As house builder, past president of Skagit Habitat, and strong advocate for affordable housing (Bill) and John a past president of SHH, a City administrator for LaConner for 14 years, we comment below on the many failures of the Housing element of the CP. We sent the City Clerk for your review links to 2 GMB recent decisions, Mercer Island and Kitsap county. It is crystal clear that the the GMA requires much more detail on the various economic groups you serve, from the poorest to the wealthiest, and who they are, and how many are there, and HOW, in relation to these groups, you will include them in the CP and serve them.
The GMB, as the decisions point out, will not accept general statements such as, “the markets will solve housing”. Or “we will continue serving the low income by our existing policies.” The GMA is clear! You must have a detailed plan in the CP to serve these groups for housing. This should include factual numbers, both for how many people need housing and how much money you need, and where they will live.
The past 35 years, since the GMA was enacted, have made the housing issues abundantly clear, “affordable housing really needs to be called subsidized housing.”
The City Council, as required, created a Housing Action Plan (HAP) in 2016 and little has been done to enact it. John and I from 2018 to Covid while presidents of Habitat, attempted to aid you in enacting the HAP by partnering with City to build here, to no avail. We provided a leasing of land contract that we all agreed was helpful and useful. All smoke and mirrors.
It is 2025 and very little is done. With this background, below please find our comments on specific issues you have failed to address in you draft CP.
- 1. HB 1220. “Must plan for and accommodate housing for all economic levels, including affordable housing for these groups.”
- 2. GMA requires specific information on housing groups etc. including an inventory of number of units to manage projected growth, and how the City will do that. More specificity.
- 3. Include a clear statement of goals of housing needs, what type, Multifamily, single family, affordable, and where?
- 4. Must identify SUFFICIENT land for this growth and for each economic group.
- 5. Provide adequate provisions on how you will deal with these groups needs for housing. This includes ADUs and where they will go. Relying on the “market” is counter to the GMA as it has produced no affordability in Anacortes and elsewhere.
Recent rulings by GMHB reveal problems for our draft Comp Plan, as outlined below.
Mercer Island
- 1. Did not identify sufficient land for each economic group for permanent housing
- 2. City must take actions to create housing, NOT in 5 years, but now. Anacortes has had a Housing Action Plan for several years but has done very little if nothing in that time.
- 3. Must not rely on relying on one word “capacity” as sufficient, or “future provisions” as sufficient. These concepts do not fulfill city’s obligation.
- 4. Do not group all economic groups into an aggregate. Must be specific!
Kitsap
- 1. Did not provide sufficient land capacity for all groups, particularly “low income groups.”
In general, the Anacortes draft 2025 CP does not provide how much money they need, or how they will find that money. Property tax levy? Raise permitting and impact fees for large homes, reduce or eliminate hookup fees and impact fees for low income, special impact fee for affordable housing? Setting aside city property for low income. Or enacting rules allowed by law to promote developers to help, I.e. property tax reductions etc.
In 2016, housing was an issue, now it is a 3 alarm fire. The only thing that the City has done is form a Housing subcommittee in 2016. This same committee has done little but meet with builders and developers. It has produced no written public agendas, and no minutes. The vast majority of citizens know nothing of their work, or rather their lack of real work. Looks like something is happening, but we voters don’t know what that is.
Very little effective outreach.
