The causes of housing unaffordability are complex but they are partly caused by the rapid increase in housing costs with incomes that aren't keeping up. Another main cause is mental and physical illness that prevents individuals from being able to work and even to live in certain settings. This is compounded by our location on the border. Persons with little money and sometimes illnesses are turned away at the border and don't have the finances to go anywhere so they end up out on the streets. The consequences are increased stress, illness, and crime to those victims who don't have a roof over their heads and to the rest of the community.

Our environment is everything around us so yes, it is an environmental issue. Further, without decent housing our community will have increases in stress, crime, and disease. That is environmental!

We will never be able to do enough and I cannot speak for Bellingham but as a county council member I have always supported the Opportunity Council, Northwest Youth Services, and Kulshan Community Land Trust in budget proposals that have come to the council. I voted for the creation of an affordable housing task force to help us create a menu of options for affordable housing. I served on the task force and repeatedly said our first and highest priority should be on homelessness. I proposed and drafted the county's original detached accessory dwelling unit (ADU) ordinance over 12 years ago, which is by far the most cost effective form of affordable housing. I have never heard a complaint from any neighbors of detached ADUs with our ordinance (Our ordinance only applies to unincorporated Whatcom County. I know there are complaints in Bellingham. I strongly believe most, if not all complaints can be eliminated with a decent ordinance that protects neighbors as well as the detached ADU owner). The only complaint I have received regarding the county ordinance is about how difficult it is to get through the permitting process. I am receptive to all housing proposals for the homeless.

It depends on how you define affordable housing. My #1 priority is housing for the homeless. I believe everyone deserves a roof over his/her head. I do not believe everyone is entitled to own a home if he/she can't afford it. I was almost 40 when my husband and I bought our first home. It was a fixer and we have been fixing it ever since. It is a wonderful environmentally sensitive place that we created with our own sweat and little money and I feel fortunate to own it. But I have enjoyed living many other ways, including in a commune with 14 other folks for eight years. We did everything including digging our own root cellar to store the food we grew. Discretionary funds should be spent first on those who need it most-the homeless, the hungry, the sick, the poor. If there is any discretionary funding left after that, and I doubt there would be, we could use that in part to help create affordable housing options for others.

I would be willing to consider putting a specific housing trust fund initiative on the ballot and have the public vote on it because the public will be paying the tab. The devil is always in the details. I want to be careful we don't create more needy people by requiring them to pay more than they can afford to provide housing for others who may be better off financially then they are. I would need to see the specific housing fund proposal before I can say I will support it.

I would support voluntary inclusionary zoning with developer offsets and incentives. I am not convinced it makes a large enough impact to force it on anyone. I have attended almost every local presentation regarding inclusionary zoning. What I have seen has not shown a very large percentage of affordable housing created by mandatory inclusionary zoning. Also, mandatory requirements do not incentivise developers to produce affordable housing.

Absolutely. I have brought this issue up before. I would love to have the support of the organizations represented in this questionnaire to help push this proposal forward.

No. At some time we will run out of space and there will still be people to house. Parts of Los Angeles grew itself right into slums and crime by extending itself beyond what it was capable of adequately caring for.

Of course. That is motherhood and apple pie. Again, the devil is in the details. We need to create incentives for good paying jobs to locate here. Right now all I hear are complaints from companies wanting to locate here. County government is mandated by the Growth Management Act to be a provider of rural services. Most good paying companies need to locate in urban areas where there is adequate infrastructure and other amenities that we cannot provide in most of the unincorporated areas. I think of the problems Aluminum Chambered Boats is facing trying to expand here. There seems to be a disconnect on the part of some decision makers in assisting companies that provide higher wage and clean jobs. Also there are people who are mentally and physically incapable of working, no matter what the wage. They are among the most in need of affordable housing, a decent roof over their heads!