Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Housing Anti Displacement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Mercer Island council advances anti‑displacement ordinance with shorter notice and cumulative cap
Summary
The council moved Ordinance 267 to a June 16 second reading after public comment and adopted two amendments: shortening advanced rent‑increase notice to 120 days and requiring notice for cumulative increases exceeding 3% in 12 months; the measure ties landlord certifications to business license renewals and includes relocation assistance capped at $2,000.
The Mercer Island City Council voted to schedule a second reading of Ordinance 267 on June 16 after a night of public comment and debate that produced two amendments reducing notice burdens on landlords while preserving tenant protections.
The ordinance, introduced by the city’s Community Planning and Development (CPD) staff, would add operational requirements for landlords in town‑center and multifamily zones, including an advance notice for rent increases above a 3% threshold and a relocation‑assistance program for low‑income tenants. At the meeting, the council amended the ordinance to require 120 days’ notice for rent increases exceeding 3% and to make the 3% threshold cumulative over any 12‑month period.
Why it matters: The package is Mercer Island’s local response to a Growth Management Hearings Board order and related county‑level planning policies that asked the city to adopt anti‑displacement measures tied to up‑zoning and other comprehensive plan changes. Planners say the rules aim to reduce displacement risk for low‑income and cost‑burdened renters concentrated near the town center and multifamily zones.
CPD Principal Planner Adam Zach summarized the core provisions to council and the public, saying the rules would be administered through the city’s business license renewal process and that landlords would need to certify compliance for a rolling three‑year period. He said relocation assistance would be capped at $2,000 per eligible tenant and that the Residential Landlord‑Tenant Act (chapter 59.18 RCW) governs how much a city can require; under state law the city is required to contribute half of required relocation payments, and the ordinance establishes a reimbursement mechanism for landlords to seek that share.
Resident Stephanie Ford, who identified herself as a local property manager, urged caution with an initial 180‑day notice proposal: “A six‑month notice does not provide six‑month availability,” she said, arguing longer notice could create uncertainty and encourage defensive pricing. After public comment and council discussion, Council Member Androl moved—and the council approved—an amendment reducing the notice period to 120 days. Council Member Reynolds successfully added language making the 3% threshold cumulative over 12 months to prevent serial small increases from avoiding the notice requirement.
The ordinance also creates a dispute‑resolution process handled by the city’s hearing examiner for relocation assistance cases, requires landlords to keep documentation of compliance, and establishes misdemeanor penalties for violations with a $500 fine per offense and daily penalties for ongoing noncompliance.
What happens next: The council set a second reading for June 16, after which, if adopted, the ordinance would take effect five days after the notice of adoption is published. Staff said implementation will include outreach to landlords, updating the Department of Revenue licensing portal, and developing handouts and informational materials to support compliance.
Staff and council members emphasized that the rules apply only in town‑center and multifamily zones and will be phased in as business licenses come up for renewal on their staggered windows.
