07/21/2008: "#4 - Open Questions To Candidates"

The Island Guardian is sponsoring weekly questions to the county council candidates, and will publish their responses; and responses of the voters to their answers.

Question Number Four:
Two parts: (1) Should taxpayers be forced to pay for affordable housing for workers, or should employers offer a pay scale as needed to attract workers (i.e. let the free market dictate wages - consumer may pay more). (2) Should affordable housing be exempt from some regulations, or be treated the same as any other development?

================================================
Gordy Petersen

If employers want to have a profitable business they need to figure out how to attract skilled workers. If that means they have to provide housing or pay living wages then they need to do that and do it better than their competition.

All developers need to be treated the same under the existing regulations. If those regulations become insurmountable barriers to building even modest homes the Council should pay attention and change them. Since the proponents of affordable housing projects have become the biggest developers in San Juan County they should be strong advocates of changing the regulations that have made housing unaffordable. This would be a good first step toward solving the affordable housing crisis we all face.-Gordy Petersen

================================================
Alan Lichter

Employers will never be able to offer a wage scale that allows an employee to purchase a home, and relying on the free market to dictate wages--presumably to attract workers--is unrealistic in a small, isolated island community that does not have the economic markers and flexibility found in mainland cities.

If we want to retain a full community life, which means the availability of trades people, service personnel, supermarket checkers, shop clerks, teachers, police, fire dept, health workers, etc., we'll need to have public-private partnerships to provide affordable housing. The housing will need to be mixed: private residences, co-housing, cluster housing, rentals. And we may need to arrange some tax relief or other incentives for builders and developers, a small cost compared to the huge burden our citizens would have to assume if we had to rely on a commuting workforce.

It will become increasingly important to investigate grant possibilities for affordable housing, both from federal and foundation sources. I have advocated for a full-time grant writer for SJC, and will continue to do so.

I don't think that affordable housing should be exempt from regulations concerning safety, construction, inspections, and the usual building codes, but we may need to fast-track the permitting process for some project-specific developments. -Alan Lichter

================================================
Bruce R. Orchid

We need to separate the issues of affordable housing and low income housing, e.g. homes for “blue collar” workers, who are making a living, albeit barely, and homes for seniors and others possibly in need who are on fixed, and probably, low incomes. In either case I am not in favor of a tax to accomplish these needs, unless, of course, put on a ballot by public initiative, and passed by the voters. Consumers, both residents and visitors are already paying a premium on free market goods and services in this community, which is why so many of us shop on the mainland, although one should study the cost effectiveness of that with rising ferry fares and cost of gasoline. Increased costs to consumers reflected in goods and services will drive away both visitors and wage earners, but we have not seen that, at least created by our local economy.

I do feel developers should have incentives to provide affordable and especially low income housing. I have not studied the issue recently, but I have always supported the concept of TDR’s, traded development rights, and I understand there are still ideas and possibly proposals being discussed that I believe I could support. I would not exempt anyone from existing regulations, but try to offer incentives and creative planning to accomplish these goals. -Bruce R. Orchid

================================================
Lovel Pratt

San Juan County (SJC) is in an affordable housing crisis. Very few jobs in SJC pay a living wage that will support a family. SJC has the largest affordability gap between the average price of a home and the average wage earned by residents of any county in Washington.

SJC needs as many affordable/workforce housing solutions as possible, and in planning for the long-term, needs to recognize the importance of permanently affordable housing. Identifying and implementing solutions to our community’s need for affordable/workforce housing should not be limited by a dialog confined to taxes vs. free market, and/or regulations applied unilaterally vs. regulation exemptions.

Local small businesses already pay higher wages than similar businesses do on the mainland �" particularly construction and professional services jobs �" but those higher wages are still not high enough to meet our high housing costs. Employers alone will not solve SJC’s affordable housing crisis because in many cases it would be more cost effective for employers to fly or ferry workers in than it would be to pay workers the wages needed to purchase a home at market rate. Here are some examples of the consequences: It is primarily the workers in this community who are our volunteer firefighters and EMTs; what would it cost taxpayers to replace those volunteers with paid emergency responders? What would this community be like without the children who are the sons and daughters of the workers in our community? What would our community be like if workers no longer lived here?

The Housing Element of SJC’s Comprehensive Plan is required by law to “make adequate provisions for existing and projected [housing] needs of all economic segments of the community.” Given the overwhelming need for affordable/workforce housing, it is appropriate that there be specific provisions to address this need, including differences in how regulations are applied.

SJC has an opportunity to make an investment in our community. When an upfront investment is made by the community to support affordable/workforce housing, there are returns on that investment such as the increase in taxes collected (both real estate taxes and the additional local sales tax collections), along with the benefits of our community’s increased economic diversity and stability.

If elected, I will work with my fellow council members, county staff, housing developers, and citizens to comprehensively address our community’s affordable/workforce housing needs. Here is some of the work we can do:

• Facilitate and support the work of affordable housing organizations.
• Update the Housing Element to include policies that will create housing for all economic segments of our community.
• Work with our legislators to amend state law to allow affordable housing programs to serve SJC residents who earn up to at least 120% of the median family income.
• Establish a local Housing Trust Fund to provide grants or subsidy support (e.g., through a special fee or tax assessed on buildings over a certain size, recording fees, small percentage of sales tax, density bonus, “inclusionary zoning,” or real estate tax). -Lovel Pratt

================================================
Howard Rosenfeld

1) No, I don’t want to burden our citizens with any additional costs for affordable housing, unless we vote to tax ourselves. There are many programs, like the Home Trust and Homes For Islanders, that get their funding from donations and grants. And yes, housing availability is already contributing to difficult employee recruitment for some County positions, and I assume for other employers. When lack of affordable housing results in higher wages, which results in higher prices, is this not also a kind of tax? Government does need to create the regulatory environment that allows these affordable housing non-profits to operate in successfully. A recent example is the Phase 1, Friday Harbor UGA. This did require significant staff time, which is a cost. But, it was also required by the GMA, so we had to do it (forced?).

If we establish or partner on a housing authority, there could be a cost if grants don’t cover everything. This is something that might be considered in the future if the need for affordable housing, including rentals, is not met through other methods.

2) It is true that any exemption, forgiveness or break of any kind will pass the cost of that break along to everyone else. It’s a zero sum game. X=Y+Z. X=$. If Y doesn’t pay then Z has to pay more.

There are some creative ways to minimize the cost of exemption to make it acceptable. Here’s one I came up with while a Town Councilmember. In order to allow a qualified, non-profit, affordable housing project to defer paying the significant water and sewer hook-up fees, the Town could defer the payment using reserve funds to replace the money. A lien is placed on the property and the non-profit has 15 years to make full payment. The only cost to the Town is the interest that would have been received on that money. To achieve affordable housing this cost might be worth it. The Town did accept this as an option.

I agree with others that the phrasing of the questions tends to reveal the bias of the editor. The big question, however, is anybody reading this stuff? -Howard Rosenfeld

================================================
Lisa Guard

“Two parts: (1) Should taxpayers be forced to pay for affordable housing for workers, or should employers offer a pay scale as needed to attract workers (i.e. let the free market dictate wages-consumer may pay more). (2) Should affordable housing be exempt from some regulations, or be treated the same as any other development?”

Lisa Guards response to Island Guardians Question #4 to the candidates:

Has anyone out there looked for an employee to fill a position for their business lately or used the services and restaurants in our community? In fact, the free market already dictates wages in our county. The cost of goods and services are expensive in the islands, I believe this is a reflection of high home prices for middle and low income workers. We need relief for the low and middle income people of our community if we continue to require services, which we will. The Oaks Community began development in 1985; it is a prime example of affordable housing that boasts a great neighborhood in a serene location. I am told this type of community is no longer possible. Perhaps this should be rethought. All the available lots are full showing signs of success.

San Juan County is highly regulated, with many layers of red tape and reports required for development. This is currently a problem for everyone not just affordable housing. Let’s pare down the regulations across the board. Ultimately our community needs families to stay in the San Juan’s and not have to live elsewhere due to the high costs of regulations. Lisa Guard

================================================
Fay Chaffee

In a perfect world, wages would be sufficient so that people, all people, could afford a decent place to live, through rental or ownership. In our less-than-perfect world however, property is so costly that often this is difficult or next to impossible.

There are projects underway now that are providing ownership possibilities for people in certain income levels, and more are sure to come. I strongly support such projects, and would encourage research into grant funding available for them. “Forcing” taxpayers to pay for affordable housing for workers is not a policy that sits well in our capitalistic society. Rather, livable salaries should be offered to attract and keep qualified and competent workers.

Affordable housing projects are required to follow the development regulations of San Juan County. -Fay Chaffee

================================================
Richard Fralick

Affordable housing is important to San Juan County on many levels. Notably one of the planning goals in the Growth Management Act, RCW 336.70A.020(4), is to encourage the availability of affordable housing. On a very real level, lack of affordable housing makes recruiting and retaining employees difficult and raises concerns about the future demographics of our islands.

Providing affordable housing has proven to be a tough problem to solve. In 2006 San Juan County voters soundly defeated a proposal that would have boosted the supply of affordable housing to islanders of modest means by tacking a half-percent tax onto local real estate sales.

Considering the legal and practical implications, San Juan County must continue to seek solutions to increase the supply of affordable homes but county government should not force taxpayers to fund this need unless the taxpayers choose to do so. Thus any proposal to subsidize housing by raising taxes must be approved by the voters.

Recent experience has shown that this approach may not succeed. Consequently, we are left with free market forces dictating housing costs and wages. As the labor force becomes scarce, wages will rise and the consumer will pay more. It is not the role of county government to interfere in this process.

Despite the obvious challenges, I believe we must explore all available avenues to help overcome the affordability obstacles. Where appropriate, the County should consider adopting codes and regulations that promote affordable housing, including fee waivers, streamlined review processes or other incentives. Offering bonus densities might be another possibility. The cost of affordable housing in the County is driven by the cost of land. The only way to lower this cost is to increase density. The County already allows increased density through rural clustering. Depending on the details, bonus densities in areas designated for higher development may make sense as long as other regulations (such as sewer, water, building code, traffic and parking) are maintained. - Richard Fralick

================================================
Daniel Miller

Affordable housing is important it's true. But of course taxpayers should not be forced to pay for to pay for affordable housing for workers. .Employers should pay a fair wage scale for the workers they need. Affordable housing should be treated the same as any other development. To keep housing costs down they should shrink regulations for every one.-Daniel Miller

================================================

Mindy Kayl

Failed to respond