Harrell Bill Would Make Venues Liable for Patrons' Off-Premises Behavior; Moore Bill to Ban Algorithmic Rent-Fixing Is on Fast Track

Today's Morning Fizz.

By Erica C. Barnett

Mayor Bruce Harrell is proposing legislation that would expand the city's ability to shut down so-called chronic nuisance properties by holding businesses responsible for incidents that happen "in proximity" to their property. The legislation would also add violations of state liquor laws to the violations that can get a property tagged as a "chronic nuisance," allowing the city to sanction or shut down bars and nightclubs if they violate liquor laws repeatedly—or if their patrons violate liquor laws after they've left the premises. If a business violates the nuisance law more than three times in 60 days, or seven times in a year, the city can take actions ranging from a fine to shutting the business down.

Currently, the city's chronic nuisance law only applies to incidents that occur on the premises of a business or property. This limited approach, according to Harrell's proposed legislation, has allowed "Nuisance activities ... including homicides and aggravated assaults, to occur near certain properties in Pioneer Square." In May, for example, four people were shot outside the OHM Nightclub near Occidental Park, three of them fatally.

Seattle has a long history of passing legislation to restrict nightlife or expand business owners' legal liability for their patrons' behavior in response to tragic incidents or repeated neighborhood complaints.

In fact, Harrell's proposal is strikingly similar to the 1999 "added activities ordinance," which would have made bars and clubs liable for noise, litter, traffic, and crime that happened nearby, in areas they don't directly control. At the time, proponents said expanding the law was necessary because of issues the city tied to clubs in Pioneer Square and on the downtown waterfront. The proposal, backed by then-city attorney Mark Sidran, floundered after a federal judge ruled that a similar state law that required venues to get special licenses for dancing, live music, and other "added" activities, was unconstitutional.

On its face, Harrell's proposal seems less restrictive than the added activities ordinance—it doesn't apply to urban annoyances like noise and litter. But the list of activities it would hold businesses newly liable for on the sidewalks and streets around them is broad, including not only criminal offenses, ranging from assault to failure to disperse, but drug and liquor violations that might occur down the block from a business, or even further away—the bill doesn't define what it means for a nuisance to be "in proximity" to a property.

Harrell's legislation notes that the existing chronic nuisance ordinance has only been used 17 times since it was adopted in 2009—a tacit reassurance that if the city gives the mayor and police chief power to hold clubs liable for off-premises activities, they won't abuse it. But the letter of the proposed law would allow the city to shut a bar or nightclub down if people are caught smoking weed or drinking alcohol in a public area outside the bar, and nothing in the proposal constrains police from keeping an extra-close eye on properties the city has identified as potential targets for abatement under the expanded nuisance law.

The legislation hasn't shown up in the council's legislative tracking system yet. When it does, it will go through Harrell ally Bob Kettle's public safety committee.

2. On Wednesday, the City Council's housing and human services committee approved legislation that would prohibit property owners and managers from using algorithmic rent-setting companies like Real Page to determine rent prices. The bill, sponsored by Councilmember Cathy Moore, took the committee just 35 minutes—35 minutes!—to discuss and approve. The fast-tracked bill now heads to the full council, which could vote on the bill before Moore departs the council on July 7.

Moore has come under fire for supporting legislation, which she was set to sponsor, that would roll back a number of anti-eviction laws passed by the previous council, including the winter and school-year eviction moratoriums and a $10 cap on late fees. Moore also proposed legislation that would have rewritten the city's ethics code so that council members could vote in their own financial interest; that proposal faced stiff opposition, and Moore withdrew it shortly before announcing she would step down a year and a half into her term.

Advocates who've opposed Moore on other policies applauded her for pushing the ban on algorithmic pricing, which uses both public and proprietary data to recommend rent prices. The state and federal governments have sued the largest algorithmic pricing company, RealPage, over the practice, which critics say amounts to illegal collusion among property management companies to keep rents high and hold units vacant until they can charge more, contributing to the housing crisis. At the time then-attorney general Bob Ferguson sued RealPage last year, his office estimated that about 800,000 leases had been priced using RealPage in the state since 2017.

"While it's hard to measure the impact [in Seattle] precisely, it is likely that this has contributed significantly to the rapidly rising rents that we've seen coming out of the pandemic," Transit Riders Union leader and mayoral candidate Katie Wilson said. "Landlords and property managers, following the instructions that they get from RealPage ... end up raising rents more than they otherwise would, forcing tenants out when they can't afford the increase."

A ProPublica investigation found that companies using RealPage sometimes leave units vacant on purpose to help drive up the cost of other units.

The state legislature took up statewide legislation to ban algorithmic rent-fixing tools earlier this year, but advocates in Olympia opted instead to focus on passing the landmark rent stabilization bill, a legislator who worked on both bills told PubliCola.