Fight over renters’ rights moves to court. Citizens group says Tacoma is confusing voters
A renters’ rights group is suing the City of Tacoma, Pierce County and county auditor Linda Farmer in her official capacity, alleging that the city violated its charter when the City Council voted to put another renters’ rights measure on the November ballot.
Tacoma for All’s ballot initiative would amend the city’s rental housing code to give renters additional rights, including some relocation assistance, the creation of a tenant and landlord code of conduct and a defense against winter evictions from November through April, among others changes.
Last month, the Tacoma City Council passed an ordinance that expanded renters’ rights by requiring that landlords comply with city licensing and safety requirements before increasing rent or evicting tenants, setting limits on late fees and pet deposits and adding new regulations for shared housing, among other changes.
That ordinance went into effect July 24, but the council also voted for the ordinance to appear on the November ballot next to Tacoma for All’s citizen initiative as “Measure Two,” leaving it up to voters to decide if they are in support of either ordinance, and regardless if yes or no, which measure should be enacted should it pass.
Tacoma for All, along with union United Food and Commercial Workers Local 367, allege in a lawsuit filed Wednesday afternoon in Pierce County Superior Court that under state law the city has no authority to put an alternative head-to-head measure on the ballot.
In an email to The News Tribune, the city said it is in the process of reviewing the complaint.
“Tacoma is a rapidly growing city, with 222,400 individuals who now call it home. The City of Tacoma must balance the needs of the entire community as it plans for future growth in Tacoma. The City of Tacoma encourages all community members to exercise their fundamental right to choose what’s best for Tacoma. The Tacoma City Charter and Washington state law are clear that the City Council can provide an alternative to a citizen-backed initiative,” the city said in a statement.
At a press conference Wednesday, Ann Dorn with Tacoma for All called the city’s competing ballot choice “very, very confusing” for voters, who might not know the city’s ballot measure is already law. Dorn said the council’s choice to bring Measure Two to the ballot “threatens to deprive voters of the chance to vote on the tenant bill of rights.”
“If it appears on the ballot as a choice for voters, it will make it look like they are choosing between two ordinances,” Dorn said. “But Measure Two is already law, and that will not change even if voters vote on it.”
The Tacoma for All and UFCW Local 367 lawsuit contends that rather than placing its initiative on the ballot for a majority vote as per the city charter, the council placed its own measure as an alternative head-to-head measure, with the winner decided by a two-part vote of plurality, not a majority.
“The Charter does not give the City Council authority to place an alternative on the ballot to compete with a qualified citizen initiative and doing so impermissibly interferes with the People’s right to initiative,” according to the lawsuit. “The Court should strike the alternative from the ballot to preserve the People’s right to initiative.”
Tacoma for All and UFCW Local 367 also petitioned the Pierce County Superior Court to modify the assigned ballot title, saying the current phrasing “would hoodwink voters into believing that Measure Two would enact new tenant protections, when in fact it would do nothing,” according to the lawsuit.
According to the suit, the city previously expressed disagreement with the Tacoma for All ballot initiative and encouraged Tacoma for All to not submit the signatures.
“The City also threatened that if TFA submitted its signatures, the City would place its own proposal on the ballot as a head-to-head alternative. When TFA refused these overtures and submitted the Initiative, the City decided to do just that,” according to the lawsuit.
The Tacoma for All lawsuit requests Pierce County Elections to bar Measure Two from appearing on a future ballot and require Measure One (the citizen’s initiative) to appear alone. The lawsuit also requests an amendment to the ballot title.
The petitioner’s lawyer, Knoll Lowney, said at the press conference Wednesday he expects the case to be decided “fairly quickly,” as ballots must be printed in early September.
Michael Hines, president of UFCW Local 367, said Tacoma for All’s initiative is “designed to level the playing field between landlords and Tacoma’s working class.” Hines said 65% of the requests that come in through their union hardship fund are housing-related.
Cam Peterson, a full-time Fred Meyer employee who is a renter in Tacoma, said he spends 63% of his income on rent.
“When I moved here last May, it cost over $5,000 for me just to move in. When you’re living paycheck to paycheck, that is an astronomical amount of money,” he said at the press conference. “It’s demoralizing to work all day stocking grocery products you cannot afford for yourself, because most of your income goes straight into the pocket of a property investment firm.”
According to a recent Economic Roundtable study, 14% of Kroger workers are homeless or have recently experienced homelessness and 36% of Kroger workers worry about eviction.
