HomeMy WebLinkAboutPCD 2024-06-10 COMPLETE AGENDA PACKETCity of Tukwila
Planning and Community
Development Committee
O Dennis Martinez, Chair
O Tosh Sharp
O Armen Papyan
AGENDA
MONDAY, JUNE 10, 2024 — 5:30 PM
Distribution:
D. Martinez
T. Sharp
A. Papyan
Mayor McLeod
M. Wine
A. Youn
L. Humphrey
ON -SITE PRESENCE:
TUKWILA CITY HALL
DUWAMISH CONFERENCE ROOM
6300 SOUTHCENTER BOULEVARD
REMOTE PARTICIPATION FOR THE PUBLIC:
1-253-292-9750, ACCESS CODE: 866559860#
Click here to: Join Microsoft Teams Meeting
For Technical Support: 1-206-433-7155
Item
Recommended Action
Page
1.
BUSINESS AGENDA
a. Ordinance amending TMC Chapter 3.14"Sales and
a.
Forward to 6/17 Regular
Pg.1
Use Tax for Affordable Housing."
Meeting Consent Agenda
Laurel Humphrey, Legislative Analyst
b. Ordinance relating to tenant protections.
b.
Forward to 6/17 Work
Pg.7
Laurel Humphrey, Legislative Analyst
Session
c. Permit review contract amendments:
c.
Forward to 6/17 Regular
Pg.55
(1) Plan review and inspection services with BHC.
Meeting Consent agenda
(2) Structural review services with Reid Middleton.
Nora Gierloff, Community Development Director
d. Code amendments associated with House Bill 1293
and State Bill 5290.
d.
Forward to Planning
Commission
Pg.61
Maxwell Baker, Development Supervisor
2.
MISCELLANEOUS
Next Scheduled Meeting: July 8, 2024
S. The City of Tukwila strives to accommodate individuals with disabilities.
Please contact the City Clerk's Office at 206-433-1800(TukwilaCityClerk@TukwilaWA.gov) for assistance.
City of Tukwila
Thomas McLeod, Mayor
INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM
TO: Planning & Community Development Committee
FROM: Laurel Humphrey, Legislative Analyst
DATE: June 4, 2024
SUBJECT: Ordinance amending TMC 3.14, Sales & Use Tax for Affordable Housing
BACKGROUND
The proposed ordinance amends Tukwila Municipal Code Chapter 3.14 to accommodate
flexibility for future changes to Washington State Law regarding the affordable housing sales
tax.
DISCUSSION
During the 2019 legislative session, the state approved HB 1406 which is a local revenue
sharing program that allows local governments to collect a portion of state sales tax to
address affordable housing. In September 2019 the City Council adopted Ordinance 2613 and
Resolution 1966 to allow the city's participation in this legislation, with the intention of
pooling a portion of the proceeds with the South King Housing and Homelessness Partners,
also established in 2019 via interlocal agreement. The City currently contributes 70% of HB
1406 proceeds to the SKHHP Housing Capital Fund.
Since the passage of HB 1406, the state legislature has made changes to the provisions of the
tax:
• SSB 5604 was adopted in the 2023 legislative session and added administrative costs
not to exceed 10% of the annual distribution to the list of allowable uses of the tax.
• SB 6173 was adopted in the 2024 legislative session and increased the homeownership
threshold from 60% to up to 80% for the development of affordable housing intended
for owner occupancy.
Staff recommends amending the Municipal Code in such a way that removes some of the
detail and instead points to Washington State law as it exists now and is amended in the
future. RCW 82.14.540, which allows the collection of the 1406 revenues and dictates
allowable uses, is likely to continue to change over time and this approach will allow the city
to accommodate future changes without requiring code amendments each time. City and
SKHHP staff will continue to monitor legislative changes to the tax for impacts to Tukwila and
its use of the revenue, and will keep the City Council apprised.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends Committee approval of the ordinance to forward to the June 17, 2024
Regular Consent Agenda.
ATTACHMENTS
1.Draft ordinance
1
2
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, AMENDING ORDINANCE NO.
2613, AS CODIFIED AT TUKWILA MUNICIPAL CODE (TMC)
CHAPTER 3.14, "SALES AND USE TAX FOR AFFORDABLE
HOUSING," AUTHORIZING THE MAXIMUM CAPACITY OF A
LOCAL SALES AND USE TAX TO FUND INVESTMENTS IN
AFFORDABLE AND SUPPORTIVE HOUSING; PROVIDING
FOR SEVERABILITY; AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE
DATE.
WHEREAS, pursuant to Ordinance No. 2613, the City Council authorized the maximum
capacity of a local sales and use tax to fund investments in affordable and supportive
housing as authorized by Chapter 338, Laws of 2019; and
WHEREAS, the local sales and use tax is credited against the state sales and use tax
so that the total tax paid by the consumer does not increase; and
WHEREAS, since 2019, the City of Tukwila has been a member of the South King
Housing and Homelessness Partners (SKHHP) and contributes a portion of its SHB 1406
revenue to the SKHHP Housing Capital Fund; and
WHEREAS, in 2023, the Washington State Legislature passed Substitute Senate Bill
(SSB) 5604, allowing cities to retain up to 10 percent of the tax for administrative costs; and
WHEREAS, in 2024, the Washington State Legislature passed Senate Bill (SB) 6173,
allowing cities imposing the tax to provide housing and services to persons whose income
is at or below 80% of the median income if the housing and services support the
development of affordable housing intended for owner occupancy; and
WHEREAS, the City Council desires to amend Tukwila Municipal Code (TMC)
Chapter 3.14 in accordance with the changes to state law effectuated by SSB 5604 and
SB 6173 and to establish flexibility to accommodate future changes in state law;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA,
WASHINGTON, HEREBY ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS:
2024 Legislation: Amendments to TMC 3.14
Version: 6/4/24
Staff: L. Humphrey
Page 1 of 4
3
Section 1. TMC Section 3.14.010 Amended. Ordinance No. 2613 §2, as codified at
TMC Section 3.14.010, "Imposition of Sales and Use Tax for Affordable Housing," is hereby
amended to read as follows:
3.14.010 Imposition of Sales and Use Tax for Affordable Housing
A. There is imposed a sales and use tax as authorized by Washington State
Legislature Chapter 338, Laws of 2019, as now enacted and hereafter amended, which
shall be codified in Chapter 82.14 RCW, upon every taxable event, as defined in Chapter
82.14 RCW, occurring within the City of Tukwila. The tax shall be imposed upon and
collected from those persons from whom the State sales tax or use tax is collected
pursuant to Chapter 82.08 and 82.12 RCW.
B. The rate of the tax imposed by TMC Section 3.14.010 shall be 0.0073 percent of
the selling price or value of the article used.
C. The tax imposed under TMC Section 3.14.010 shall be deducted from the
amount of tax otherwise required to be collected or paid to the Department of Revenue
under Chapter 82.08 or 82.12 RCW. The Department of Revenue will perform the
collection of such taxes on behalf of the City of Tukwila at no cost to the City.
D. The Department of Revenue will calculate the maximum amount of tax
distributions for the City of Tukwila based on the taxable retail sales in the City in State
Fiscal Year 2019, and the tax imposed under TMC Section 3.14.010 will cease to be
distributed to the City of Tukwila for the remainder of any State Fiscal Year in which the
amount of tax exceeds the maximum amount of tax distributions for the City as properly
calculated by the Department of Revenue. Distributions to the City of Tukwila that have
ceased during a State Fiscal Year shall resume at the beginning of the next State Fiscal
Year.
Section 2. TMC Section 3.14.020 Amended. Ordinance No. 2613 §3, as codified at
TMC Section 3.14.020, "Purpose of Tax," is hereby amended to read as follows:
3.14.020 Purpose of Tax
A. The City may use the moneys collected by the tax imposed under TMC Section
3.14.010 or bonds issued only, as allowed by Washington State Legislature Chapter 338,
Laws of 2019, as now enacted and hereafter amended. , for the following purposes:
1. Acquiring, rehabilitating, or constructing affordable housing, which may
supportive housing services under ROW 71 .2/l .385; and
2 Providing the operations and maintenance costs of new units of affordable
or supportive housing; and
3. Providing rental assistance to tenants.
2024 Legislation: Amendments to TMC 3.14
Version: 6/4/24
Staff: L. Humphrey
Page 2 of 4
4
B. The housing and services provided undcr TMC Section 3.14.020 may only be
provided to persons whose income is at or below 60 percent of the median income of the
C. In determining the use of funds under TMC Section 3.14.020, the City must
consider the income of the individuals and families to be served, the leveraging of the
resources made available under TMC Section 3.14.010, and the housing needs within
the City.
reven, Tthe-ta-x sednder T Section 3.14.010.
E. The tax imposed by the City under TMC Section 3.14.010 will expire 20 y arc,
to the City Council and the Mayor of the expiration date of the tax each year beginning
three years before the expiration date, and shall also promptly notify the City Council and
the Mayor of any changes to the expiration date.
Section 3. TMC Section 3.14.030 Amended. Ordinance No. 2613 §4, as codified at
TMC Section 3.14.030, "Administration and Collection - Statutory Compliance," is hereby
amended to read as follows:
3.14.030 Administration and Collection - Statutory Compliance
The administration and collection of the tax imposed by Chapter 3.14 shall be in
accordance with the provisions of Washington State Legislature Chapter 338, Laws of
2019, as now enacted and hereafter amended, which shall be codified in Chapter 82.14
RCW.
Section 4. The Finance Director is authorized to provide any necessary notice to the
Department of Revenue to effectuate the tax enacted by this ordinance and to execute,
for and on behalf of the City of Tukwila, any necessary agreement with the Department
of Revenue for the collection and administration of the tax enacted by this ordinance.
Section 5. Corrections by City Clerk or Code Reviser Authorized. Upon
approval of the City Attorney, the City Clerk and the code reviser are authorized to make
necessary corrections to this ordinance, including the correction of clerical errors;
references to other local, state or federal laws, codes, rules, or regulations; or ordinance
numbering and section/subsection numbering.
Section 6. Severability. If any section, subsection, paragraph, sentence, clause or
phrase of this ordinance or its application to any person or situation should be held to be
invalid or unconstitutional for any reason by a court of competent jurisdiction, such
invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of the
remaining portions of this ordinance or its application to any other person or situation.
2024 Legislation: Amendments to TMC 3.14
Version: 6/4/24
Staff: L. Humphrey
Page 3 of 4
5
Section 7. Effective Date. This ordinance or a summary thereof shall be published
in the official newspaper of the City, and shall take effect and be in full force five days
after passage and publication as provided by law.
PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON,
at a Regular Meeting thereof this day of , 2024.
ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED:
Andy Youn, CMC, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM BY:
Office of the City Attorney
2024 Legislation: Amendments to TMC 3.14
Version: 6/4/24
Staff: L. Humphrey
Thomas McLeod, Mayor
Filed with the City Clerk:
Passed by the City Council:
Published:
Effective Date:
Ordinance Number:
Page 4 of 4
6
City of Tukwila
Thomas McLeod, Mayor
INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM
TO: Tukwila City Council
FROM: Laurel Humphrey, Legislative Analyst
Kari L. Sand, City Attorney
Nick Morton, Assistant City Attorney
DATE: May 31, 2024
SUBJECT: Renter Protection Policy Proposals
ISSUE
Draft ordinance regarding enhanced renter protections.
BACKGROUND
In May 2023, the Transit Riders Union (TRU) approached the City Council about adding
additional regulations/protections for tenants in Tukwila.
The Planning and Community Development (PCD) Committee discussed the proposals at its
May 1, 2023 meeting and requested that the City Attorney prepare a preliminary opinion on
legal risk prior to any legislation being drafted. The Committee discussed the legal analysis at
its August 7 2023 meeting and subsequently directed staff to prepare an ordinance including
specific components that posed limited risk and bore minimal impact to city resources and
staffing.
The Committee further discussed the draft ordinance at its November 7, 2023 meeting with
revised recommendations based upon a pending legal challenge against the City of Kenmore.
The draft ordinance no longer included protections associated with Rent Increase Notices or
Just Cause Eviction. The Committee directed staff to conduct public outreach on the draft,
which was done via inclusion in the renewal notices sent to landlords enrolled in the
Residential Rental Business License and Inspection Program as well as an information page
on the city website, a newsfeed post, and a request for comment in the e-Hazelnut.
In March 2024, TRU representatives made public comment and distributed a letter outlining a
"minimum set of policies that would be acceptable," included in the public comment
attached to this memo.
Ordinance Draft
The draft ordinance as recommended by last year's PCD Committee in November 2023
includes the following components:
• Distribution of Information - the City will prepare written summaries of legal
protections and landlords would be required to provide them to prospective renters,
to new tenants, and to existing tenants.
7
INFORMATIONAL MEMO
Page 2
• Deposit Requirements - upfront costs over and above the 1st month's rent are capped
at a total of 1-month rent, with a right to pay in installments over 6 months, or 2
months for leases shorter than 6 months.
• Late Fees - Fees for late payment of rent shall not exceed 1.5% of monthly rent.
• Rent Due Dates - Tenants may adjust rent due date if on a fixed income.
• Social Security Numbers - Landlords may request but not require a social security
number for purpose of screening prospective tenants.
CityAttorneyAnaiysis
In advance of the April 22, 2024 Committee of the Whole meeting, the City Attorney prepared a
legal analysis of TRU's March 24, 2024 proposals. The analysis used a traffic light metaphor,
assigning green to proposals that carry a low risk, yellow to proposals that carry a medium level
of legal risk, and red to proposals that carry a high level of legal risk.
The following proposals were assigned green, meaning they carry low legal risk. All these
proposals are already included in the current draft ordinance. Council has received both
positive and negative responses to these provisions from public commenters. Analysis of the
criticisms is included in the public comment section below.
• Cap move -in costs additional to first month's rent at no more than one month's rent,
and allow payment in installments.
• Social security number cannot be required for rental applications.
• Renters on fixed income can change their rent due date.
The following proposals were assigned red, meaning they present high legal risk or are
otherwise not advisable. The City Attorney advises against implementing these proposals.
• Tenant can terminate lease and move with 20 days' notice if rent is increased by 3% or
more.
• Tenant is entitled to landlord -paid relocation assistance for large rent increases.
• Strengthen just cause protections, including closing the "lease loophole."
• Ban unfair, deceptive, and abusive practices.
The following proposals were assigned .slow, meaning they present a medium level of legal
. Below is additional analysis of these proposals for Council's consideration.
• Require 180 days' notice for rent increases of 3% or more.
o Analysis - State law requires 60 days' notice of rent increases. A significant
number of neighboring cities have imposed longer notice periods, usually
either 120 days or 180 days. However, Kenmore's provision extending the
notice period to 120 days is one of the provisions challenged by the
Washington Business Properties Association in the lawsuit that is still pending
in King County Superior Court (further discussion of the case is in the litigation
section below).
8
INFORMATIONAL MEMO
Page 3
• Prohibit landlords from raising rent on housing units that are defective, unsafe, or
unlivable.
o Analysis - The draft ordinance does not currently include this provision. Burien
and SeaTac have passed versions of this proposal, both of which prohibit rent
increases where the dwelling is in violation of any element of RCW 59.18.060.
These provisions are quite broad, as this RCW section lists all landlord duties,
such as the requirement to maintain a duplicate key to each unit, which
arguably is unrelated to a dwelling being defective, unsafe, or unlivable.
Additionally, there is some risk that a provision of this kind could be challenged
under RCW 35.21.830, which prohibits cities from enacting any ordinances that
"regulate the amount of rent to be charged." By broadly prohibiting landlords
from raising rents, a court could plausibly find the ordinance to be a "control
on rent" that is preempted by state law. Thus, the recommendation is to only
prohibit rent increases in instances where the dwelling is defective, unsafe, or
unlivable and not to prohibit rent increases more broadly for anyviolation of
RCW 59.18.060.
• Cap late fees at $10 per month and ban notice delivery fees.
o Analysis - The draft ordinance includes a cap on late fees at 1.5% of monthly
rent. The City received public comment both in support and against this
provision. Raising or reducing the percentage or dollar value of the late fee cap
does not affect the legal risk of this provision.
4/22/24 Committee of the Whole
The Committee of the Whole discussed the draft ordinance at its April 22, 2024 meeting and
referred it back to the Planning & Community Development Committee for additional
discussion, to be followed up by a Full Council Work Session. The following themes emerged
from Councilmember comments and questions:
Response to public comments
The Council expressed a desire to more fully consider the input received from landlords
regarding potential tenant protection measures. Greg and Vanessa Zaputil, who are landlords
in Tukwila, submitted a 4-page letter addressing each of the provisions of the draft ordinance.
They also provided public comment at the COW meeting held on April 22, 2024. Their key
points are representative of the concerns presented by other public commenters that were
critical of the provisions currently included in the draft ordinance. Below is an analysis of
their criticisms:
8.47.030 - Distribution of information
• Criticism - The requirement that distribution of information must take place "within
30 days" after being made available by the City is confusing. It is unclear when the
clock starts on the 30 days.
9
INFORMATIONAL MEMO
Page 4
• Analysis - Is there a feasible method of providing notice to all landlords that the
informational packet has been released, such that there is a concrete date on which
the 30 days commences? The City could resolve this concern by posting on its website
with any new informational packet the start and end dates for any new 30-day clock.
8.47.040 - Deposit requirements and installment payments
• Criticism - Landlords should not be limited in their ability to collect deposits and
move -in fees because costs, bills, and expenses have increased for landlords. Also,
state law already allows for installment payments and requires checklists and trust
accounts for tenant deposits.
• Analysis - Whether this provision is too burdensome for landlords is a policy question
to be weighed by Council. It is true that chapter 59.18 RCW already allows for
installment payments. However, the draft ordinance is more robust. The ordinance
allows for six installment payments while state law only allows for up to three. It is
also true that state law requires checklists and trust accounts for deposit funds. The
draft ordinance adopts those requirements, though state law applies whether or not
the City adopts it. Accordingly, the City could remove the checklist and trust account
requirements from the draft ordinance for clarity, if desired.
8.47.050 - Late fees
• Criticism - The cap on late fees in the draft ordinance is too harsh and will eliminate
the incentive for tenants to pay rent on time.
• Analysis - This is a policy question to be weighed by Council. The cap is at 1.5% in the
current draft of the ordinance. Neither increasing nor reducing the cap will affect the
legal risk of this provisions, which is relatively low.
8.47.060 - Due date adjustment
• Criticism - Landlords have bills with due dates that cannot be adjusted, such that
allowing for flexible rent due dates will affect the landlords' ability to pay their bills on
time.
• Analysis - This is a policy question to be weighed by Council. This provision presents
very low legal risk.
8.47.070 - Social security numbers.
• Criticism - Prohibiting landlords from requiring social security numbers (SSN) will
limit their ability to verify that applicants are able to pay their rent and do not pose a
threat to the property or other residents. Many landlords prefer to run their own
background checks on applicants using SSNs.
• Analysis - This is a policy question to be weighed by Council. This provision presents
very low legal risk. The practical implications of this provision relate to the type of
credit/background check a landlord can do with and without an SSN. In general, a SSN
10
INFORMATIONAL MEMO
Page 5
is not required to run a credit report or criminal background check, though the use of
a SSN arguably ensures more accuracy in these reports. Many typical background
checks used by landlords do require a SSN. However, there are methods of conducting
background checks without a SSN. One such method is a "reusable tenant screening
report," which allows an applicant to obtain a screening report from a consumer
reporting agency and submit the report to multiple landlords. This also helps
applicants avoid paying screening fees every time they apply to a landlord. The draft
ordinance requires landlords to accept these portable reports. Under RCW 59.18.030,
these reports must include a credit report, criminal history, eviction history,
employment verification, and rental history. There are also tenant screening services
that landlords can use directly that do not require a SSN, though some landlords fear
that these reports may not be as accurate (as noted by several landlords during public
comment).
8.47.090 - Violations and Penalties
• Criticism - The enforcement provision of the ordinance is too harsh. The ordinance
should include escalating warnings prior to punitive measures.
• Analysis - The draft ordinance creates a private right of action to enforce these
provisions, meaning that a tenant must bring a claim against a landlord. Adding a
structure of escalating warnings would create an administrative burden on the City.
Whether the penalties themselves are too harsh is a policy question to be weighed by
Council.
Status update of related pending/completed litigation
Washington Business Properties Association ("WBPA") v. City of Kenmore (pending) -
There are no new developments in this case. Below is a summary of the claims brought
against Kenmore in this matter:
• Requires 120-days' written notice for rent increases greater than 3% and 180-days'
written notice for rent increases greater than 10%.
o WBPA argues that this provision is preempted by RCW 35.21.830, which states
that "controls on rent" are a state concern and may not be regulated by local
governments. The strength of this argument is questionable, as this provision
requires additional notice but does not limit the amount of rent chargeable.
That said, it is still unknown how the courts will rule on this issue.
• Extends just cause eviction requirements to nonrenewal of lease agreements at
expiration (i.e., closes the "lease loophole").
o WBPA argues that this provision is preempted by state law, as it prohibits
something expressly allowed under state law. Specifically, it prohibits non -
renewing a tenant's lease at the end of its term without just cause, which the
WBPA asserts is allowed under RCW 59.12.030. There is an unpublished (non-
11
INFORMATIONAL MEMO
Page 6
binding) appellate court case supporting this argument. See Rental Hous. Ass'n
of Washington v. City of Burien, 23 Wash. App. 2d 1015 (2022) (see below).
• Prohibits unfair, abusive, and deceptive practices by landlords.
o WBPA argues that this is an unconstitutionally vague restriction on speech.
This is a facially valid constitutional claim but is unknown how the courts will
rule on the issue. The City Attorney's Office previously flagged this provision as
high risk (red category).
Rental Housing Association of Washington v. City of Burien (2022) - This case is
unpublished, meaning it is technically non -binding. However, it does provide guidance as to
how courts might rule on closing the "lease loophole."
Burien enacted an ordinance that extended just cause requirements to the non -renewal of a
fixed term lease. This is what TRU refers to as "closing the lease loophole," which would
require landlords to renew a tenant's lease at its expiration unless the landlord can show just
cause for eviction under chapter 59.18 RCW.
The court held that Burien's ordinance was preempted by state law, as it "prohibits what
state statute allows: eviction at the end of a lease term." This decision is based on RCW
59.12.030, which allows landlords to initiate an action to evict a tenant at the end of the lease
term without showing one of the bases of just cause under RCW 59.18.650.
TRU maintains that this decision was wrongly decided, and has emphasized that it is
unpublished, such that it does not prohibit closing the lease loophole. However, no
subsequent lawsuits have tested this theory. Enacting such a provision carries a high risk of
legal challenge.
Funding relationship with King County Bar Foundation Housing Justice Project
The City of Tukwila participates in a funding collaborative for the KCBA at a rate of
$10,000 per year in the current biennium. KCBA provides free legal assistance to low-
income tenants facing eviction. Neighborhood legal clinics make legal information and
referral available to low-income residents. Adoption of an ordinance relating to tenant
protections would not impact this relationship currently or in the future.
Tukwila's Rental Housing Inspection Program
The City Council received a briefing on the Rental Housing Program at its February 12, 2024
Committee of the Whole meeting. (Meeting material)
The City of Tukwila's Rental Housing Program is comparable to other cities in Washington;
however, some are stricter, and some are more lenient. In January, our rental staff began
meeting with rental staff in other Washington cities to collaborate and learn about how their
programs work. These meetings have so far included Aberdeen, Auburn, Bellingham, Burien,
12
INFORMATIONAL MEMO
Page 7
Kent, Lakewood, Lynnwood, Olympia, Pasco, Renton, Seattle, Spokane, and University Place.
Of all the cities in Washington that have rental programs almost all of them require an annual
registration (some charge a fee, some do not). The city of Tukwila has an annual license fee.
All cities with rental programs require periodic rental inspections every 2-5 years. The city of
Tukwila inspects rental properties prior to issuing the rental license and every 4 years
thereafter. Auburn and Seattle have adopted renter protections. A few of the other cities are
looking at adopting renter protections and a few others do not want to get involved in that
level of regulation. The common goal of all the city's programs is to provide healthy and safe
housing to tenants.
The City of Tukwila offers courtesy inspections for tenants concerned about their living
conditions on the rental licensing webpage and in the Hazelnut newsletter.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff is seeking Council discussion and direction on the proposed ordinance.
ATTACHMENTS
Exhibit 1: Draft Ordinance
Exhibit 2: Comment Letters
13
14
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, REPEALING ORDINANCE NO.
2526, AS CODIFIED AT TUKWILA MUNICIPAL CODE
(TMC) CHAPTER 8.47; REENACTING TMC CHAPTER
8.47, "RENTAL HOUSING TENANT PROTECTIONS;"
PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND ESTABLISHING
AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, over the past several years, average rents in South King County have
increased, and vacancies for affordable rental housing are at low levels, making it difficult
for tenants, especially those with low incomes, to locate affordable rental housing; and
WHEREAS, the King County Regional Affordable Housing Task Force issued its Final
Report and Recommendations for King County, WA, December 2018 (rev. October 2019)
(hereafter referred to as "Regional Affordable Housing Task Force Final Report"), which
identifies that renting rather than owning a home increases the chances of being severely
cost burdened, and recognizes an existing affordable housing crisis in King County; and
WHEREAS, the Regional Affordable Housing Task Force Final Report includes a
regional plan with goals, strategies and a Five -Year Action Plan to address the affordable
housing crisis, and Goal 4 of the action plan is to "[p]reserve access to affordable homes for
renters by supporting tenant protections to increase housing stability and reduce risk of
homelessness"; and
WHEREAS, the King County Countywide Planning Policies, developed pursuant to the
Washington State Growth Management Act, suggest that local jurisdictions "[a]dopt and
implement policies that protect housing stability for renter households; expand protections
and supports for moderate-, low-, very low-, and extremely low-income renters and renters
with disabilities"; and
WHEREAS, the Tukwila community includes a relatively high percentage of renters
compared to the Washington State average, with the most recent census data indicating
that just 42.7% of housing units are owner -occupied, which is significantly lower than the
statewide average of 63.6%; and
2024 Legislation: Rental Housing Tenant Protections
Version: 04/16/2024
Staff: L. Humphrey
Page 1 of 7
15
WHEREAS, enhanced tenant protections, in addition to those in the Residential
Landlord -Tenant Act (chapter 59.18 RCW), are in the best interests of the residents of
Tukwila and will promote the public health, safety, and welfare of the City; and
WHEREAS, the City Council is committed to maintaining vibrant and diverse
neighborhoods while balancing the needs of landlords and tenants; and
WHEREAS, to ensure adequate time to educate landlords about the requirements and
responsibilities imposed on them as a result of this ordinance, and to give landlords time to
update their administrative processes to achieve compliance with this ordinance, the
effective date of this ordinance shall be delayed to January 1, 2024.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA,
WASHINGTON, HEREBY ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Repealer. Ordinance No. 2526 is hereby repealed in its entirety, thereby
eliminating Tukwila Municipal Code (TMC) Chapter 8.47, "Fair Housing Regulations."
Section 2. TMC Chapter 8.47 Reenacted. TMC Chapter 8.47 is hereby reenacted to
read as follows:
CHAPTER 8.47
RENTAL HOUSING TENANT PROTECTIONS
Sections:
8.47.010 Definitions
8.47.020 Applicability
8.47.030 Distribution of information required
8.47.040 Deposit requirements and installment payments permitted
8.47.050 Late fees
8.47.060 Due date adjustments
8.47.070 Social security numbers not required
8.47.080 Violations and penalties
Section 3. Regulations Established. TMC Section 8.47.010 is hereby established to
read as follows:
8.47.010 Definitions
The definitions of this section apply through this chapter unless the context clearly
requires otherwise. The definitions of RCW 59.18.030 under the Residential Landlord -
Tenant Act (RLTA), as now in effect or as may be subsequently amended, also apply to this
chapter unless otherwise defined in this section.
"Dwelling" or "dwelling unit" has the same meaning as RCW 59.18.030(10), as now in
effect or as may be subsequently amended, and means a structure or that part of a structure
which is used as a home, residence, or sleeping place by one person or by two or more
2024 Legislation: Rental Housing Tenant Protections
Version: 04/16/2024
Staff: L. Humphrey
Page 2 of 7
16
persons maintaining a common household, including but not limited to single-family
residences and units of multiplexes, apartment buildings, and mobile homes.
"Landlord" has the same meaning as RCW 59.18.030(16), as now in effect or as may
be subsequently amended, excluding the living arrangements identified in RCW 59.18.040,
and means the owner, lessor, or sublessor of the dwelling unit or the property of which it is
a part, and further means any person designated as representative of the owner, lessor, or
sublessor, including, but not limited to, an agent, a resident manager, or a designated
property manager.
"Rent" has the same meaning as RCW 59.18.030(29), as now in effect or as may be
subsequently amended, and means recurring and periodic charges identified in the rental
agreement for the use and occupancy of the premises which may include charges for
utilities. Except as provided in RCW 59.18.283(3), rent does not include nonrecurring
charges for costs incurred due to late payment, damages, deposits, legal costs, or other
fees, including attorneys' fees.
"Rental Agreement" or "lease" has the same meaning as RCW 59.18.030(30), as now
in effect or as may be subsequently amended, and means all agreements which establish
or modify the terms, conditions, rules, regulations, or any other provisions concerning the
use and occupancy of a dwelling unit.
"Security Deposit" means a refundable payment or deposit of money, however
designated, owed by the tenant to the landlord at the commencement of a rental agreement
to secure performance of a rental agreement or any part of a rental agreement.
"Subsidized Housing" has the same meaning as RCW 59.18.030(33), as now in effect
or as may be subsequently amended, and refers to rental housing for very low-income or
low-income households that is a dwelling unit operated directly by a public housing authority
or its affiliate, or that is insured, financed, or assisted in whole or in part through one of the
following sources: (a) a federal program or state housing program administered by the
Department of Commerce or the Washington State Housing Finance Commission; (b) a
federal housing program administered by a city or county government; (c) an affordable
housing levy authorized under RCW 84.52.105; or (d) the surcharges authorized in RCW
36.22.250 and any of the surcharges authorized in chapter 43.185C RCW.
"Tenant" has the same meaning as RCW 59.18.030(34), as now in effect or as may be
subsequently amended, and excluding the living arrangements identified in RCW 59.18.040,
and RCW 59.20.030(24), as now in effect or as may be subsequently amended, and means
any person who is entitled to occupy a dwelling unit primarily for living or dwelling purposes
under a rental agreement, and RCW 59.20.030 defines "tenant" as any person, except a
transient, who rents a mobile home lot.
Section 4. Regulations Established. TMC Section 8.47.020 is hereby established to
read as follows:
2024 Legislation: Rental Housing Tenant Protections
Version: 04/16/2024
Staff: L. Humphrey
Page 3 of 7
17
8.47.020 Applicability
The provisions of this chapter apply to tenancies governed by Chapter 59.18 RCW
(Residential Landlord Tenant Act) and Chapter 59.20 RCW (Manufactured/Mobile Home
Landlord -Tenant Act) and are in addition to the provisions provided in said chapters of the
RCW. The provisions of this chapter shall not apply to rental agreements between an owner
and tenant where the owner shares the dwelling unit as a primary residence with the tenant.
Section 5. Regulations Established. TMC Section 8.47.030 is hereby established to
read as follows:
8.47.030 Distribution of information required.
A. The City shall prepare, and update as necessary, summaries of this chapter, the
Nuisance Code (TMC Section 8.28.020), the Washington State Residential Landlord Tenant
Act (Chapter 59.18 RCW), Forcible Entry and Unlawful Detainer (Chapter 59.12 RCW), and
Fair Housing laws, describing the respective rights, obligations, and remedies of landlords
and tenants, including information about legal resources available to tenants.
B. A landlord shall provide a copy of the summaries prepared by the City as described
in subsection A of this section to any tenant or prospective tenant when a rental agreement
is offered, whether the agreement is for a new or renewal agreement.
C. Where there is an oral rental agreement, the landlord shall give the tenant copies
of the summaries as described in subsection A of this section, either before entering into the
oral rental agreement or as soon as reasonabl _possible after entering into the oral rental
agreement.
D. For existing tenants, landlords shall, within thirty (30) days after the summaries are
made available by the City, distribute copies of the summaries to existing tenants.
E. The initial distribution of information to tenants must be in written form and landlords
shall obtain the tenant's signature documenting tenant's receipt of such information. If a
tenant refuses to provide a signature documenting the tenant's receipt of the information,
the landlord may draft a declaration stating when and where the landlord provided tenant
with the required information. After the initial distribution of the summaries to tenants, a
landlord shall provide existing tenants with the most current summaries prepared by the
City, which summaries may be distributed in electronic form, unless a tenant specifically
requests written summaries in hard copy form.
F. The packet prepared by the City includes informational documents only, and
nothing in the summaries therein shall be construed as binding on or affecting any judicial
determination of the rights and responsibilities of landlords and tenants, nor is the City liable
for any misstatement or misinterpretation of the applicable laws.
Section 6. Regulations Established. TMC Section 8.47.040 is hereby established to
read as follows:
2024 Legislation: Rental Housing Tenant Protections
Version: 04/16/2024
Staff: L. Humphrey
Page 4 of 7
18
8.47.040 Deposit requirements and installment payments permitted.
A. The sum of any security deposits and nonrefundable move -in fees charged by a
landlord before a tenant takes possession of a dwelling unit shall not exceed an amount
equal to one month's rent, except in subsidized housing where the amount of rent is set
based on the income of the tenant. The exception for subsidized housing shall not include
tenancies regulated under Section 8 of the Housing Act of 1937, 42 U.S.C. Section 1437f,
commonly known as the "choice voucher program."
B. Tenants entering rental agreements with terms lasting six or more months may
choose to pay their move -in fees and security deposits in six equal monthly installments
over the first six months occupying the dwelling unit.
C. Tenants entering rental agreements with terms lasting fewer than six months or
month -to -month rental agreements may choose to pay move -in fees and security deposits
in two equal monthly installments over the first two months occupying the dwelling unit.
D. Landlords may not impose any fee, charge any interest, or otherwise impose a cost
on a tenant because a tenant elects to pay in installments.
E. Installment payments are due at the same time rent is due.
F. All installment schedules must be in writing, signed by both parties.
G. Paying in installments does not apply to a landlord obtaining a tenant screening
report, which report cost paid by the tenant shall be limited to the standard and actual cost
of the tenant screening report.
H. No security deposit may be collected by a landlord unless the rental agreement is
in writing and a written checklist or statement specifically describing the condition and
cleanliness of, or existing damages to, the premises and furnishings, including, but not
limited to, walls, floors, countertops, carpets, drapes, furniture, and appliances, is provided
by the landlord to the tenant at the beginning of the tenancy. The checklist or statement shall
be signed and dated by the landlord and the tenant, and the tenant shall be provided with a
copy of the signed checklist or statement.
I. A landlord must place any required security deposit in a trust account and provide
a written receipt and notice of the name, address, and location of the depository and any
subsequent change thereof to the tenant, in compliance with the requirements of RCW
59.18.270.
J. Nothing in this section prohibits a landlord from bringing an action against a tenant
to recover sums exceeding the amount of the tenant's security deposit for damage to the
dwelling unit for which the tenant is responsible. The landlord may seek attorney's fees for
such an action as authorized by Chapter 59.18 RCW
Section 7. Regulations Established. TMC Section 8.47.050 is hereby established to
read as follows:
2024 Legislation: Rental Housing Tenant Protections
Version: 04/16/2024
Staff: L. Humphrey
Page 5 of 7
19
8.47.050 Late fees
A. Any fees for late payment of rent shall not exceed 1.5% of monthly rent per month.
No other fees may be charged for late payment of rent. Any rental agreement provision
providing for such fees shall be deemed void with respect to any provision prohibited by this
subsection. This subsection shall not apply to or limit decisions, orders, and rulings of courts
of competent jurisdiction.
B. Any notice to pay or vacate served under RCW 59.12.030(3) shall include within
the notice in at least sixteen (16) point bold font for the following information:
"You have 14 days to pay the rent required by this notice. After 14 days, you may
pay the rent but will have to include a late fee totaling at most 1.5% of monthly rent for each
month of rent owed. If the landlord has started a court case to evict you and the case is filed
in court, you will need to pay court costs as well before the hearing date to avoid eviction."
Section 8. Regulations Established. TMC Section 8.47.060 is hereby established to
read as follows:
8.47.060 Due date adjustments
All rental agreements executed after the adoption of this ordinance shall include, or be
deemed to include, a provision allowinq tenants to adjust the due date of rent payments if
the tenant has a regular monthly source of governmental assistance, or fixed income source
(e.g., Social Security) that the tenant receives on a date of the month that is incongruent
with paying rent on the date otherwise specified in the rental agreement. A landlord shall not
refuse to rent to a prospective tenant or terminate a lease based on a request for a due date
adjustment.
Section 9. Regulations Established. TMC Section 8.47.070 is hereby established to
read as follows:
8.47.070 Social Security numbers not required
A landlord may request but shall not require a social security number for the purposes
of screening a prospective tenant as allowed under RCW 59.18.257. A landlord shall not
refuse to enter into a rental agreement with a prospective tenant or prospective occupant
because the prospective tenant or prospective occupant does not agree to provide a social
security number. Alternative proof of financial eligibility such as portable screening reports
or other proof of income must be accepted, where available, if offered by the tenant or
prospective tenant.
Section 10. Regulations Established. TMC Section 8.47.080 is hereby established
to read as follows:
2024 Legislation: Rental Housing Tenant Protections
Version: 04/16/2024
Staff: L. Humphrey
Page 6 of 7
20
8.47.090 Violations and penalties
A landlord found in violation of any of the provisions in this chapter, unless otherwise
provided in this chapter, shall be liable to such a tenant in a private right of action for the
greater of double the tenant's economic and noneconomic damages, or three times the
monthly rent of the dwelling unit at issue, and reasonable litigation costs and attorneys' fees.
Section 11. Corrections by City Clerk or Code Reviser Authorized. Upon
approval of the City Attorney, the City Clerk and the code reviser are authorized to make
necessary corrections to this ordinance, including the correction of clerical errors;
references to other local, state or federal laws, codes, rules, or regulations; or ordinance
numbering and section/subsection numbering.
Section 12. Severability. If any section, subsection, paragraph, sentence, clause or
phrase of this ordinance or its application to any person or situation should be held to be
invalid or unconstitutional for any reason by a court of competent jurisdiction, such
invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of the
remaining portions of this ordinance or its application to any other person or situation.
Section 13. Effective Date. This ordinance or a summary thereof shall be published
in the official newspaper of the City, and shall take effect and be in full force five days
after passage and publication as provided by law.
PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, at
a Regular Meeting thereof this day of , 2024.
ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED:
Andy Youn, CMC, City Clerk Thomas McLeod, Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM BY: Filed with the City Clerk:
Passed by the City Council:
Published:
Effective Date:
Ordinance Number:
Office of the City Attorney
2024 Legislation: Rental Housing Tenant Protections
Version: 04/16/2024
Staff: L. Humphrey
Page 7 of 7
21
22
From: Lori Solberg
To: Laurel Humphrey
Subject: FW: Home sold/Input for City Council
Date: Friday, December 15, 2023 9:18:45 AM
Hi Laurel,
Are you the correct person to forward these to?
Thanks,
Lori
From: Carly <carlywillis253@gmail.com>
Sent: Thursday, December 14, 2023 10:07 PM
To: Rental Housing <RentalHousing@TukwilaWA.gov>
Subject: Home sold/Input for City Council
Hi there,
We sold our home located at 13706 34th Ave S, Tukwila 98168.
We got out of King county due to unreasonable restrictions on rentals and we were screwed over
too many times by renters who damaged our property, didn't pay rent for months on end, or both. I
highly recommend the City Council stops protecting renters and starts protecting owners of
properties. Once all the property owners who were offering reasonably priced rentals sell their
homes, there will be no more rentals or the competition for the few that remain will be so fierce
that no one will be able to afford renting anymore. This is what is happening. Please pass this along
to City Council. Good luck.
Carly Willis
Owner, Blue Sage Properties & Antique Marketplace
(253) 691-7645 I BlueSagePropertiesLLC.com
carlywillis253@gmail.com 11809 Howard Road, Suite B
Auburn, WA 98002
Create your own email signature
CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Tukwila network. Please DO NOT open
attachments or click links from an unknown or suspicious origin.
23
From: Clearbrook Manager
To: CitvCouncil
Cc: Cathy Reiner; Cliff Godwin
Subject: Proposed Rental Housing laws
Date: Wednesday, December 20, 2023 11:22:01 AM
As 40-year landlords of 1 property in Tukwila and a couple in Burien
and Seattle, we URGE you to be careful that any new laws enacted take
the small landlords into consideration.
It's (ready very difficult to be a landlord, and if we can't collect a
security deposit AND last -month's rent, we have little security when a
tenant doesn't pay rent, but we still have mortgages and expenses to pay.
Capping late fees means little incentive for a renter to pay on time. And
we still have mortgages and expenses to pay on time.
Removing some screening assistance such as social security numbers
means we don't really know WHO the tenant is, nor what their background
is.
Evictions are very difficult on landlords as well as tenants, and the
courts are so crowded that it can take many months. Therefore we want
good tenants, with good records, so we never have to evict.
We want to be fair and good landlords, but when a city (such as Burien
or Seattle) makes it excessively hard on the landlords, we can't stay in
business.
If small landlords have to leave the system, the city makes FEWER
rental units available, when more are needed.
Thank you
Cathy Godwin
Property Manager
(206) 228-3143
clearbrookmanagerCa_� yahoo. corn
CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Tukwila network. Please DO
NOT open attachments or click links from an unknown or suspicious origin.
24
Greg & Vanessa Zaputil
15171 52nd Ave. S. #5
Tukwila, WA 98188
1/24/24
Lori Solberg
Rental Housing Program Administrator
City of Tukwila Dept. of Community Development
6200 Southcenter Blvd.
Tukwila, WA 98188
RE: Draft Rental Protections Ordinance
As a small landlord who has provided housing in Tukwila since 1979 in the form of four
townhomes, we wish to object to the proposed draft rental protection ordinance. We are (and
have always been) resident landlords who have weathered the ups and downs of markets, treating
our tenants with respect and compassion while choosing to remain in Tukwila to provide housing
to our community. As active Tukwila Community members, we are very familiar with the
challenges tenants in our area face and the few bad actors that unfortunately stereotype all
landlords unfairly as slumlords. Costs for landlords have significantly increased over the past
several years with wage increases, cost of living increases across all sectors, and property tax
increases (both due to voter -approved initiatives and burden shifting through exempting
properties from taxes).
While we appreciate the barriers that our community faces regarding access to housing, we
believe a regulatory approach such as this will create the opposite effect- less clarity, less
understanding, and less affordable housing. This approach creates confusion between applicable
laws. In a community where communication barriers have been consistently identified; we
should be making things easier, not more complicated. Many barriers traditionally have stemmed
from misunderstanding, or not even being aware of the WA Landlord Tenant Act. This Act is
comprehensive, and legislators have consistently updated it, often annually, primarily increasing
tenant protections.
Much of what this new Tukwila Ordinance brings forward is already covered in the WA
Landlord Tenant Act, while further creating an administrative burden for the City. Ensuring the
ordinance remains relevant and in compliance, as new state legislation is enacted or repealed will
require constant and onerous oversight for the City without accomplishing stated goals.
Additionally, this will create yet another administrative burden, especially on small landlords.
The goal, and resources, should be first and foremost educational for both the tenants and the
landlords not authoritative and punitive.
Some specific comments we have regarding sections of the draft will additionally support and
highlight why we object to the regulatory approach the City is proposing.
25
8.47.030 Distribution of information required.
D) The requirement to distribute copies of new summaries to Tenants "within 30 days" after
being made available by the City lacks clarity. How is it made available? When specifically does
the clock start? How is the City ensuring equitable distribution to all landlords, including those
with language barriers?
E) Electronic communication is inconsistent with WA Landlord Tenant Act provisions- it is
unclear if tenants receive notices. Requiring Tenants to specifically request a hard copy, if
desired, in a community with language barriers is inconsistent with equitable access.
Furthermore, if landlords inadvertently change communication methods, or are on vacation,
providing copies, within 30 days becomes a barrier and subject to punishment.
8.47.040 Deposit requirements and installment payments permitted.
A) With inflationary costs escalating due to increased minimum wages and cost of living, it has
forced landlords to increase deposits and fees simply to break even. For example, Non -
Refundable fees for redecorating costs such as carpet cleaning, and house cleaners have had to
increase. Similarly, Security Deposits to secure the property for damage have had to increase due
to significant rises in construction costs such as drywall repair, plumbers, supply chain materials,
etc. Landlords need to have this provision to safeguard their investment. If limitations on
deposits are imposed, rents would need to increase to cover any restoration costs not covered by
tenants who have been granted a low, insufficient Security Deposit, and are unable to pay on
move -out. Litigating tenants who cannot afford to pay on move -out is a costly and impractical
solution, only further escalating the landlord's costs and consequently less affordable rent.
B, C, D, E, F, G) Installments are already provided for in RCW 59.18.610. Providing contrary
language promotes confusion.
H) Checklists are already provided for in RCW 59.18.260. Providing additional language
promotes confusion and burden in cross-referencing for both the tenant and the landlord.
I) Trust accounts for deposits are already provided for in RCW 59.18.270. Providing additional
language promotes confusion and burden in cross-referencing for both the tenant and the
landlord.
8.47.050 Late fees
A) Capping the rental late fee provides no incentive for the Tenant to pay on time or move out.
This cap would severely limit the ability of the landlord to pay their bills or in the case of
complete failure to pay, to regain possession of their property (investment) without a costly legal
procedure. For example, a 1.5% cap on an average Tukwila rental (according to rental.com) of
$1,890 would equate to $28.35/month. Capping late fees will have the opposite of the City's
desired effect by creating an unattractive environment for quality landlords if they cannot protect
their investment/retirement.
26
B) 14-day notices are already provided for in RCW 59.18.057. Adding this would require
duplicative and confusing notices.
8.47.060 Due date adjustments
Landlords have payments with due dates (Mortgage, Property Tax, City of Tukwila Rental
License Fees)- requiring flexible due dates will impact the landlord's ability to pay their bills.
There is already a 5-day grace period built into RCW 59.18.057.
8.47.070 Social Security numbers not required
Landlords must be able to require as permitted by RCW 59.18.257 a screening process whereby
tenants provide required information to a tenant screening company (including a Social Security
number) to protect their properties and the existing tenants. Credit/Background screening is a
reliable and established risk assessment indicator. Furthermore, requiring a "portable" credit
screening report to be accepted unfairly targets small landlords who do not have the resources to
verify the credibility of such reports. Allowing the landlord to administer their own uniform and
identical screening methods across all tenants is equitable and eliminates the potential for
language and content barriers on both sides.
8.47.090 Violations and penalties
These penalties are unduly and unnecessarily harsh. Considering the City of Tukwila's known
language and communication barriers this unfairly targets small landlords who may not have the
resources or the knowledge to discern the differences and nuances between the WA Landlord
Tenant Act and the City of Tukwila Regulations. To not have an escalating structure that
includes warnings and education before punitive damages is counter to an inclusive City culture.
This additional layer of regulations will unnecessarily create the unintended consequence of less
affordable housing. Small landlords will be challenged to comply and rather opt to sell at higher
market values and push housing costs higher.
Rather than create another layer of government regulations and administrative burden, we
advocate for the City to address the core issue in our community which are barriers to
understanding Tenant rights as set out in the current WA State Landlord Tenant Act, and
landlords not fully understanding that act.
Assisting tenants would be best accomplished through:
• Tasking the Human Services Dept. with a better and more focused effort at connecting
Tenants with resources and advocates.
• Providing information to Tenants in means and formats that are recognized to them is
also a best practice.
• Providing links to rental information on the main City webpage so they are easily found
and navigable.
Efforts must be made to communicate and connect landlords with information to allow them to
succeed as well. This includes:
27
• Providing and implementing improved and verifiable communication practices to
distribute current City regulations such as the rental licenses/inspections as well as state
laws and information.
• Including an FAQ on the City Website for both Tenants and Landlords that explains the
WA Landlord Tenant Act in plain English.
Punishing and unduly burdening landlords (especially smaller ones who provide affordable,
quality housing) will have the opposite effect and decrease and diminish affordable housing.
Moreover, the fiscal capacity of landlords to reinvest, maintain, or improve housing will also
decrease.
Regards,
Greg & Vanessa Zaputil
28
March 18, 2024
Dear Tukwila City Councilmembers,
Last spring, Tukwila renters and community organizations in the Stay Housed Stay
Healthy coalition came to you urging action to address rising rents, housing insecurity,
and habitability issues in Tukwila's rental housing market. We proposed a set of renter
protection policies, most of which have already been implemented, successfully, in other
nearby jurisdictions.
We appreciate the work that's been done so far to review our proposals. But we're also
concerned that the ordinance drafted last year is very weak and we don't yet have a
clear timeline for passing legislation. Renters are facing urgent problems affecting their
quality of life and sometimes even leading to their displacement out of the city, so it's
frustrating to feel that there may be a lack of urgency from their elected representatives
to improve this situation.
Last November, Tacoma voters approved a set of renter protections by citizen's initiative
that went significantly beyond what we have proposed, including, for example, bans on
winter evictions and evictions of families with school -age children and educators during
the school year. This measure passed despite aggressive opposition from the landlord
and real estate industries, outspending the campaign 3-to-1; despite being an odd year
election; and despite the fact that only about 43% of Tacoma households are renters.
We have no doubt that Tukwila voters would approve a set of renter protections much
stronger than those we've proposed to the council. We would prefer not to run a
citizen's initiative, and we believe that this council can support good legislation. But we
have made a commitment to Tukwila renters to make significant improvements. If it's
not possible for the council to pass adequate protections, we may have no choice but to
take this issue to the voters.
After many conversations with Tukwila renters, here is what we think is a minimum set
of policies that would be acceptable:
1. Require 180 days notice for rent increases of 3 percent or more.
2. Tenant can terminate lease and move with 20 days notice if rent increase is 3
percent or more.
29
3. Tenant is entitled to landlord -paid relocation assistance for large rent increases.
4. Prohibit rent hikes in defective, unsafe or unlivable housing.
5. Cap move -in costs additional to first month's rent at no more than one month's
rent, and allow payment in installments.
6. Cap late fees at $10 a month and ban notice delivery fees.
7. Strengthen Just Cause protections, including closing the lease loophole.
8. Social security number cannot be required for rental applications.
9. Renters on fixed income can change their rent due date.
10. Ban unfair, deceptive and abusive practices.
These protections should apply to all Tukwila renters regardless of how many units their
landlord owns, and they should cover mobile and manufactured home parks as well as
residential tenants.
We understand that some councilmembers and staff may be worried about legal risks.
We believe these concerns are overblown, as all of these policies (or very similar ones)
are already in place in other jurisdictions in King County. If we did go to the trouble to
run an initiative, we would certainly make these protections even stronger and add more
to the list, likely including some that haven't yet been passed elsewhere. In this case,
the City may well be in a position of having to defend voter -approved legislation in court.
We also understand that there are several new members of the council and that it takes
some time at the beginning of the year to get things rolling. We and other members of
the Stay Housed Stay Healthy coalition are available to help get everyone up to speed
on the policy discussions in Tukwila so far, as well as the history and wider context of
work on renter protections throughout King County and Washington state.
We hope that you will make it a high priority in the next few months to pass legislation
that includes at least the policies listed above, and also consider adding some of the
other elements we've previously proposed. We are ready to assist in this effort in
whatever way is most helpful. Thank you for your attention to this important issue.
Sincerely,
Katie Wilson
General Secretary
Transit Riders Union
30
From: David Puki
To: CityCouncil
Subject: Renter protections policy
Date: Wednesday, March 27, 2024 5:31:14 PM
Council members,
I don't see the need to create a renter's policy. I have not been made aware of any issues by
my friends or other residents living here in the city. Artie my neighbor who supports all the
socialist causes and belongs to the groups that promote them, couldn't give me examples of
actual landlord abuse here in Tukwila. He had lots of stories but could not give me verifiable
examples. I've asked Chief Dreyer if he had any issues of landlord abuse and he said none he
could think of. Also, who will pay the cost to support and enforce this new policy?
So, to me it looks like a solution looking for a problem.
Thanks,
Dave Puki
CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Tukwila network. Please DO
NOT open attachments or click links from an unknown or suspicious origin.
31
RHAWA
Rental Housing Association of WA
Proposed Tukwila Landlord/Tenant Draft Ordinance
The Rental Housing Association of Washington (RHAWA) represents small mom and pop rental housing providers all over
the state. Our average member owns about two units. Small housing providers supply much of the affordable housing
available in their communities. They live in the communities they serve.
Many of the new more restrictive policies across the state have caused increasing anxiety that one bad experience could
leave them in financial ruin. According to a Seattle Auditor's Report from December 2023, Seattle lost nearly 7,000 single
family and small multi -family housing units from 2016 to 2022.
RHAWA members house more than 2,200 residents and/or families in the City of Tukwila.
8.47.050 Late Fees
The proposed late fee cap of 1.5% would impose great economic hardship on rental housing providers. If a housing
provider is late on their mortgage payment, the cost to them is much higher than 1.5%. No one wants to collect late fees,
but they need to be high enough to encourage residents pay rent on time. According to Zillow, the average rent in Tukwila
is $1,795.00 which would put the late fee of 1.5% at $26.92 which, for comparison, is less than the $30 Shut -Off Notice
Fee that Tukwila Public Utilities charges to shut off water after non-payment of utilities or the $50 fee to turn the water
back on. We would hope to see something closer to 10% if a cap is going to be instituted.
8.47.070 Social Security Numbers Not Required
Restricting a housing provider's ability to screen a possible tenant using their social security number limits the
information a housing provider can learn about their prospective resident when performing a background check. This
lack of verifiable screening information could jeopardize the safety and well-being of current residents and the housing
provider. It is crucial that prospective tenants are properly screened to ensure they will not pose a threat to the property
or other residents. If a tenant occupies their residence and then becomes a problem to others in the future; evictions
have been taking up to a year in King County even to remove problem residents from their communities. During that legal
process, their neighbors still need to navigate living in close proximity to the problem resident. If a potential resident is
properly screened ahead of time, these types of issues are less likely to occur. As such, if passed, the ordinance should
include language that a tenant may be denied if their identity cannot be confirmed in the absence of supplying a Social
Security Number.
Policymaker Resource
It is essential to include the voices of local rental housing providers to create policy that creates and preserves affordable
rental housing for Tukwila residents and families. These proposed policies would put an increased financial burden on
housing providers, severely restricting their flexibility, and leading to a more exponential rise in rents across Tukwila.
RHAWA remains available and willing to discuss alternative policies that will have a positive impact in the Tukwila rental
housing market.
Corey Hjalseth I External Affairs Manager
Direct (206) 905-0603 I chjalseth@RHAwa.org
Rental Housing Association of Washington I T (206) 283-0816 I RHAwa.org
32
From: Arc Di
To: CityCouncil
Subject: I support a Renters" Bill of Rights
Date: Sunday, April 21, 2024 2:40:09 PM
Tukwila City Council,
I want to thank City Council for working on this important issue. Housing is a basic human
right. Renters in our city deserve stability. Comprehensive renter protections like more notice
of rent increases, limiting steep move -in fees, and relocation assistance will help make sure
renters can afford a place to live. Enforcing protections already in place can make such a big
impact as well. Please strengthen the inspection program to ensure healthy homes.
Arc Di
arc.di93@gmail.com
15300 33rd Ave S Apt N229
Seatac, Washington 98188
33
From: Al Awnur
To: CitvCouncil
Subject: We need strong renter protections in Tukwila
Date: Sunday, April 21, 2024 2:52:08 PM
Tukwila City Council,
I support a strong Renters' Bill of Rights for Tukwila. Rents prices are skyrocketing and people
are struggling to keep up. Capping move -in costs and requiring property owners to offer
relocation assistance for steep rent increases would help make sure renters can afford a place
to live. Please pass comprehensive renter protections now!
Al Awnur
aawnur@gmail.com
14225 42nd Ave s 109
Tukwila , Washington 98168
34
From: James Burdick
To: CitvCouncil
Subject: I support a Renters" Bill of Rights
Date: Sunday, April 21, 2024 2:37:13 PM
Tukwila City Council,
I want to thank City Council for working on this important issue. Housing is a basic human
right. Renters in our city deserve stability. Comprehensive renter protections like more notice
of rent increases, limiting steep move -in fees, and relocation assistance will help make sure
renters can afford a place to live.
James Burdick
jamesburd@aol.com
3824 South 154th Lane, 14
Tukwila, Washington 98188
35
From: Artie Nosrati
To: CitvCouncil
Subject: In support of a Renters" Bill of Rights
Date: Sunday, April 21, 2024 11:00:36 AM
I am writing to express my support for strong renter protections in Tukwila. Renters in Tukwila
deserve safe and healthy homes. Many renters are living in homes that aren't being kept up by
their landlords. I encourage you to strengthen our inspection program to protect Tukwila
renters along with a comprehensive Renters' Bill of Rights.
Artie Nosrati
artie@transitriders.org
4219 S Othello St
Seattle, Washington 98118
36
From: Anika Mckenzie
To: CitvCouncil
Subject: I support a Renters" Bill of Rights
Date: Monday, April 22, 2024 11:10:43 AM
Tukwila City Council,
I want to thank City Council for working on this important issue. Housing is a basic human
right. Renters in our city deserve stability. Comprehensive renter protections like more notice
of rent increases, limiting steep move -in fees, and relocation assistance will help make sure
renters can afford a place to live.
Anika Mckenzie
shawtywamynameiz@gmail.com
5565 S 152nd St, #37
Tukwila, Washington 98188
37
From: Debra Wendorff
To: CityCouncil
Subject: In support of a Renters" Bill of Rights
Date: Monday, April 22, 2024 2:54:22 PM
Tukwila City Council,
I am writing to express my 9support for strong renter protections in Tukwila. Renters in Tukwila
deserve safe and healthy homes. Many renters are living in homes that aren't being kept up by
their landlords. I encourage you to strengthen our inspection program to protect Tukwila
renters along with a comprehensive Renters' Bill of Rights.
Debra Wendorff
dewinfine@gmail.com
15445 39th Ln S, D-105
Tukwila, Washington 98188
38
From: Allen Thompson
To: CitvCouncil
Subject: Please pass strong renter protections for our city
Date: Monday, April 22, 2024 7:30:46 AM
Tukwila City Council,
We need strong renter protections in Tukwila. Renters need some stability in their lives. Many
are given very little notice for huge rent increases and have no time to adjust their budgets or
find a new place they can afford. I urge you to pass a Renter's Bill of Rights for our city.
Allen Thompson
allencaps@gmail.com
4014 s 152nd st
Tukwila, Washington 98188
39
L�03orric.
o
PROPERTY MANAGEMENT, PLLC
May 7, 2024
Dear Councilmembers,
PO Box 78358
Seattle, WA 98178
(206) 990-9006
info@fullservicepm.com
Good afternoon. My name is Peter Nelson. I am CEO and Designated Broker for
Full Service Property Management. Full Service manages four properties within
the City of Seatac, and hundreds more throughout King and Snohomish Counties.
I have been managing rental real estate for over 38 years. I purchased my first
house in 1985, with a MIL apartment. I was an instant landlord, and learned the
hard way how to treat tenants fairly, and how to not get burned by them.
Full Service has been in business for 12-1/2 years. During that time, I am proud to
say that we have had zero discrimination complaints, and only one court -ordered
eviction! The key: treat everyone fairly and respectfully.
Over the past 4 decades I have witnessed many changes. Increased regulations
are driving the mom-and-pop landlords — small businesses, if you will — out of the
industry. More and more small landlords are either hiring a property manager or
40
getting out of the business entirely. Even as a property manager, this saddens
me. Small business, and the dream of owning and operating a small business,
have always been a dream for so many Americans.
Life is all about choices. You selected where you wanted to live, and who you
want to do business with. Give small business owners that same latitude, without
over -regulating them. We are in America. Land of the free. Give small business
owners the freedom to operate their business as they see fit.
Housing has gotten increasingly expensive; there is no doubt about that. This
proposed ordinance is not going to "fix" the housing crisis, and I know you do not
expect it to. I believe you hope it will help tenants weather the storm. A band -aid
if you will. On a short-term basis, you may be right. Let's take a look at the
longer -term implications.
By making it easier for tenants to get into properties, you increase the likelihood
of delinquencies, defaults, and evictions. Two to three years from now those
delinquencies are going to show up on credit reports and verifications of rent,
exacerbating the problem for tenants to find suitable housing.
Tenants with previously good rental history will be prevented from purchasing a
home. Emotionally, many tenants will feel the stress of not meeting their
41
obligations. The overall health of tenants and the rental industry in the City of
Tukwila will decline.
I am not here to preach to you, or argue the pros and cons of the moral
imperative of a healthy rental market sustaining the local economy. But I do ask
you to act consciously because the decision you make in the coming weeks will
have consequences well into the future.
I want to take a moment to dispel a common and dangerous myth. After a 10-
year run-up in asset values, it is a commonly held belief that landlords are wealthy
landowners who can afford to shoulder the burden of their tenants. I can tell you,
with God as my witness, that while some have built equity in their homes, all of
them are dependent upon the rent to meet their mortgage obligations. Many of
them are one missed rent payment, one expensive turnover, away from serious
financial hardship. Be careful: your actions could have a cascading effect.
Imagine what will happen 5 or 10 years from now when the boom in rents we
have recently experienced becomes a bust. Small landlords will be on the verge
of foreclosure. Regulating an industry like so many local jurisdictions have tried
to do does not fix the problem — it only complicates it long-term.
42
You are going to hear (and probably have already heard) from a group of tenants
and tenant advocacy groups. They are going to plead with you that their lives will
be adversely affected, if not ruined, if they are not afforded certain tenant
protections. I agree. Tenant protections have merit against overzealous
landlords. I can assure you that the bulk of our landlords are kind, compassionate
individuals, who were once renters themselves, and only want a successful
landlord -tenant relationship.
I want to remind (point) each and every one of you that after hearing the pleas of
renters, you still have an obligation to fulfill Tukwila's destiny of carving a
landlord -tenant relationship that will sustain this city, and this economy, not just
today or tomorrow or next week, but well into the future.
I do not claim to be an economic genius, but the economist Adam Smith (and not
our Rep. Adam Smith!) came up with a pretty simple, long-term solution to this
housing crisis. Supply & demand. Flood the market with rentals and housing
prices will surely drop. To put a band -aid on a problem without addressing the
underlying cause will not take care of the problem. Councilmembers — work with
your planning department to get more rentals in the market.
43
Johann Wolfgang Von Goethe once said "Whatever you can do, or dream you can,
begin it! Boldness has genius, power and magic in it." I challenge you to be bold.
Don't just 'follow the leader'. Find long-term solutions that work for your fair city.
It will bring genius, power, and magic!
I wish now to shift gears and address the elements of your proposed ordinance:
1. Information Provided by a Landlord to a Renter
There is little economic impact to either party through good communication.
Depending on the content of the material, it can be a very good thing. I suggest
rather than have your staff prepare the document in a black box, that you enlist
the services of stakeholders, and develop a constructive, well -thought document.
2. Renter Fees
Are you really 'protecting renters' by allowing them to move in to a rental owing
money? Absolutely not! You are setting many of them up to have ruined credit
which will further impact their housing choices in the future.
44
Councilmembers, I implore you to take a long-term view of what we are doing. If
a tenant moves into a home that he/she cannot afford, that might fix the problem
short-term. But long-term you are setting that tenant up for failure in housing.
Regarding the proposal to limit late fees to a paltry $10, my response is....are you
kidding? Late fees are not there as an income source! They are there solely as an
incentive to encourage good payment behavior. My ultimate goal as a fee -based
property manager is to collect zero dollars in late fees!
I have to believe that many if not all of you have children. When raising those
children, you likely applied a "cause -and -effect" approach. Good behavior was
rewarded, and bad behavior punished.
Please apply that same strategy to late fees. Encourage tenants to pay on time,
and build good credit that could help them purchase a home in the future — the
American dream. Fannie Mae came out just last year saying they would use
rental history as a form of credit.
A low, $10 late fee encourages tenants to pay late without thinking of the long-
term consequences. It ruins their rental credit for buying a home, as well as
limiting their future rental housing choices.
45
I support protection for tenants from landlords who charge excessive late fees
and gouge the tenants. If you want to impose late fee regulations, restrict
excessive late fees!
As a side note, we have taken over management of rental property from small
landlords who charged an excessive late fee — often something like $100/day. It is
laughable because by the end of the month the tenant owes thousands of dollars.
No one would ever pay that kind of late fee even if they could. At Full Service, we
like to charge a late fee that hurts a little, to get the tenant's attention, to
encourage good behavior, but not so much that it burdens them into rolling lates.
By limiting the gouging, you can actually help landlords with better business
practices while also helping the tenants.
As another side note, at Full Service we require first, last and security deposit at
move in. Why? Because we want to ensure that tenants and owners alike do not
have to suffer through the financial hardship resulting from tenants getting in
over their head. We stage the last month's rent deposit over 4 months, beginning
with the second month because: 1) we know most tenants are not walking
around with 3 months' rent in their pockets, and; 2) we want to lessen the burden
on the tenants. The beauty of this system is that it is a savings account for
46
tenants so when the time does come for them to move on, they don't have to pay
rent their last month, and can save money for their next place. You see? There
are solutions that don't have to penalize anyone. It just takes creativity.
3. Rent
For rent increases of 10% or more, I do not understand the rationale behind
requiring 180-day notice. 6 months? Is that really "protecting" tenants? It does
not take 6 months for a tenant to figure out he/she cannot afford that kind of
increase, and find another place. Just because "big brother Seattle" did it, doesn't
make it logical or right. Let's be practical here. 120 days is sufficient time for a
tenant to figure out whether they need to move, and then find another place.
Regarding the rent due date: again, leave this to be negotiated between the
landlord and tenant. In the Information Provided by Landlord to Tenant, include
best practices. One of those best practices is for the landlord to encourage timely
payments by being flexible. The large majority of landlords, including myself and
Full Service Property Management, do NOT want late fees. We just want rent to
be paid on time. As agreed. While you are educating tenants on their rights as
tenants, educate landlords on best practices for happy leases! Instead of
47
punishing landlords with restrictions, find ways to encourage them and reward
them for their flexibility. Be bold. Be creative. Be positive.
Finally, regarding uninhabitable units, you do not need to govern or regulate
them. The very term 'uninhabitable' has taken care of that for you. If landlords
do not maintain a unit as required by law, then let building enforcement take
over. Let the tenants know they can report unlawful conditions, and your existing
building code officials can take care of the rest. There is no need to compound
the authority with more, confusing regulation.
4. Social Security Numbers
It is unclear how this is 'protecting' tenants. It opens the door for tenants with
really bad credit — with no regard for what they agree to pay — to continue their
bad habits of taking advantage of small business owners. Again, councilmembers,
do NOT encourage bad behavior under the guise of "protecting tenants". Find
ways to encourage good behavior.
Running a credit check is at the very core of most landlords' screening process.
To take that away is like putting a blindfold on them, and denying them the right
to due process. I am no lawyer, but I am pretty sure this measure is illegal.
48
5. Evictions
Can we all agree? Evictions are a bad thing. The tenant loses. The landlord loses.
The taxpayers lose with increased court congestion. The only party that wins are
the lawyers, and they are already doing well enough without our help!
If you are going to require landlords to get a business license, then pass (or don't
pass) laws just as you would for any other business.
• Do you require other businesses to not accept full payment at the time they
enter into a business agreement with a customer or client?
• Do you limit how much businesses can charge, or raise their prices?
• Do you regulate the terms under which a business can terminate a
relationship with a customer or client?
Of course you don't. To do so would be highly discriminatory and illegal. Which
exactly what this ordinance is!
Sincerely,
49
Peter Nelson
CEO
50
From: Peter Nelson
To: Laurel Humphrey
Subject: Re: Enhanced Renter Protections
Date: Wednesday, May 8, 2024 9:55:43 AM
Thank you, Laurel.
I recently had one more thought that I do not think made it into my comments. I have been in
real estate for 39+ years. I have seen a lot. But I do not think I can think of another industry
that is being regulated like housing. These rules are a knee-jerk reaction to the run-up in rental
rates between 2010-2020 with no thought to the long term.
The housing market will turn just like every other market turns. The question is not "if' but
when. And WHEN it does, there are going to be a lot of small business owners (landlords)
who will be financially strapped with falling rents. On top of that will be the burdens placed
on them by all of this legislation.
I am not worried about the big hedge funds that manage 30,000 units. They can withstand
that. But I am concerned about the moms -and -pops. It is their entrepreneurial spirit that made
this country great. If there was a way for legislation to distinguish between the two then the
big corporations could weather their storm and the moms and pops could, too.
The hard part will be distinguishing between the two since hedge funds often do not own the
properties they manage. But the distinction could be "If you own or manage more than 1,000
units..."
Everyone is on the tenant bandwagon, and I get that. Most property management companies
(PMCs) are worried about their own bottom line. I have discovered that if we help tenants
solve their problems, then we solve ours! If it is a temporary problem then we work with
them. If it is more permanent, and they moved into too much house, then we try to talk them
into breaking their lease and getting a less expensive place.
There needs to be a paradigm shift within the PM industry. Legislation is one part of the
solution. Too many legislators think it is THE solution. It is not. There needs to be
temperance.
Best of luck.
On Tue, May 7, 2024 at 7:25 PM Laurel Humphrey <Laurel.Humphrey@tukwilawa.gov>
wrote:
Hello Mr. Nelson, it is not too late as the draft ordinance is still under consideration. Thank you
for your comments.
Sincerely,
Laurel Humphrey
51
Legislative Analyst City of Tukwila
6200 Southcenter Blvd 1 Tukwila, WA 98188
Mobile: 206.491.2297
http://tukwilawa.gov
From: Peter Nelson <peter@fullservicepm.com>
Sent: Tuesday, May 7, 2024 5:34 PM
To: CityCouncil <CityCouncil@TukwilaWA.gov>
Subject: Enhanced Renter Protections
Greetings.
I do not know if it is too late, but attached is some testimony I provided to the City of
SeaTac that I have modified for Tukwila. Most of the points are still very relevant.
Thank you.
Sincerely,
Peter Nelson, Founder/CEO
Full Service Property Management
"Good property management just got better!"
52
From: Elizabeth Koch
To: De"Sean Quinn; Dennis Martinez; Hannah Hedrick; Laurel Humphrey; CityCouncil
Subject: Fwd: Rental Housing Provider
Date: Tuesday, May 21, 2024 11:18:13 AM
Forwarded message
From: Elizabeth Koch <kochfamily1234@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, May 21, 2024 at 11:15 AM
Subject: Rental Housing Provider
To: <citycouncil@tukwila.gov>
I understand the desire to help people. I get that. However, are you aware of how your laws
are impacting those you are trying to help?
I have owned properties in Tukwila since 2004. I have always been willing to work with
people. Now you have taken that right away from the one who owns the property. I have had
tenants stay for 19.5 years. I don't want them to vacate. I want them to stay.
In the past, I had always given 60 to 90-day notice for rent increases even before you
mandated such nonsense. In the past, I have always worked with tenants to schedule their rent
around their pay dates, social security, etc. Before your intrusion I was able to work with
people with evictions, felonies, high debt with a plan to pay off, now I have to treat everyone
the same which now excludes good people and has contributed to our homeless problem. No
longer can I give someone a chance due to the nonsense of asking someone to vacate "my"
property because they have chosen to not comply with what they agreed to. In the past, if a
tenant was unable to pay for rent due to unforeseen circumstances there were organizations to
help. My tenants never took advantage of that but some would use it on a 1 time which
required me to wait on rent and agree to no late fee if the organization was willing to help. I
believe more money going into these organizations rather than providing tenants with all the
rights in the world with paid attorneys would be a better direction to go.
When will the City of Tukwila pay my property taxes or pay for the renovations that are
required? I'm waiting for an answer. Oh yeah, I owner of the property and I am responsible
for those. You have NO RIGHT to tell me who I can and cannot rent to; yet in this
Bannana Republic you feel you have that right! COMMUNISM will not last here.
I feel you have overstepped our Constitutional rights big time. We do not need more
government control. We need housing providers who can give someone a chance and if they
make poor choices have a remedy to have them move. This is purely common sense.
My registration fee is not a fee it is a tax! This too is unconstitutional!
You are forcing good landlords to exit the rental industry leaving fewer homes available for
those that need one; but isn't that the goal of "You will own nothing and be happy"? We are
not a socialist country we are a Republic. Your government control is the TRUE PROBLEM!
Respectfully,
53
54
City of Tukwila
Thomas McLeod, Mayor
INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM
TO: Planning and Community Development Committee
FROM: Nora Gierloff, DCD Director
BY: Lee Sipe, Acting Building Official
CC: Mayor Thomas McLeod
DATE: June 4, 2024
SUBJECT: Permit Review Contract Amendments
ISSUE
Two contracts for permit review by consultants are nearing their maximum amount and need to
be increased in order to prevent building permit issuance delays.
BACKGROUND
The Building Division uses private consultants to assist with review of development permits.
BHC Consulting LLC provides plan review and inspections for larger projects or when the
workload is too high for City staff to maintain response timelines. Reid Middleton provides
structural review in a more cost-effective manner than the City hiring an in-house engineer.
DISCUSSION
During the budget process staff estimates the cost needed for these permit services over the
next two years and contracts for that dollar amount. We are experiencing higher permit
volumes/values than anticipated and so need to increase the contracts in line with the City's
needs. BHC is willing to extend their contract through 2025 at the current rates. Reid Middleton
has not developed their 2025 fee schedule, so that will need to be addressed separately before
the end of 2024.
FINANCIAL IMPACT
Staff is proposing to amend the "not to exceed" amount for the two contracts from $150,000 to
$300,000 each. Only the amount needed to keep up with review of future permit submittals will
be spent. The funds for these services come from the permit fees paid by applicants for plan
review and inspections and do not impact the general fund.
RECOMMENDATION
The Council is being asked to approve these contract amendments and forward these items to
the Consent Agenda at the June 17, 2024, Regular Meeting.
ATTACHMENTS
A. Amendment to contract 23-002 with BHC Consulting
B. Amendment to contract 23-003 with Reid Middleton
55
56
wq City of Tukwila
sy
y 6200 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila WA 98188
2
B
Agreement Number:
CONTRACT FOR SERVICES
Amendment # 1
Between the City of Tukwila and BHC Consultants LLC
That portion of Contract No. 23-002 between the City of Tukwila and BHC Consultants LLC. is
hereby amended as follows:
Sections:
3. Duration of Agreement; Time for Performance. This Agreement shall be in full force
and effect for a period commending upon 1/2/2023 and ending on 12/31/2025, unless sooner
terminated under the provisions hereinafter specified. Work under this agreement shall
commence upon written notice by the City to the Consultant to proceed. The Consultant
shall perform all services and provide all work product required pursuant to this Agreement
no later than 12/31/2025 unless an extension of such time is granted in writing by the City.
4. Payment. The Consultant shall be paid by the City for completed work and for services
rendered under this Agreement as follows:
A. Payment for the work provided by the Consultant shall be made as provided on
Exhibit "B" attached hereto, provided that the total amount of payment to the
Consultant shall not exceed $300,000.00 without express written modification of the
Agreement signed by the City.
All other provisions of the contract shall remain in full force and effect.
Dated this day of June, 2024.
CA Reviewed May 2020
Page 1 of 2 57
City of Tukwila
6200 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila WA 98188
Agreement Number:
CITY OF TUKWILA CONTRACTOR:
Thomas McLeod, Mayor
ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED:
Andy Youn, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Office of the City Attorney
By:
Printed Name:
Title:
58 CA Reviewed May 2020
Page 2 of 2
w�4
City of Tukwila
sy
6200 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila WA 98188
y
2�
8
Agreement Number:
CONTRACT FOR SERVICES
Amendment # 1
Between the City of Tukwila and Reid Middleton Inc.
That portion of Contract No. 23-003 between the City of Tukwila and Reid Middleton Inc. is hereby
amended as follows:
4. Payment. The Consultant shall be paid by the City for completed work and for services
rendered under this Agreement as follows:
A. Payment for the work provided by the Consultant shall be made as provided on
Exhibit "B" attached hereto, provided that the total amount of payment to the
Consultant shall not exceed $300,000.00 without express written modification of the
Agreement signed by the City.
All other provisions of the contract shall remain in full force and effect.
Dated this day of June, 2024.
CITY OF TUKWILA CONTRACTOR:
By:
Thomas McLeod, Mayor
Printed Name:
ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED: Title:
Andy Youn, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Office of the City Attorney
CA Reviewed May 2020
Page 1 of 2 59
City of Tukwila
6200 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila WA 98188
Agreement Number:
60 CA Reviewed May 2020
Page 2 of 2
City of Tukwila
Thomas McLeod, Mayor
INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM
TO: Planning and Community Development
FROM: Nora Gierloff, DCD Director
BY: Isaac Gloor, Associate Planner
Maxwell Baker, Development Review Supervisor
CC: Mayor Thomas McLeod
DATE: June 10, 2024
SUBJECT: Permitting Process Improvements
ISSUE
Amendments to Tukwila Municipal Code Titles 8, 16, 17, 18, and 19 are needed to consolidate and
simplify permit procedures and comply with recently passed Washington State legislation SB 5290
and HB 1293.
BACKGROUND
Tukwila's Permitting Process
The City of Tukwila Department of Community Development accepts and reviews applications for
land use projects and development. The Tukwila Municipal Code (TMC) distinguishes various
permits by type and contains standards for the processing of those permits. Review of land use
permits is subject to timelines for various steps, which are broken down below. These timelines are
largely dictated by State law.
• Notice of Complete / Incomplete Application:
o The City of Tukwila must determine whether an applicant has submitted all
necessary documents for review, like site plans, building plans, environmental
reports, etc.
o This step is subject to the following timelines:
■ The Department must determine whether a permit application is complete
or incomplete within 28 calendar days of permit submittal. Should the
Department fail to provide a determination within that time, the application
shall be deemed automatically "Complete" for the purposes of this step.
■ An application is "Incomplete" if the Department determines that the permit
submittal doesn't contain all required documents.
• The applicant has 90 calendar days from the date of the "Notice of
Incomplete Application" to provide required materials. If the
applicant fails to do so, the Permit Application will expire. Any
refundable fees paid will be returned to the applicant.
■ If the Department determines that the permit submittal is "Complete", the
Department shall provide a "Notice of Complete Application" that informs
the applicant that formal review of the application will begin.
• Notice of Application:
o Some permit types require the public to be notified that an application has been
submitted. In those cases, the Department has 14 calendar days to issue this
61
INFORMATIONAL MEMO
Page 2
62
"Notice of Application". That notice can be provided via email to all interested
parties and agencies with jurisdiction, via mail to nearby property owners and
residents, and by a physical sign erected on the subject property. Some permit
types require all these notice formats to be utilized.
o A "Notice of Application" is accompanied by a comment period. This is a set period
in which the Department will accept comments from the public or agencies with
jurisdiction regarding the project. During the comment period, the Department will
not make a final determination on the project's compliance with Tukwila Municipal
Code. This period can range from 14 calendar days to 21 calendar days, depending
on the Permit Type.
o If the Permit Type requires that the final decision be made in a hearing, this step will
also include a "Notice of Hearing". This notice must be provided at least 14
calendar days prior to the hearing.
• Permit Review:
o The Department must provide a final determination regarding whether a proposal
complies with the TMC within 120 calendar days from the date that the applicant
was sent a "Notice of Complete Application".
o The 120-calendar day countdown runs for the entire time that the Department is
reviewing a project. However, that countdown stops whenever the Department
determines that the application must be revised to comply with the TMC. At that
point, the status of the application is changed to "Corrections Required" and a
Correction Letter will be sent to the applicant that details all required submittals.
■ When the status is changed to "Corrections Required", the applicant has 90
calendar days to submit all required materials. If they fail to do so, the
application will expire.
Tukwila's Zoning code was adopted in 1995 and is approximately 29 years old. Original sections
have been built on, expanded, and edited over time. Because of the patchwork nature of Tukwila's
code, sections are occasionally repetitive, confusing, refer to nonexistent permits or standards, or
conflict with other sections. It has been a goal of the Department of Community Development to
simplify and correct the TMC, as well as to bring all the TMC's Titles into alignment with each other.
New Legislation
2023 was an active year for State Legislation, with Governor Inslee signed into law many bills
affecting Tukwila. Among them were Senate Bill 5290, now called the "Local Project Review Act"
(LPRA), and House Bill 1293. These bills mandate sweeping changes to permit reviews for all local
governments planning under the Growth Management Act, including Tukwila. They are intended to
increase the timeliness and predictability of local review, both of which have large impacts on
project costs for development.
Changes mandated by these two bills, and relevant to this code update proposal, are summarized
below:
• SB 5290: New Permit Review Timelines
o For projects that do not require public notice, the final decision must be issued
within 65 calendar days of the "Notice of Complete Application".
o For projects that do require public notice, the final decision must be issued within
100 calendar days of the "Notice of Complete Application".
https://tukwilawa.sharepoint.com/sites/departmentofcommunitydevelopment/DCDPlanning/Code Updates/2024/SB 5290 Edits/PCD Documents/PCD Info Memo
- Permitting Process Improvements.docx
INFORMATIONAL MEMO
Page 3
o For project permits which require both notice and a public hearing, the final
decision must be issued within 170 calendar days of the "Notice of Complete
Application".
o If a project permit fails to meet these timelines, in addition to other measures that
an applicant may seek, the local jurisdiction would be required to refund up to 20%
of an applicant's permit fees.
■ However, local jurisdictions may implement at least 3 of 10 optional
measures set forth in SB 5290 that are intended to further speed up permit
review timelines. If a jurisdiction enacts these measures, refunds would not
need to be provided even if permit timelines are not met.
• HB 1293: Limits on Design Review Meetings
o Cities may not hold more than a single public meeting for design review projects.
This severely limits the utility of public hearing for design review, as the only
possible decisions that a Design Review body can make are to approve or deny a
proposal. They cannot require corrections, as that would entail another design
review meeting.
o HB 1293 also requires that design review standards be clear, objective, and be
based on an ascertainable guideline or criterion. The intent of this is that an
applicant should be able to determine whether a design will meet the review criteria
simply by reading the criteria themselves.
While this may sound straightforward, as most code is clearly legible for
developers, many jurisdiction's design review criteria (including Tukwila's) contain
standards that are clearly subjective in nature. This includes standards such as
requirements that a project "match the character of the surrounding neighborhood"
or that a building "feature a high -quality design". These standards are necessarily
reliant on the eye of the beholder, and thus enforcement can differ based on who is
the decision maker.
The Department is not currently proposing reform to the design review standards.
That work will be presented as part of a separate code update package. However,
as the limit on the number of public meetings/hearings portion of this bill has
implications for the new standards set forth in SB 5290, the Department proposes
to implement this aspect of the bill as part of this update.
Tukwila must implement the new permitting timeline requirements by December 31 s`, 2024. The
requirements of House Bill 1293 must be implemented by mid-2025, or, 6 months after the City
adopts its next Comprehensive Plan.
DISCUSSION
This code update would amend the portions of Titles 8, 16, 17, 18, and 19, that relate to project
permitting, permit types, review timelines, appeals, and design review. It would consolidate permit
types, establish new permitting timelines, and speed up the review of applications for Design
Review by removing the requirement to hold public hearings before the Board of Architectural
Review (BAR). It also includes corrections to scrivener's errors, as well as removals of redundant or
expired code sections.
The proposal would bring the City's codes fully into compliance with the LPRA and would
implement a requirement from HB 1293 that correlates well with the rest of the amendments. It
https://tukwilawa.sharepoint.com/sites/departmentofcommunitydevelopment/DCDPlanning/Code Updates/2024/SB 5290 Edits/PCD Documents/PCD Info Memo
- Permitting Process Improvements.docx
63
INFORMATIONAL MEMO
Page 4
also would help achieve Department and City goals regarding permit review timelines, particularly
relating to the timeliness of Design Review applications.
The current City of Tukwila review timelines for most permit types already meet the new statutory
requirements, and virtually all permits currently meet the (now superseded) 120-day timeline, as
shown below.
September 2021
February 2022
February 2023
February 2024
Fire Reviews
28 — 0 Overdue
41 - 1 Overdue
48 — 0 Overdue
23 — 0 Overdue
Building
Reviews
47 — 9 Overdue
11 - 4 Overdue
3 — 0 Overdue
19 — 0 Overdue
Planning
Reviews
128 — 95 Overdue
31 - 8 Overdue
38 — 13 Overdue
51 — 0 Overdue
Engineering
Reviews
178 — 78 Overdue
60 - 8 Overdue
61 — 8 Overdue
65 — 0 Overdue
(First number are permits actively Under Review which includes those that are overdue.)
However, Design Review projects that require review by the BAR commonly reach or exceed
timelines, largely due to the need to schedule a Public Hearing. These hearings occasionally must
be scheduled months ahead of time to be accommodated in busy agenda schedules.
The Department has a strong interest in accelerating the review of permits that require design
review, many of which are related to the development of new housing. A commonly cited barrier to
development is timely and predictable procedures within the permitting process. This proposal
would amend the portions of Title 18 that relate to design review applications to establish that all
design review would be an administrative process. The BAR, whose members consist of the
Planning Commission, would continue to serve in their roles and perform all functions of the
Commission other than the administration of a public hearing and quasi-judicial review for Design
Review permits. Public notice would still be required for Design Review applications, and the City's
timeline for approval of a design review permit would be set at 100 calendar days, in accordance
with state requirements (as opposed to 170 days for those decisions which require a public
hearing). The Design Review standards would not change as part of this proposal; however, all
departures from the standards would be reviewed administratively as opposed to at a hearing by
the Board of Architectural Review.
As part of their implementation strategies, some jurisdictions are considering complying with these
new state requirements by changing their review procedures for certain permit types in a way that
would increase the permit timelines. This could be accomplished by adding public notice
requirements where they currently don't exist, or requiring a public hearing for a permit type when
currently it can be reviewed administratively. In this way, a permit timeline could legally be
extended from a state requirement of 65 days up to a maximum of 170 days. While these changes
would comply with the letter of the law, the Department is not proposing any amendments that
would lengthen reviews.
These changes are expected to provide greater clarity and predictability for applicants, simplify
permit review processes for both applicants and staff, speed up review timelines, and push Tukwila
another step towards compliance with new State requirements.
64
https://tukwilawa.sharepoint.com/sites/departmentofcommunitydevelopment/DCDPlanning/Code Updates/2024/SB 5290 Edits/PCD Documents/PCD Info Memo
- Permitting Process Improvements.docx
INFORMATIONAL MEMO
Page 5
FINANCIAL IMPACT
Eliminating public hearing design review would lower the fees for that permit type but also save
considerable staff time.
RECOMMENDATION
The Committee is being asked to forward this issue to the Planning Commission for a
recommendation. It will then be returned to the Council in ordinance form for a hearing and
decision.
ATTACHMENTS
Attachment A: Example Permit Timeline
https://tukwilawa.sharepoint.com/sites/departmentofcommunitydevelopment/DCDPlanning/Code Updates/2024/SB 5290 Edits/PCD Documents/PCD Info Memo
- Permitting Process Improvements.docx
65
66
Attachment A: Example Permit Timeline
Project:
New Duplex within the Medium Density Residential zoning district
Permit Case Study:
Design Review Application
Current Project
Pathway:
Application Submitted:
City has 28 days to determine whether the
application is complete. If the application is
complete, staff will notify the public of the
application.
Permit Review:
The Department will review the project for
compliance with Tukwila Municipal Code and
Design Review Guidelines and issue corrections if
necessary.
Upon determining that the project permit complies
with the TMC and Design Review Guidelines, the
Department will then prepare a detailed staff
report.
Public Hearing:
The Department must schedule a Public Hearing at
the next available Planning Commission session.
As the Commission meets monthly, if the next
meeting agenda is full the applicant may need to
wait more than 30 days.
Two weeks of notice must be given to the public
for this hearing. Staff will present the project and
explain the Design Review Criteria to the Board of
Architectural Review, who will make the final
determination.
V
Maximum Time to Issue Final
Determination:
120 calendar days
Actual review time is highly variable and
frequently extended.
r Proposed Project
Pathway:
Application Submitted:
City has 28 days to determine whether the
application is complete. If the application is
complete, staff will notify the public of the
application.
tJ
Permit Review:
The Department will review the project for
compliance with Tukwila Municipal Code and
Design Review Guidelines and issue corrections, if
necessary.
The final decision maker is the Director of
Community Development. Thus, when staff review
is complete, the Department can prepare a staff
report and issue the permit.
Maximum Time to Issue Final
Determination:
100 calendar days
No additional time for scheduling or public
notice for hearings is required.
67
68