Macri
Seattle socialist firebrand city councilmember Kshama Sawant fought for years for rent control in the city before one final defeat as she left office in 2023. Wednesday, Governor Bob Ferguson signed into law a new statewide cap on rent hikes that limits landlords to annual increases of no more than 7% plus inflation, or 10% — whichever is less.
43rd District Rep. Nicole Macri co-sponsored the milestone rent stabilization legislation,
“The challenge of affordable housing has only increased, despite years of legislative work to expand supply and subsidies provided during and after the pandemic,” Macri said in a statement upon the signing.
“It’s time for stability for renters. We must do more, but in the meantime, this is an incredibly important step forward and will provide renters the predictability that they need to make their household budgets. This is going to make a big difference for families who have been facing year after year of skyrocketing and price gouging rent increases.”
Under the new rent control law, residential rent hikes will be limited on an annual basis for the next 15 years and landlords will be prohibited from rent increases during the first year of tenancy. The legislation allows landlords full leeway with new listings, however, with no restrictions on increases when a new tenant moves in.
The new statewide cap goes into effect immediately. Each June, the Department of Commerce will calculate the allowable maximum annual rent increase and set the year’s cap.
A statewide ban on local rent control measures above — or below — Washington’s limits remains in place. Sawant’s last major political battle in the city ended in failure in 2023 as the council rejected her bill to establish a “trigger law” rent control in Seattle in the event that the statewide ban was ever lifted.
$5 A MONTH TO HELP KEEP CHS PAYWALL-FREE
🌈🐣🌼🌷🌱🌳🌾🍀🍃🦔🐇🐝🐑🌞🌻
Subscribe to CHS to help us hire writers and photographers to cover the neighborhood. CHS is a pay what you can community news site with no required sign-in or paywall. To stay that way, we need you.
Become a subscriber to help us cover the neighborhood for $5 a month -- or choose your level of support 👍
Good, if you want your neighbors to even have a chance to stick around a little longer…
Oh right, everyone who hates this isn’t even a renter and doesn’t even like their neighbors and would prefer to have less of them.
I think the criticism is this will benefit the lucky people who live here now, but will screw more people over.
Ask yourself why no one would apply this policy to literally anything else.
That criticism is bizarre coming from anyone who was ‘lucky’ to buy a house at various points in time and now is fighting against future development for ‘character’ reasons. And that’s who I was thinking would have a grievous problem with it.
I am one of those lucky and smart enough to buy at the last bottom of the housing market (2011). I live in a R3 zone and am all in favor of raising the the density. I live near/next to fantastic mass transit in a very nice neighborhood. My street should have 8 story or higher buildings. I get the frustration with the people you are against increase density. But rent control is a horiible idea. We need more density, rent control will result in less not more rentals.
https://www.gsb.stanford.edu/insights/rent-controls-winners-losers
There’s also the notion that this is not the only thing being done and being done in complete lieu of building out more housing. It’s part of a larger approach to address the very real problem that regular rental increases doesn’t allow deeper community rooting, and that community rooting and building is one part of a more stable muni.
It really is a question of whether ‘churn and burn’ tenancy has negative externalities that are experienced and seen anywhere but headline pricing for rental units.
Half the time they’ll jack your rent up and then offer new tenants a lower price than you’re getting. It’s ass-backwards.
How is this going to screw anyone over more than the current system where they can literally raise our rents by 1000% on a whim?
“This will make an already untenable situation even worse” as justification for keeping the prior status quo immaculately intact is all they got about this.
it will raise new rents on the margin, which screws new renters…the young, immigrants, etc. just another case of incumbents taking gains for themselves and locking newcomers out.
do you seriously think those rents weren’t going to raise already though?
Boris is worried someone wouldn’t get the chance to imagine living on CH and still settling for Renton.
it’s all on the margin. our problems are overwhelmingly lack of supply, and this will have a negative impact on new supply. so it’s not about rents that would raise anyway, it’s about new units that now won’t be built.
this ^^^
If they want to raise your rent, they simply won’t renew your lease..
It’s the same logic they use for everything.
They wanted to claw back pay raises for “small businesses” meaning 500 employees or less. They claim higher wages will cause a recession and more closed businesses. Labor will be poorer because people won’t tip anymore or go eat anymore. And we lose customers jobs are lost. on and on with the falsehoods that create the imaginary vicious cycle. The more you pay in wages? The less they will make. Like “Right to work for less” logic. “Trickle Down” is another version.
It’s the “It will do the opposite” logic that is anything but.
Most mortgages are literally already like that, you know
(Unfortunately, wannabe real estate moguls keep buying up houses they don’t need, so it’s harder to get one)
Also…. Credit cards are literally like that too, for over a decade now.
I grew up in the country, with way fewer neighbors, but also way more gunshots, gruesome 2-lane highway accidents, 1:30AM dirtbikes, and definitely way more of that one guy two houses down building ramparts in front of his house with a bulldozer (and firing guns). I’ll take more neighbors any day over the weird antisocial settler stuff.
This law will be interesting to watch move through our state.
No limit on rent rises for new construction seems to have a perverse incentive to knock down old under zoned apartments and build new. Or sell old. Or turn them into airbnbs. Can we control the increase in property tax rises in the same way ?
Bingo. This law is pushed by the big developers and their “progressive” partners in Olympia.
prop 13 in california has totally worked, right?
“Can we control the increase in property tax rises in the same way ?”
In case you didn’t know, since Initiative 747 was passed in 2001, nominal* property taxes increases are capped at 1% per year. Apparently there’s been some recent attempts to increase that to 3% ( https://washingtonstatestandard.com/2025/02/11/house-democrats-begin-push-to-repeal-washingtons-cap-on-property-tax-hikes/ ).
*The “nominal” part here is important: since inflation nearly always exceeds 1%, real property taxes go down most years since 2001.
I think you are ignoring the endless levy add one, my property tax had doubled in less than 5 years. That, insurance, and interest rates are the main driver of rent rises.
Very few Seattle landlords have been raising rents more than the limits prescribed by this legislation. Seattle rents have been, on basis, relatively flat since 2019, with average annual increases limited to three percent or less. Other areas in the state have had different experiences, of course. I don’t think this law will improve affordability or increase the housing supply. The real issue is how quickly the legislature realizes the law has not achieved those goals and what they do as a result. I suspect they will go back and lower the annual increase limits with a few years. None of this will encourage investments in apartment housing, which is currently at very low levels here anyway.
Next step will be lowering the 10% max raise to a lower %age while still exempting new construction (aka the buddies of the legislators in Olympia)
Need a law to abolish landlords
Oh dear. Big eyeroll. Sounding kind of Chinese cultural revolution there Chi Chi. Guess I’ll have to go work in the fields?
Soviet Union had that law.
Then the government is your landlord and they get to tell you where you are allowed to live….
My increases have been almost ten percent each year, and I know many people who have the same, so you must be one of the lucky few
naw..just full of shit is all. It’s the standard playbook for landlords.
Enjoy your subsidized housing Smooth.
I do!
You are just disappointed I do not pay higher rent.
oops…eh?
Show me some data on Seattle rent since 2019. Then we will see who is full of shit.
Sorry buddy. You lose I win.
My rent? It’s been raised recently. $225.00 is what I pay.
You realize that the rest still gets paid right… even if not by you. Your building doesn’t/couldn’t run on what you pay in. The balance is subsidized by the rest of us.
“the rest of us” is me too. Just not today. And that’s life.
What is your point? I am not grateful enough like JD Vance? Am I undeserving? No wait! I know! I am to cow to those who pay!
I am catching on.
Mainly that you’ve been being more than a bit of an a$$hat and gloat-y at others, when you’ve little standing to do so…
“Little standing”? How so?
no one who has rented anywhere in the past ten years would say this
yeah, the mask fell off and into the mud on that.
Misleading. They jack up the rate for current tenants and offer deals to new ones making it look flat but you’re getting hit around 10% most place if you don’t move every year.
Right. But now that the law removes the opportunity for them to recoup their losses if they have to, they will be raising rents the maximum 10% a year to make sure they don’t get caught out.
Get used to seeing 10% a year regardless of how good or steady a tenant you’ve been.
Ohhh!…So the law does the exact opposite of what it’s supposed to do?
“Very few Seattle landlords have been raising rents more than the limits prescribed by this legislation.”
Oh Paleeeez…You have to ignore the facts for that whole line.
Stay mad GLENN!
Hmmmm…..I didn’t think I sounded mad. More analytical than anything else. I just think this law will not have the effects it’s advocates desire.
analytical?
LMAO! mkay
Disgusting policy
Get ready for rent increases!!! Another victory for less affordable housing!! Way to go WA socialists.Think about this law from the perspective of the landlord. Landlords are not evil. They’re people like you and me. If you were a landlord of a residential property, what would be some logical responses to this law that you might take? It sure ain’t gonna be lowering any rents anytime soon LOL. (Or building new apartment buildings – who needs the hassle?)
lmao, I’m a shareholder in a cooperative, go eat glass landlord.
Wow. Such anger
Cooperatives are incredibly bad investments
Good thing most shareholders arent about the ROI, but the stability afforded, especially after any financing is paid down.
lmao again 5 minutes later when pondering it from the landlord POV and being pissed at every other landlord who botched the fucking racket so badly as to see The State intervene in a way I never would have wanted. HA! Good job fuckups!
You seem pretty angry. Have you had a bad rental experience? I don’t understand why you’re so angry given you said you’re a shareholder in a cooperative which I assume means you’re somewhat insulated from the new laws. I’m not a landlord but a renter and I believe this law will hurt, not help renters. Why not post some information or links, on how people can form a housing cooperative. I had no idea there were such things in Seattle.
“Have you had a bad rental experience?”
EVERYONE HAS. Out of touch much?
I never had a bad rental experience…
Everyone I have ever become friends with who lived on CH no longer does, because they rented and couldnt afford it after 3 years. Exlcuding fellow shareholders ofc, where its hard not to buddy up since theyre neighbors for years and years.
Coops are few and far between because they do impact potential resale value, financing isnt as available, and it can be difficult with rules and stipulations of bylaws. But the only reason Im still here on CH is because I got into the cooperative, and our monthly nut for housing has been less than inflationary pressures, even if my own wages have been fucked since 2020 – those havent tracked inflation at all – 55k in 2019 to 61k in 2025 even with some job changes for the better.
This is the thing though – i never wanted to rent in perpetuity but I also never wanted some starter home and to then live in the burbs. I grew up in the burbs, they suck. I am an urbano, this is the life for me, when some of yall are living elsewhere because there isnt affordable housing stock to have a kid or two, I will still be here with my wife barring major calamity. And its absolutely sick that the fuclrum of being an American boils down to ‘pay to play’ and so many societal ills are basically not being able to pay and chips falling where they do.
If there is any potential for more neighborhood rooting, and keeping folks in their homes to build stronger communities, I will support it. Most my buds are renters and they couldnt hang with YoYs that put their monthly nut to renting from 1700 to 2000+
That is it too. They Realpaged their golden goose to death.
I didn’t know Vulcan was a person.
Correct.
they are NOT LIKE ME!
I do not own a rental. In fact? They are…wait for it…THE MINORITY OF THE POPULATION!!!!
Wanna know the majority? RENTERS!!!
So if your thinking is a typical garden variety landlords position?
“Get ready for rent increases!!!”
Okay landlords. Color us shocked! We renters never would have guessed our benevolent landlords will crush us all if the law passes. And ESSPECIALLY if it passes.
Okay…I am starting to feel that power well up inside my soul. I see what you are saying now! SUCK IT RENTERS! THE BENEVOLENT LANDLORDS ARE IN CHARGE!!!
I am feelin’ it…YEAH! RAWR!
7% + Inflation or 10% (whichever is lower) cap?
That’s just an annual 10% cap because inflation is always at 2-3%. So, it’s always 10%.
Does your income go up by 10% every year? Probably not. But, your rent will.
This is the type of middling do-nothing feel-good legislation that gives Democrats a bad name. If you wanted to be nice to the landlords, set the cap to “inflation” which would allow for a 3-9% increase annually. If you really wanted to crank it down, set it at a cold 2% which would help keep inflation down.
10% is insane.
Or, Washington Democrats could stop raising property taxes at rates well above inflation.
Taxes go down when property values do. But they go nothing but up.
What does that mean? Higher taxes.
Gosh. Calm down everyone. I have one single rental, the
first house I ever had. I lived there for 12 years. I love my tenants. I have raised the rent minimally twice in the 8 years they have been there. They love the house like I do and I want them to stay. I don’t have any problem with the new legislation. I would never raise the rent anywhere near the limits set. But oh well all landlords are evil in Seattle right?
You’re an outlier and the anger is being directed at apartment buildings owned by national property management companies. But 10/10 mental gymnastics turning yourself into a victim.
I agree with you 1000%. I am deeply concerned about this exact issue. It’s happening and no one seems to see it. I don’t understand your last sentence. Was I turning myself into a victim somehow? I don’t at all consider myself a victim.
You do realize that all the crazy rules are pushing the landlords like Stumpy out and consolidating the properties into the multi-nationals more and more….
I’m neither a landlord nor a renter, but my parents had a few small buildings (in a different city, in a different time) They would never do it today. Too crazy, too risky. The big corporations can eat it when a unit is vacant or has a non payer in it and have deep pockets to hire lawyers, if they need them. The little guys don’t have the capital or time to fight those fights.
Many Mom-and-Pop landlords are like you.
Unfortunately, Seattle lost over 10,000 mom-and-pop rentals in 2022 alone. This data is from the Rental Registration Inspection Ordinance database.
In their place are big corporate landlords with $4/sf apartments.
Are you looking for sympathy? gross
No, not at all.
Kristy/Karen, Stumpy is doing a nice thing by keeping rents low and you are such a bitter person that all you can find is the bad in the situation and criticize Stumpy.
Let me guess. You live alone and have a cat that doesn’t like you.
I would recommend watching this insight about “rent stabilization” in NYC.
https://www.instagram.com/reel/DIuO9BYzrMR/?igsh=MXdydmZqMjF2cTc1cA==
You want us to believe a dude who has Insta reels like “How to get $1M from banks with no tax returns”?
Dude. Good lukx with your botting.
Doesn’t mean what he’s saying is not true. Sorry to bring actual perspective from cities that have implemented similar measures to give insight on what can happen to our city. Good for YOU the current renter, crap for anyone else trying to rent. But by your response I think that’s all you care about.
One time I had a landlord try to increase my rent $500. Leeches
Hideous
Unfortunately, the likely result will be landlords being even more fascist looking for trivial reasons to evict tenants so they can jack the rent for someone else. Even having more restrictive lease terms to create more reasons.
Can’t trust leeches to be moral
Yes all landlords are leeches. Fuck you too.
what’s wrong with you?
You CONSTANTLY put words in peoples mouths. You CONSTANTLY imagine things.
KT did not say “ALL”. It is YOU who inferred it. By claiming they are wrong, therefore all is wrong.
Sorry, but hiking rent has become an algorithm. So it is you who will not raise rents when everyone else is right? Nope, you look at the rent like the stock market. If they are raising rents? So can I a little bit. No extra costs. Just a profitable opportunity.
For someone who was gifted a house? You sure are precious about it. You are a landlord. Landlords have horrible reputations. That’s reality man. That is real.
So it’s something you can fight against? Or simply take it personally and fuel that attitude of dispising landlords. You are what you say you are not. Period.
Gifted a house? WTF are you talking about?
Smooth appears to think no one works for what they have….
Seems so. No one gifted me a damn house. I wish.
not you as in you the person. It’s “Landlords” in general. My grammar sucks.
Example..You give a shit about who lives in your house and they live there for a little cheaper more consistent rent. Others will rent to anyone who’ll pay the cash. Those are generally the big companies and your average landlord. Raise the rents every chance you get. Some landlords enter your apartment w/o you home. It’s just a weird soup. You never know what you are going to get but you can count on it sucking at some point. A landlord purposefully keeping rent low does it for a reason important to them. A unicorn.
Actually? Too many work their entire lives with nothing to show for it and everyone competes for their money before they leave HS. 10’s of thousands in debt before their first job. Some poor bastards just get blown up before they ever join the workforce.
Simply working is a small part. Just because you work your ass off doesn’t guarantee anything when a finite resource is monetized to infinity. Then dot your life with that. Everything in Seattle has been monetized. Everything. The cost of living is through the roof. Even a benevolent landlord is doing very well. Why? Because a PC algorithms says you can charge X beyond your wildest dreams.
Meanwhile? Seniors age in place. They can’t afford to move. So they borrow on their homes. Soon the bank will own it. Or some broker, developer. But not a new family. The land is too much. What is on it is an afterthought. That’s called monetization via algorithms.
Then? Outlaw living on the streets. Give sweetheart zoning deals to investors. And so it goes.
The safety net was in effect until 1980. From there it became difficult to impossible to live. 1.3 trillion dollars transfers from the poorest to the wealthiest in Social Security Benefits alone. Many of these landlords get checks they didn’t earn and do not need. But they take it anyway. They want what they paid in…Okay…that was a long time ago. Now it’s profit for until you die. Not money earned. Money transferred from the kids to the elderly. And someday, we’ll alllll be elderly.
If someone can’t relate? Fine. It is what it is. There’s exceptions to everything. But someone claiming to be an exception when the reality of it is anything but that, whether they are aware or not. The rent hike stats speak for themselves. They ALL charge as much as they feel they can. Not need based. Profits based.
Life is not profit based. it just happens to be others think it is theirs to exploit.
The main reason people are struggling to save up and get ahead is rent. It’s ridiculous how landlords jack up the rent constantly on their good tenants and when you see an ad for an apartment in your building, they offer new tenants lower prices. They know it’s a massive inconvenience to move and use it to screw us over. It’s kind of like how you can’t get a raise at the place you’ve worked for 5+ years but if they bring in someone brand new with no experience they’ll make more than you do. It’s shortsighted at best and completely evil at worst.
I don’t know about “evil” but yeah that sucks. “Evil” is so loaded with so many things, religious, political in Trump times, etc….
Yes it’s EVIL. Destroy your life and call it what? “not very kind”?
I dunno. Anything but EVIL maybe? Something less Satan-y and less Christian shamey stuff? That might be good.
I laughed at “shamey”…I like that
This is excellent news for current Seattle landlords. It’s a BIG GIFT to landlords as it guarantees 7%+ annual rent increases. Why? Because the housing supply will be further constrained.
Rent control decreases private investment in housing. Expect less apartments to be builtMom-and-Pop–already beleaguered by Seattle’s war on landlords–will continue to sell their rental to Townhouse developers. “Up zoning” density has made ripping down single family to small apt buildings attractive to developers. So these affordable units will become $800K ugly townhouses without parking
In 2022 alone, Seattle lost over 10,000 mom-and-pop rentals. Now there’s yet another reason to sell out.
Rents in Seattle have been flat for the last couple of years because lots of new apts were building. But Rent Control will change that.
Expect 7-10% annual rent increases going forward. So, if you’re paying $1,800 on CapHill today. In 7-9 years, your rent will be $3,600.
Enjoy!
None of this is happening. There’s no “war on” landlords. You can rent an 1br. corner apartment with 18 windows for 1500 a month on Capitol Hill Pike and Broadway. Pine and Broadway. Central CH!!!
“Rent control decreases private investment in housing.”
That’s a lie. No explanation needed and you know it. ALL your numbers are inflated.
Before the laws? You could raise rents to anything you wanted. Realpage to victory. If raising rent 70% a decade is not enough? That means it’s you sweetheart. You are the problem.
Your over exaggerated alarmist Chicken Little assessments are all lies. Not even good ones. They are way outside the strike zone.
Nobody is picking on renters.
Yes, you can rent an apt on CapHill for $1,500/month in 2025. Because it’s been cheap with build new housing with 3-5% mortgage rates and $300/sf to build. in 2023/2024, 8,000 new apartments were added to CapHill
Today’s commercial mortgage rates are 6-8% and the cost to build is ~$400-500/sf. In 2025/2026 600 new apartments are predicted. That’s a 93% drop in new housing.
With Rent Control now in place, combined with higher mortgage and building cost….there is even less incentive to build
With “Upzoning” in place, it does make financial sense to tear down single family rental, duplex, and triplexes to building $800K+ townhome.
Before Rent Control and Upzoing–yes, you could raise rents 70% and you would have an empty apartment.
Thanks to Rent Control, Upzoning, War-on-landlord rules and penatles–RENTS WILL INCREASE 70%….IN 6 YEARS. And, the apartment will be rented.
Look at any city that has RENT CONTROL and you’ll see very high rent prices: New York, Santa Monica, San Francisco….but “progressives” believe this time it will work.
It won’t. You’ll be paying 7%+ more in rent each year. Your rent will double ever 7-10 years.
If it is sooo lucrative? Why are realtors and monied investors wanting to change the law to a free for all instead of rent controls?
I’ll take my chances with a rent control law. A wage law and any other law to curb the greed in this nation and especially the big cities.
You can spin and twist all ya want. Don’t chnge basic logic.
Seattle Love has it correct and the facts back them up. Just a couple of research studies for you:
https://www.gsb.stanford.edu/insights/rent-controls-winners-losers
https://www.brookings.edu/articles/what-does-economic-evidence-tell-us-about-the-effects-of-rent-control/
When you look at the results in other cites that have rent control, one would think the landlords and property owners pushed this legislation out of greed.
We need a lot more density and more rental units.
It seems that despite their intentions, nearly every attempt to help renters ie “stick it to the evil landlords” backfires and ends up with unintended conseqences.
That, unfortunately, is the problem – despite best intentions – with socialism, government control…etc… It’s really best if we have a government that ensures certain basics (stable legal system, public safety, etc…) but keeps as much as possible, a very light hand on economic matters and lets people make – through the operation of the market – individual decisions. Maximizing the freedom of individuals to make their own decisions is a core strength of this country. This law restricts that freedom.
10% is still a lot. My rent has increased each year by less than that, but less than that is also still a lot — I moved into my building in 2021 at $1350 per month, now 4 years later I’m paying $1750 per month. Still, I’m happy for laws. My dad lives in Wisconsin where there are no laws to protect tenants. He’s on a fixed income and his building is owned by a private equity firm. Two years ago, his rent increased by 27.2%. This year, it was 19.5%. And he gets about a month’s notice. So, thank you Washington.
$1350-$1750 is a lot in 4 years. about 6.5%/year. Are you in a corporate run building or mom-and-pop.
Also, property taxes and insurance have been increasing at 10%+ year….so not surprising.
I think the debate on this topic on this blog is great!!
Too bad this very important issue wasn’t brought up by the regular media ahead of time (as far as I can tell). A state-wide debate would have been good. This, and all the new taxes, fees and what-not, seem to have been snuck in under the radar.
Welcome to San Francisco! Rent control will greatly raise the price for new renters. Landlords will convert rental properties to condos or short term rentals. (less rental properties not more)
The solution is more rental properties and more density, not rent control which will hurt renters.
If we have to have rent control which is horrible for renters, then at least look at the math. 10% max sounds fine and even to high. Unless inflation gets above 10% and given our current federal government, this is not unrealistic. Also, 7% above inflation sounds too high.
There are winners and losers to rent control. Winners are those that are renting at the time of the rent control starts if they stay long term. Everyone else loses. This is a link to a short easy to read study:
https://www.gsb.stanford.edu/insights/rent-controls-winners-losers