, I would learn from Salt Lake City, Houston, and other cities that have significantly reduced homelessness and build on their successes, which not only achieved humane results but also reduced overall costs.

Second, I would seek to prevent homelessness in the first place by supporting policies that help those on the brink stay in housing, such as by providing assistance with rent or security deposits, making background checks transferable, and prohibiting source-of-income discrimination.

Third, for those experiencing homelessness, I would support policies that rely less on overnight emergency shelters and provide more 24-hour shelters, ideally ones open to partners and pets so that more people will use them. We can co-locate mental health and addiction treatment services with transitional housing and increase mainstream housing opportunities for people experiencing homelessness.

Fourth, the state must fund the Consolidated Homeless Grant, prioritize mental health funding, and ensure that our limited resources are being used most effectively toward the goal of ending homelessness and not just on supporting agencies involved with that.

In addition, we cannot overlook the importance of policies that equalize opportunity, such as fully funding public education, extending health insurance coverage, and fixing our regressive tax system.

What state policies would you support to create more livable urban communities?

We can provide for healthy urban growth through policies that channel density into areas where transit and transportation options exist or can be added, maintain or enhance the diversity (including income diversity) of neighborhoods, provide shared public amenities and social spaces that enhance connections, facilitate a diverse and talent-based economy, protect the environment, and encourage the use of cleaner sources of energy.

What state policies would you support to create more equitable urban communities?

Education is the great equalizer, and access to a quality education is a critical component of equity in urban communities. We need the state to fully fund public education because education is the gateway to opportunity. We also need to improve the availability of early learning programs, make higher education more affordable, and provide more vocational training opportunities.

Policies around transit and transportation, growth management, zoning, environmental regulation, public safety, and more must be evaluated through the lens of equity. For example, we should prioritize transit options in lower-income areas to provide more access to job opportunities and reduce the cost of living.

In addition, I would support the policies described above to provide more affordable housing and end homelessness.

How can the state transportation budget better support diverse transportation choices?

We should recognize that we will not be able to build enough road capacity to meet all of our transportation needs. Transportation funds for urban roads should prioritize maintenance of existing roadways. To the extent we fund road expansions, we should prioritize projects that alleviate bottlenecks rather than simply moving bottlenecks to another location. The savings from this reorientation of priorities can be used to fund mass transit infrastructure, which is decades behind where it needs to be, increase bus service, and build safe and dedicated bike paths along high-usage commuter routes.

Would you support a repeal of the state ban on rent control? Why/Why not?

I would support enabling legislation if local jurisdictions demonstrate a desire and a need for such powers.

Do you support a mileage-based fee on vehicles to replace the gas tax?

Yes

Do you support mandatory inclusionary zoning?

Yes

Do you plan to support Sound Transit 3?

Yes

Do you support the Seattle Housing Levy?

Yes

Do you support the preservation tax exemption as applied to both non-profit and private landlords?

Yes

The post 2016 Endorsement Interviews: Dan Shih first appeared on The Urbanist.

Over the next week or so, we’ll be releasing our surveys from candidates in the 43rd Legislative District (Representative Position 1) followed by candidates in the 7th Congressional District. In early July, our Elections Board will release Primary endorsements of The Urbanist covering both candidates and local issues.

The following is our full survey from Thomas Pitchford, candidate for the 43rd Legislative District.

Do you consider yourself an urbanist? Why/Why not?

I do indeed consider myself an urbanist. I committed to the idea that in order to have a more livable city we have to continually examine how we meet density and transit needs. To confess that I’m not the best bike person, however, but I’m learning.

What is your strategy for making housing more affordable both for very low-income and middle-class workers?

The only way we can make housing affordable on a long-term basis is to increase supply and density

What are your preferred policies for adapting to and mitigating climate change?

I think we have to have a commitment to continually seeing the construction standards of our buildings become more and more in line with LEED and other certification processes and green development best practices. Also have to strengthen our commitment to our parks and other urban forestry preservation projects. People moved to Seattle for its elements of natural beauty and we certainly can’t lose that.

What are your preferred policies for ending homelessness?

The preferred policy would be to establish permanent supportive housing. Totaling the ongoing costs of shelter oversight and systems costs in health and in some cases law enforcement has a per person estimated cost of at least $35k; Housing the chronically homeless, though, such as disabled veterans under the “housing first’ concept costs about $13k – $25k. When someone is housed, they can focus on other aspects of life – like dealing with substance abuse, or just getting an uninterrupted night’s sleep as the basest of needs we all need to thrive. That is interrupted, and the lives of children are in upheaval when families are homeless, also. These programs, however, cannot be successful in the long-term unless we are able to more meaningfully address both income inequality and poverty. We also need to answer the calls of a very distressed segment of the LGBTQ community in working to find solutions for the approximately 40% of young people that identify as LGBTQ. We must be much more aggressive in working to find reconciliation for parents and children, and where that’s not possible, we need to hold parents accountable. By sending their underage children out of their home, they are turning them over to society to care for. It’s not right and parents know that. We need to call them out for it.

What state policies would you support to create more livable urban communities?

Right now, new state-funded public housing projects benefiting low and middle income earners would be ideal given that interest rates right now are at historic lows. There are currently approximately 7600+ units in development, but there should be many more. And we do have immediate needs to update and modernize infrastructure. Many of our area bridges will soon need major structural work, for example. And we also should consider later investment in infrastructure projects when highways outlive their usefulness. I-5, for example, one day will come to the end of its useful life, leaving the space free for developing entirely new neighborhoods. While that day is not today and not for quite awhile, what could happen there and along other areas along I-5 more in the immediate future is lidding, with availability of new spaces above that would greatly benefit existing neighborhoods, and connect neighborhoods in a way they haven’t been connected in decades.

We must be open to that possibility and be open to creating more density in downtown and all across Seattle. Neighborhoods, even those that have been single-owner homes, should have a voice in how their neighborhood responds to the city’s need. But much like we need a collective heavy lift on revenue reform from all Washingtonians, we need all Seattleites to come to this conversation and to take ownership for crafting neighborhood plans that can help prepare for our future population needs. This is a long-game conversation, and if the city thrusts anything on anyone, all we will see is further polarization and an eventual imminent domain showdown. It is also up to neighborhood leaders to assert their voice and represent their interests, but also come to the conversation ready to own some of this shared responsibility to help me our collective density planning needs.

What state policies would you support to create more equitable urban communities?

As previously mentioned, permanent supportive housing for everyone, and aggressive state investment in affordable housing; continued raising of the state’s minimum wage, and tying future increases to grow with market growth; an increase in state disability benefits.

How can the state transportation budget better support diverse transportation choices?

With additional revenue. Beyond that conversation, we should be preparing for a day when we will no longer depend on highways and cars. There are some of those structures in the interim that we’re still going to have to support for those in more remote parts of our state. I’m happy to support projects like ST3 that will greatly expand regional transit, though, and I am open to hear what suggestions community members might bring to the table in the coming years.

Would you support a repeal of the state ban on rent control? Why/Why not?

Overall, I would not support a repeal of rent control because of the economic disaster it has been shown to be over and over. Constraining prices will always lead to a supply shortage. I would be open to allowing cities to explore other options for rent stabilization, however. Ultimately, the only way to alleviate the housing crunch and price spiral is to increase housing supply.

Do you support a mileage-based fee on vehicles to replace the gas tax?

No

Do you support mandatory inclusionary zoning?

Yes

Do you plan to support Sound Transit 3?

Yes

Do you support the Seattle Housing Levy?

Yes

Do you support the preservation tax exemption as applied to both non-profit and private landlords?

Yes

The post 2016 Endorsement Interviews: Thomas Pitchford first appeared on The Urbanist.