Mount Vernon council rejects ordinance that would bar requiring Social Security numbers on rental applications

Mount Vernon City Council members voted 3-4 on April 16 to reject Ordinance 39-12, a proposed amendment to Municipal Code Chapter 5.40 that would have prohibited landlords from requiring a prospective renter’s Social Security number as a condition of tenant screening.

The proposal would have required landlords who request a Social Security number to accept alternative proof of financial eligibility when offered, such as tenant-paid portable screening reports or other proof of income, and included a six-month delay before taking effect to allow for public education, according to the city attorney’s memorandum. City Attorney Kevin Rogerson told the council the ordinance is a single-subject measure drafted at the council’s request and that adoption would require a majority of the full council; under Mount Vernon’s strong-mayor code-city form of government, the mayor does not cast a tie-breaking vote.

Supporters of the ordinance said the measure would remove a barrier that disproportionately affects immigrants, mixed-status families and other residents who lack Social Security numbers. Andy Dugan, executive director of Skagit Legal Aid, said the ordinance “would remove a discriminatory barrier that disproportionately affects some of our most vulnerable residents” and recounted a recent case in which a landlord demanded tenants’ Social Security cards, which ceased after Skagit Legal Aid intervened.

Residents and tenant advocates also said alternatives to Social Security numbers exist for identity verification and background checks. A Skagit Legal Aid paralegal, Addie, said she helps tenants avoid evictions and that “members within our community should not experience discrimination or be denied housing due to not having a social or providing a social number.”

Opponents — including landlords, property managers and contractors — told the council the ordinance would make it harder to verify identity, pull accurate credit and eviction reports, and could encourage fraud. Stacy Salyer, a designated managing broker and founder of Leading Edge Property Management, testified that Washington state law already prohibits denying housing solely because a prospective tenant declines to provide a Social Security number and warned that a local ordinance “duplicates what’s already state law, adding confusion and regulatory burden.”

Several property managers and owners described operational concerns about portable screening reports, which tenants purchase and bring to landlords. Rebecca Neer, who has operated a background-check company since 1995, said portable or reusable reports can be manipulated and noted that under Washington law landlords may decide whether to accept a reusable report; she urged leaving acceptance decisions to landlords.

Speakers also debated likely market effects. Some landlords and developers contended the ordinance would push small owners out of the rental market and deter investment; others said it would help stabilize vulnerable households and reduce fear of eviction or immigration enforcement. During public comment, business owner Paul Woodmancy and developer John Piazza said the city should focus on speeding permitting and increasing housing supply rather than adding new local tenant regulations.

After public comment and brief council discussion, Council member Andrew moved to approve the ordinance; a second was indicated. Council then took a roll-call vote: Vanderstuen (aye), Kurios (aye), Tercero (no), Molina (no), Beaton (no), Brock Smith (yes), Hudson (no). The motion failed 3-4 and Ordinance 39-12 did not pass.

The council closed the study session at 8:15 p.m. Several council members said they want to continue gathering information. City Attorney Kevin Rogerson had noted in his presentation that the legislative record and recitals describe harms and housing impacts but that the office did not offer a recommendation and that adoption is a policy choice for the council.

Votes at a glance: Ordinance 39-12 — Prohibit requiring Social Security numbers as a condition of residential tenant screening; require acceptance of alternative proof of financial eligibility if offered; six-month delayed effective date as drafted. Motion to approve failed 3-4 (ayes: Vanderstuen, Kurios, Brock Smith; noes: Tercero, Molina, Beaton, Hudson).