Would you give up your Seattle home for affordability?

People who see themselves as future homeowners need to be wary of a proposal by Seattle Mayor Ed Murray and council member Mike O’Brien that could pit progressives against progressives.

Brier Dudley of The Seattle Times writes that a plan to rezone the city’s neighborhoods could backfire and kill the dream for many who someday want to own a single-family home.

“Progressives should be especially wary of the proposal by Mayor Ed Murray and City Council member Mike O’Brien to allow Seattle’s single-family homes to be converted to investor-owned, multifamily rentals,” Dudley writes.

Related: Sorry, Kshama Sawant, you still die after falling on your sword

Dudley points out that the proposal is being spun as an affordability measure, but would actually “have the opposite effect on those trying to buy a home.”

As KIRO Radio’s Tom Tangney sees it, even current homeowners might be shooting themselves in the foot by supporting this measure. Not only would future homeowners be deprived of a chance to own a home, but more and more people would find themselves living next to multifamily units.

That begs the question: Would a homeowner who firmly opposes sacrificing single-family homes for more housing be willing to sell for less to hold onto that ideal?

Tom, who owns a home in a popular Seattle neighborhood, says yes. He told co-host John Curley that he values his neighborhood. Of course, he would set a price that he’d be unwilling to go below. And if selling his house meant people on the street could afford a place to live, he would reconsider his stance.

Curley argues that there is only so much land available in Seattle and that if you want affordable housing, people have to be willing to rezone.

Listen to Curley’s argument below.

Follow @https://twitter.com/mynorthwest