1. City Council member Teresa Mosqueda will introduce affordable-housing legislation that could have major implications for one of the largest land holders in the city, Seattle City Light. Mosqueda’s bill would allow City Light to sell its surplus land to affordable-housing developers for less than market value—all the way down to the amount the city originally paid for the land—and would require City Light to do so if the agency committed to build housing making 60 percent or less of the Seattle median income. (That latter part may be up for negotiation.) For example, if City Light bought a piece of property in South Lake Union 60 years ago for a few thousand dollars, and the land is now worth millions, a nonprofit that agreed to build deeply affordable housing could buy it for the original, decades-old price.

The proposal, if it passes, will mark a significant change in the city’s policy for disposing of excess City Light land, and could invite a court challenge. Currently, the city requires property owned by its electric utility to be sold at fair-market value, thanks to a 2003 ruling striking down a fee City Light imposed to install and maintain streetlights. That ruling found that City Light could not charge ratepayers for any purpose other than providing utilities, and forced the agency to return $24 million to Seattle residents. Mosqueda’s legislation would change this disposition policy. However, Mosqueda’s office maintains that a separate ruling in 2013, in which the state supreme court disagreed with Bellevue developer Kemper Freeman’s claim that it was illegal to build light rail over I-90 because the bridge was built with gas taxes, which are supposed to be spent only on road purposes, establishes a precedent for City Light to sell its property at below-market value once that property is paid off and declared surplus to the city’s purposes.

Separately, Mosqueda’s office says she will introduce legislation that would encourage all city agencies that own surplus land to  give away or sell this excess property for below-market values to public agencies or nonprofit housing providers that agree to use the land to build affordable housing. The legislation comes in response to a new state law, House Bill 2382, passed by the state legislature last year allowing state and local agencies to transfer land to affordable housing developers at little or no cost.  Mosqueda’s proposal would also allow agencies, including nonprofits to exercise this right even if they don’t have all the money in hand or haven’t secured a development partner.

“Through smart management of public land, and using surplus and underutilized public land for the best public good, we can reduce the cost of building the affordable housing our communities need,” Mosqueda says. “This will also help us realize more community-led affordable housing and small-business development” by giving housing providers more time to pull together funding and development plans for properties that become available.

According to the latest city land inventory, there are about 35 pieces of city-owned land larger than 15,000 square feet that are surplus, “excess,” or underutilized, although some are outside Seattle and not all are suitable for housing development.

2. As I noted on Twitter last week, the anti-head tax campaign formed on May 18 and achieved its goal of repealing the tax on June 12. In the course of their brief effort, they spent nearly half a million dollars, according to their latest filing at the city’s Ethics and Elections Commission—more than most of last year’s city council candidates spent in a year-long campaign.

A large amount of that money went to  out-of-town consulting firms, including Scottsdale, Arizona-based firm Morning In America, which was paid $350,000 to gather signatures for the effort to repeal the head tax. Signature gatherers were reportedly paid as much as $6 a signature, belying any notion that the movement to quash a tax that would have impacted nearly 500 high-grossing businesses was primarily a “grassroots” effort. Morning In America, as its name indicates, is a firm closely linked to Republicans; in 2016, the Trump campaign paid Morning In America $256,000 for “ballot access consulting.”

The campaign also paid Swarthmore, PA-based Awareness Analytics Partners $10,000 to target Seattleites with anti-head tax ads on Facebook and Twitter. The firm is also linked to Republicans and right-wing political activism, through its work for individual candidates and national conservative groups such as the D.C.-based Right Way Super PAC. One of the group’s partners, Matthew Elliott, was the head of Vote Leave, the pro-Brexit campaign in England. The campaign was also generous to local burger scion Saul Spady, a political consultant and grandson of Dick Spady, who started Dick’s Burgers. Spady’s consulting firm, Cre8tive Empowerment, received $31,000 for its work on the monthlong campaign to kill the head tax.

3. The state has issued a $24,055 judgment against the King County Democrats for failing to disclose tens of thousands of campaign expenditures and contributions in a timely fashion in 2016, with half of the total suspended if the group doesn’t commit any more violations for the next four years. The judgment, which also includes $12,742 in costs and attorney’s fees, resulted from a series of complaints filed by conservative activist Glen Morgan, who files complaints against Democratic candidates and organizations for violating campaign-disclosure rules—some minor, others significant—in the hope that they will result in significant fines.

As I reported earlier this year, the King County Democrats knew the judgment was coming, but did not know specifically how much they would owe the state. The group was thrown into turmoil earlier this year when its chairman, Bailey Stober, refused to step down after multiple investigations found that he had committed workplace and financial misconduct, including profligate spending on rent, office equipment, and cable service as well as entertainment and travel for himself and his friends. When Stober finally stepped down, after a 13-hour trial in which Stober’s allies turned tables on the woman who accused him of sexual harassment and abusive behavior, insinuating that she was a drug addict who was making up stories to get back at her former boss for firing her, the group had just $3,200 in the bank, with thousands of dollars in outstanding debts.

The group hasn’t filed its latest expenditure reports, so it’s hard to know precisely how much cash they have on hand; at the end of May, they reported raising $3,703 and spending $6,265,  a balance of $13,560, with $3,703 in contributions for the month. Between June 4 and July 6, the group has filed contribution reports totaling just over $1,450. They reportedly plan to pay the judgment in installments.