Thursday, October 1, 2026
In a move to address housing discrimination, the Olympia City Council is considering sweeping changes to tenant screening practices that have marginalized low-income residents, immigrants and people of color.
During a study session on Tuesday, Sept. 16, council members examined five areas of rental application processes: income requirements, the use of social security numbers, criminal history evaluations, credit checks and rental history assessments.
Housing Program Senior Specialist Christa Lenssen presented findings from the Engage Olympia survey, which had 283 respondents. The survey showed 89% of landlords check rental history, 84% verify income, 84% check credit and 75% conduct criminal background checks.
Renters reported rejections most often for income (55%), credit (43%), rental history (28%), criminal history (21%), and immigration status or lack of SSN (3%). Service providers added restrictive practices trap people in substandard housing or homelessness.
The proposed reforms stem from the city’s Housing Action Plan and Thurston County’s Assessment of Fair Housing, which both aim to reduce barriers and strengthen tenant protections.
Many landlords use a “three times the rent” requirement, which disqualifies renters earning minimum wage. A proposed cap at 2.5 times rent would allow combined income, co-signers or proof of rent history. About 76% of renters supported the change, while 59% of landlords opposed it.
Council members generally supported the cap, but debated how it should apply.
Mayor Dontae Payne backed the policy, but called for more data on the standard. He also suggested limits on how far back rental history or evictions can be considered.
Council member Dani Madrone opposed tying combined income to rental history, pointing out it could exclude students, new couples or family members living together.
Lenssen noted requiring Social Security numbers in tenant screening can unintentionally discriminate against immigrants and refugees. A proposed policy, modeled on other Washington jurisdictions, would bar landlords from rejecting applicants who do not provide an Social Security number or inquiring about immigration status, instead allowing alternative documentation.
In the survey, Lenssen said 72% of renters and service providers support the policy, while 51% of landlords opposed it.
Landlords raised concerns about screening without Social Security numbers and potential risks tied to immigration status, including loss of rent if a tenant were detained or left the country. Some suggested allowing verification of legal residency status and eliminating the restriction on asking about lawful presence.
Madrone, who chairs the Olympia Land Use Committee, flagged the issue as urgent, noting that requiring a Social Security number bars people from applying altogether. She added the requirement conflicts with Olympia’s sanctuary city values and the state’s anti-discrimination laws.
She also said the proposal would not ban the use of the Social Security number, but would require landlords to accept alternatives for applicants who do not have one.
Proposed rules would prohibit rejecting for arrests not leading to conviction, crimes over 5 years old (with exceptions), juvenile offenses, or convictions vacated or sealed.
Survey results showed 71% of renters supported the policy while 48% of landlords opposed, citing safety concerns and liability.
Madrone suggested an educational approach to address potential discrimination in criminal history screenings.
“Most people in our community don’t want to contribute to these kinds of outcomes," she said.
Madrone argued that proving bias is difficult, as landlords can easily claim they selected another applicant.
Instead of immediate regulation, she recommended providing landlords with tools to recognize and prevent unconscious bias in tenant screening processes.
The proposed policy would prohibit rejections based on:
The survey revealed strong support, with 85% of renters backing the policy, while 62% of landlords opposed it.
Lenssen cited Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) guidance, pointing out credit scores were never designed to predict successful tenancy, but rather to assess loan default risks.
Council member Robert Vanderpool criticized credit scoring as a legacy of systemic racism.
“Credit history is part of redlining and deed restrictions that have generationally limited people’s opportunities," he said.
Payne inquired for the practical alternatives, asking how landlords could assess financial reliability without credit scores. Lenssen suggested using income verification, tax returns and bank statements as alternative assessment methods.
A University of Washington study found that between 2013 and 2017, one in 55 adults in the state faced an eviction filing, with racial and gender disparities evident.
Lenssen said the HUD guidance cautions that eviction records are often inaccurate or incomplete, and advises against denying applicants based on no-fault evictions, retaliation cases, domestic violence issues, or cases where tenants prevailed or settled.
The proposed policy, drawing from other cities and Colorado, would prohibit rejections based on withdrawn, settled or dismissed cases, satisfied judgments, orders of limited dissemination or no-fault evictions.
Survey results showed 80% of renters supported the policy. Renters emphasized evictions can stem from improper or retaliatory actions.
About 63% of landlords opposed the proposed policy, as they voiced unease about disregarding past filings, while viewing evictions as a serious step.
The council consensus leaned toward education and outreach, recognizing the complex nature of rental history screening and its potential for unintentional discrimination.
Lenssen said HUD has warned that overly restrictive screening practices can cause disparate impacts and violate fair housing laws.
The council expressed support for advancing policies on income-to-rent ratios and Social Secuirty number alternatives, while favoring education and outreach on criminal, credit and rental history. The proposed policies are expected to be addressed at a regular council meeting for further action.
13 comments on this item Please log in to comment by clicking here
Boatyarddog
Where are the Usual WHINEY Crowd.
Cat got your Tongues?
Awesome! No Voice no Issues
LOVE OLYMPIA
Wednesday, September 17, 2025 Report this
Quadlok
The credit check thing is so stupid. Does me paying rent on time help my credit? No? Then it shouldn't be considered.
AND it wasn't! I genuinely don't think I ever encountered them for the half dozen places I rented pre 2016. Came back 5 years later and even the anti government kook renting his illegally converted front porch wanted it.
AND The modern credit report system is likely younger than the average reader of the JOLT.
Wednesday, September 17, 2025 Report this
Southsoundguy
So more deadbeats can clog up housing and drive up prices more? This is more idiotic Seattle progressivism.
Wednesday, September 17, 2025 Report this
Claire
Property owners are not in 'business' to lose money to nere-do-wells. They deserve protection as well. Wondering why rents increase? To make up for lost revenue. The state does it, as do municipalities. Why not landlords?
Thursday, September 18, 2025 Report this
Brewmanchu
The Olympia council ignores the very basics of supply and demand. When my rental units become available I often have to turn off the zillow listing within 24 hours because I cannot keep up with all of the inquiries. I select tenants based on whether they are likely to pay rent on time, take care of the place, and get along with the neighbors. Yes, that requires a track record. The Olympia council should instead focus on making it easier to expand the housing stock through zoning, expediting permits, and things like pre-approved ADU designs. It is generally not landlords that require social security numbers but the screening services we use. If I knew someone was in the country illegally I would not rent to them; no local government can legally demand otherwise.
Thursday, September 18, 2025 Report this
HappyOlympian
I hear Boatyarddog and Quadlok going to save society by taking on extra jobs and donating the money they make to the city of Olympia and to pay rent for homeless folks! Thank you for putting your money where your mouth is and not forcing the rest of us to support your whims.
Thursday, September 18, 2025 Report this
MrCommonSense
This is what is stated in the article which apparently the City believes:
"Service providers added restrictive practices trap people in substandard housing or homelessness."
These are not "added restrictive practices". They are practices that have existed for a very long time. They are NOT the cause of the problem. They exist not to discriminate, but to ensure that when a landlord entrusts the care of a house worth $300,000 to someone, they take care of it and the landlord, by receiving timely rent, can continue to pay the mortgage, insurance, taxes and all the other expenses needed to maintain the property.
It will be interesting to see the final "income" rules and how landlords are required to calculate it and what ratios are "reasonable". What counts as income, what doesn't count as income. Is it gross income, net income, does overtime count if it is not guaranteed? What about alimony, child support, or other income that may or may not continue. Can the landlord ask for a copy of the legal documents and require verification to confirm "other income" such as alimony has been paid timely and for how long, and confirm how long payments are expected to last? If income is from a federal government program, is it required to be counted given the program cuts the Trump administration is continuing? Will a landlord have to rent to a tenant who violently stormed the Capitol because their conviction has been vacated?
And how does the City plan to enforce new rules when the City is facing a multi-million dollar short fall in revenue?
The City should be deferring these things to State government as there should be uniform rules throughout the state, not different ones for the 100's of jurisdiction around the state. Please get back to building and repairing sidewalks to make walking to school safe, filling potholes and upgrading the City's water system infrastructure. There are parks that need a lot of attention, too.
Waste of time and money better spent on counseling tenants on how to present themselves and their specific situation to landlords.
Thursday, September 18, 2025 Report this
MikePelly
Eliminate corporate welfare the city has been giving to developers in the form of Zero residential real estate taxes, Sometimes for up to 20 years that corporate owned apartment developers have been receiving from the city.
Thursday, September 18, 2025 Report this
BobJacobs
when we rent a residential unit, we are entrusting a large asset to the tenants, often over $200,000. That is a big financial risk.
This is very similar to people applying for bank loans. If I apply for a $200,000 loan, the lender will require all sorts of information, certainly including social security number and employment/income information. The bank needs to cover its risk of losing some or all of the money.
Certainly landlords should be allowed to require the same kind of information that lenders require to make loans.
The city council doesn't seem to understand this.
Bob Jacobs
Thursday, September 18, 2025 Report this
JulesJames
Olympia City Council wants me to rent to undocumented immigrants? This municipality swoons at the price of rental housing, but doesn't pause for a moment to realize all the extra costs borne by the landlord when ICE arrests and deports. Those costs must be anticipated. And if we landlords aren't allowed to distinguish between quality and risky tenants, we've got to price all our product based on the latter. Sorry quality tenants: Olympia screws you again.
Friday, September 19, 2025 Report this
Bobwubbena
A simple solution. When a tenant doesn't quite meet common sense "background checks" but the Council still doesn't want those background checks to apply, have the Council person be required to "co sign on the tenant's behalf" and accept the responsibility for damages and unpaid rent. This is the "loan/rent" guarantee that the Council is asking the landlord to bear. They need to share the responsibility personally--not the city/us taxpayers.
Friday, September 19, 2025 Report this
BettyVerdammt
Ridiculous. This council obsesses over rules they lack the capacity to enforce. There's one code enforcement person for the whole city and police complain about dozens of vacancies. The council and city manager eliminated Olympia's court and prosecutor. This is silly, performative nonsense that only worsens housing barriers.
We need a new council and city manager.
Vote out the incumbents on Tuesday, November 4, 2025.
Saturday, September 20, 2025 Report this
sunshine39
So many accurate comments. Thank you Mrcommonsense and Bob Jacobs. Renting is a credit decision. A landlord must have some background information on a prospective tenant. While you're at it, why not make the rules for eviction easier? I don't think so. Why make life more difficult for landlords and lose more landlords, further decreasing the supply of rental housing.
Council should avoid issues they have no knowledge of. Get back to the issues we elected you for.
Sunday, September 21, 2025 Report this