Seattle 'First in Time' rental ordinance found unconstitutional

[Brian Hughes]

In case anybody hasn't seen this yet:

https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/politics...

King county superior court found seattle's 'first in time' rental ordinance unconstitutional.   This ordinance is/was the first of its kind in the country;  goal was to eliminate "implicit bias" from landlords in tenant selection process.   The Judge (who does apparently own a rental in seattle and was up front about this fact)  sided with plaintiffs (several small local landlords) on pretty much every point.

The ordinance required landlords to publish acceptance criteria and accept the first applicant that met those criteria,  with a few exceptions for ADUs and house shares.   It also mandated how the criteria were communicated and required "reasonable accomdation" for applicants needing additional time to meet said criteria.

<my editoral follows>

Hopefully this is the start of a trend back towards balanced regulation in the seattle market.  I'm still making medium/long term plans to escape.  We will see. 

</>

[Joseph Delia]

Yeah, happy to hear the news.  As the judge said, it was a well intentioned effort with "laudable goals", but IMO simply impractical to execute.

Our system of checks and balances works as it should in Seattle and Washington state (not so sure about the other Washington).