Bruce Ramsey, an opinion columnist at the Seattle Times, opines today that we must "pause to consider the housing levy." The levy, which renews the same amount of affordable housing production as the levy passed in 2002, raises median property taxes $2.25 a month. The typical homeowner would pay $5.50 a month. Ramsey says, "The campaign for the levy — and there is none against it — is funded by the people who expect to make a living from it." Ah yes, those people employed by affordable-housing nonprofits. They must be getting very wealthy. Let's talk to one of those Richie Rich McRichensteins. Here's the outreach director of the Housing Development Consortium and a supporter of the Yes For Homes campaign, Anna Markee, who I asked to respond to Ramsey:

We appreciate the Seattle Times’ attention to the details of the Housing Levy renewal. This attention led them to endorse Proposition 1 along with The Stranger and Publicola. Proposition 1 will continue our commitment to housing our most vulnerable residents with the lowest incomes, like seniors, people with disabilities, domestic violence victims and low-income families.

Proposition 1 would continue the same level of services that we currently provide. Mr. Ramsey suggests that the Housing Levy should purchase existing apartments, which it has. A great example is the preservation of the beautiful Sylvian on Capitol Hill, a historic brick building near Broadway and Harrison. With levy funds, Capitol Hill Housing purchased the building, keeping rents affordable and making needed repairs.

As Mr. Ramsey points out, the cost of housing has risen sharply since voters approved the last levy in 2002 and this levy will run until 2016. The cost to the typical homeowner will now be $5.50 per month. For this price, we will help thousands of residents, bring in additional matching funds from the state and federal government, create jobs, and save money. One Housing Levy funded building, 1811 Eastlake saved $4 million in one year by reducing the amount of emergency services used by its residents.

Most of the financial contributions to the campaign for the Housing Levy have come from the already-stretched non-profits and their employees who are dedicated to providing housing opportunities for everyone. Our campaign is running on a shoestring powered mostly by committed volunteers who have made over 30,000 phone calls. We welcome other contributions which can be made at www.yesforhomes.org.

Bruce, I know that you're worried about saving money in a recession—we all are. But you know who's really worried about money? PEOPLE WHO DON'T HAVE ENOUGH MONEY FOR FOR AN APARTMENT. Most of the housing levy goes towards housing for poeple who can pay some—but not all—of the average rental rates in Seattle. Providing apartments for low-income and middle-income workers makes more sense than providing emergency services and health care for the homeless (not to mention that it's more humane). And we'd be keeping workers near their jobs and creating new construction jobs. You could vote for that. Or you could vote to let them go homeless in a recession—if that's worth saving $2.25 a month.