with traditional infrastructure projects and economic development
priorities within the same fund. Last year there was a large fund balance, and
Council and the Administration discussed allocations for infrastructure and
housing, but they were also including Whatcom County’s percentage in the
talk of percentages. What was decided was 30 percent going to the County,
30 percent to housing, and 40 percent to other municipalities for
infrastructure or economic development purposes (referred to as
“30/30/40” - See AB2025-303). For 2027, there is $3.9 million after the
County’s share and after the amount for recurring obligations and
established programs, and that portion is allocable to the two tracks of
affordable housing and infrastructure. He read from the presentation about
the EDI board’s recommendations. The dollar split the EDI Board
recommended was $2.3 million for infrastructure and $1.7 million for
housing. That 57.5 percent and 42.5 percent allocation (as a base of 100)
matches the allocation percentage that was approved last year. He stated the
Executive’s Office is planning to continue forward with a 75/25 percent
split, which would mean approximately $3 million each year for
infrastructure and economic development purposes and $1 million for
direct subsidy for affordable housing, though the infrastructure allocation
can be used to support housing.
Councilmembers discussed the presentation with Logan and the following
additional speakers:
·
·
·
Steve Oliver, County Treasurer
Satpal Sidhu, County Executive
Kayla Schott-Bresler, Executive's Office
Councilmembers and the speakers discussed giving clarity to the allocation
amounts, why the fund balance grew to the size that it did, that a project like
Old Town Urban Village to support housing development would be making
housing possible instead of directly subsidizing it so it could be counted as
part of the 75 percent for infrastructure, that EDI plays a relatively small
roll in the whole housing capital stack and the impact of a higher housing
percentage will cause more harm to the infrastructural side than the help it
would provide, how the $700,000 difference for infrastructure between the
two recommendations will help out our county, that the executive’s
proposal could potentially include banking successive years of the
infrastructure side of the fund to be able to make more strategic
investments in major economic development infrastructure projects (such
as the Bell Road overpass in Blaine), that the executive’s recommendation
was developed subsequent to the EDI Board’s meeting though a 75/25 split
was a motion that was made and not passed, that they could come back to
the discussion in tonight’s Council meeting and maybe find a compromise
that would uphold the Council’s values toward affordable housing while also
investing in critical infrastructure, and that maybe the board’s
