Repeal RRIO and make Seattle Affordable!
Repeal Seattle RRIO: A Simple Way to Lower the Cost of Rent
By Arron Renfrew | Asset Manager | Renfrew Team | AUM Real Estate
Seattle says it wants more affordable housing. I agree.
But after nearly 30 years working in Seattle real estate and property management, I believe we need to ask a basic question:
Are we making it less expensive to provide housing—or are we continually adding costs to the people who provide it?
Seattle's Rental Registration and Inspection Ordinance (RRIO) is a good example of a program I believe should be repealed.
This isn't an argument against safe housing. Seattle should enforce its housing and safety codes, investigate legitimate complaints and hold negligent landlords accountable.
My argument is that RRIO is a redundant layer of regulation that adds cost and administrative burden to rental housing without creating a single additional unit of housing.
RRIO Adds Cost to Rental Housing
Seattle requires rental properties to register and periodically undergo RRIO inspections. Registration and renewal fees, inspection fees and other charges generate millions of dollars for the program. In 2024, RRIO collected approximately $3.17 million and spent about $2.96 million administering the program. The program also ended 2024 with approximately $4.6 million in accumulated fund balance.
But the City's numbers don't capture the full cost.
As a property manager, I know what happens behind the scenes.
Someone has to navigate the City's website, maintain accounts, complete registrations, pay fees, schedule inspections, coordinate tenant access, provide notices, meet inspectors, respond to deficiencies and document compliance.
That is a private-sector time tax that doesn't appear on Seattle's RRIO budget.
The Money Should Stay in the Housing System
This is the part of the RRIO debate I think is often missed.
I'm not suggesting Seattle repeal RRIO and move its $3 million budget to another government program.
I want the money to stay with the people providing the housing.
If a housing provider doesn't have to spend money on unnecessary registration, inspections and administrative compliance, that money remains available for the property.
It can pay for a roof, furnace, plumbing, electrical work, appliances, insurance, property taxes, mortgage costs, reserves or improvements.
And when the economics allow it, it can reduce the rent necessary to operate the property.
That's a much more direct approach to housing affordability than taking money out of the housing system and then creating another government program creating even more friction for housing providers and tenants.
Seattle's Small Rental Housing Supply Is Already Shrinking
This becomes particularly important when we look at Seattle's own data.
The Seattle City Auditor found that from 2016 through 2022, the number of registered single-family and small multifamily rental properties declined, while larger multifamily properties increased.
At least 6,859 RRIO-registered properties were sold, and 87.5% of those sales involved properties with one to five units. Nearly 69% were single-unit properties.
The Auditor also found that among surveyed landlords who stopped renting their property, 21% said they converted it to a primary residence for themselves or a relative.
The Auditor did not conclude that RRIO alone caused this decline—and I won't make that claim either. Property values, interest rates, taxes, insurance and many other regulations affect an owner's decision.
But the conclusion I draw is simple:
Why would we add unnecessary costs to the single family rental properties that are already disappearing from Seattle's rental market?
We Already Have a Way to Deal With Bad Housing
Seattle already has housing and building-maintenance codes and a Code Compliance system for addressing complaints.
If a tenant has a dangerous electrical problem, investigate it.
If a landlord refuses to make a required repair, enforce the code.
If a property repeatedly generates complaints, inspect it more aggressively.
If a landlord has a history of violations, increase oversight.
But why require every rental property—even one with a history of compliance and no complaints—to participate in a separate registration and recurring inspection system?
That's the part of RRIO I believe Seattle should eliminate.
Repeal RRIO. Keep the Housing Code.
My proposal is straightforward:
Repeal RRIO and replace universal registration and periodic inspections with strong, complaint-based and risk-based enforcement.
Keep Seattle's housing standards.
Keep tenant protections.
Keep meaningful penalties for negligent landlords.
But stop imposing a recurring administrative cost on every rental property regardless of its history.
Seattle doesn't need more bureaucracy to create affordable housing.
It needs to make it less expensive to provide housing.
Every dollar a housing provider doesn't have to spend on unnecessary fees is a dollar that stays in the housing system.
Every hour not spent navigating City bureaucracy is an hour that can be spent maintaining a property, serving a tenant or doing productive work.
And every rental property that remains financially viable is another home available to a Seattle renter.
If we genuinely want to lower the cost of rent, let's stop taking money out of the housing system and start leaving more of it with the people who provide the housing.
Repeal RRIO. Less bureaucracy. More rental housing. Lower costs.
Arron Renfrew | Asset Manager | Renfrew Team | AUM Real Estate
30 years of experience in Seattle real estate, rental housing and asset management. Contact Arron Today and let’s work together to bring affordable safe housing back to Seattle!
