I respect Gene’s decision and look forward to working with him as a council member as I have done for the last 15 or more years.  We do not always agree but I am always assured that Gene will not only meet with me but listen. 

I certainly hope there will be someone running who is not tied to developer/realtor interests.   We need a candidate who respects the GMA’s intent to preserve neighborhood character while allowing for appropriate growth that benefits people,  not profits.   Realtors who advertize to bring 50,000 new people here for the “small-town feel” will surely alter that “feel”.    And other cities like New York who suffer from consequences of the Realtor-in-Chief,  have become hollowed-out empty towers of investment capital,  not affordable to their previous ethnic diverse population.   ‘Spose that’s ok if you want to pay a cool million for the 56th floor condo,   and you never have to leave the building to see another human.   (Like the new “Spire” in Seattle,   advertized by Sotheby’s to the international jet-set crowd;  just think,   we could be just like them!)

John, please provide evidence of a ‘movement’ or statements of intent from either April Barker or Dan Hammill that they want to eliminate single family zoning.

Which of these mayoral candidate hopeful/ Council Member candidates voted for the Neighborhood Killing DADU ordinance again?  

The Extra Dwelling unit ordinance that exempts all newer neighborhoods with existing covenants and screws the rest of existing neighborhood Bellingham owner occupied homeowners.

I seem to recall Gene voted against it.  

Anyone else who supported and/or voted for it should consider to drop out of the race now.  I really can’t see : “I voted to destroy Bellingham Neighborhoods”,  as a winning campaign platform to become mayor.

Tim,

 The DADU ordinance does nothing to destroy nieghborhoods

The DADU ordinance ordinance does nort exempt any neighborhoods, however some neighborhoods with existing covenants exempted themselves  from many potential ordinances at the time that these ordinances were put into place.

The ordinance actually helps neighborhoods to increase to increase the number of permanently owner occupied homes by requiring those with ADU’s to have owner occupants, thereby eliminating the possibility of absentee owners for that property.

Cmon guys.  This thread is going off topic.  This is not about neighborhoods - it is about who might run for mayor.

Besides, the article uses the word “against” and Michael turned that into “elininate” which is totally different.  Please do not distort what I wrote.  “Against” could mean they do not want any more or some such, while “eliminate” definitely means remove the existing.  Michael, please do not put words in my mouth.

For articles on zoning, ADUs, DADUs, etc, there are plenty articles on this site that touch on that directly.  

No John, you don’t get to make this decree when you brought up the subject of zoning and two people responded about the issue of zoning. By including information ablut the potential Mayoral condidates, you have opened the discussion to those  issues.

As to the meaning of “movement against single family zoning”, ‘eliminate single family zoning’ is not at all different from ‘against….’. Sure, ‘Against’ COULD mean ‘they don’t want anymore or some such’, but  I doubt that anyone but you would read it that way. 

Having been involved in affordable housing issues in Bellingham for a few years now, I am not aware of any ‘movement’ against single family zoning. ‘Missing Middle’ policies that some council members and the Planning Department support, advocate for increased density at the edges and in some cases within single family zones. Advocating for these policies does not constitute being ‘against single family zoning’. 

Michael,  would you like to write a guest article on zoning, neighborhoods, and the housing issues that are a current topic in Bellingham?   Give us your perspective on affordable housing solutions?   We would welcome an article from you.

The articles on housing on this site have been written by others.  It is not an issue that I have written on.   I merely used the word “against” to inform readers of the main issues and positions of April and Dan.  It was not perjorative. Now, if you want to take me apart over the use of that one word in the article, then feel free to carry on in this thread.  But I think you made your point.  And it is a weak one.  I did not use the word “eliminate” and you are putting that word in my mouth.

Michael, attempting to read the mind of a politician is always going to be a challenge.  As we’ve seen time and time again, politicians tend to say what a particular audience wants to hear.

As we all know,  the existence of single-family (SF) zoning is being threatened in many ways.  Zoning changes that allow more than a single family residence on a SF zoned lot changes the nature of SF zoning.  Things like detached ADUs, duplexes, triplexes and even short-term rentals change the dynamic of single-family neighborhoods, severely impacting families who have invested their life savings in their homes.

Actual rezones of SF zoned areas, such as HALA in Seattle, eliminate SF zoning in certain areas.  Recently, the  Minneapolis’ City Council passed Minneapolis 2040, which plans to eliminate SF zoning by allowing triplexes on all SF lots.  In Oregon, speaker of the House Tina Kotek is drafting a bill that would require Oregon cities to allow apartments in all residential neighborhoods.

Rather than attempting to read the minds of our politicians, perhaps it would be simpler to ask them where they stand on these proposed changes.  Personally, I’d like to hear what they say (not that I’d completely believe them).  

For anyone who doesn’t believe that CM Barker would love to make significant changes to single-family zoned areas, perhaps this 1-1/2 minute montage of her comments at the Nov. 10, 2017 Housing Week panel might be of interest.

Well, what can I say. Gene supported Dig Once and a Technology Advisory Board. While I don’t think he cared about tech as much as Michael Lilliquist, he certinally was more of a straight shooter and more reliable. I believe he would have given us more transperancy. This is not something most of the other council members care about, and something we desperately need. I cringe to think of Bellingham with another 4 years of mayor Linville or April Barker. Both who are easily proven to be wolves in sheeps clothing if you look just beneath the surface of what they say, and at their decisions against the welfare of most of the citizens of Bellingham instead. For example, both still hide behind the homelessness issue, but it took them 3 years to even act on it. Both are landlords that overcharge for their properties. Both back anti-net neutral, anti-first amendment companies. Both cant’ be bothered with learning about technology and both, refuse to look into Public Works even when they threaten citizens on behalf of PSE, and consistently come back with nubmers anywhere from 2 to 13.5 times higher on installs than just about every other city in the US. Manhattan level costs in Bellingham don’t bother them at all. I can’t say what Dan Hamill thinks, since he’s so immature that he blank replies on topics he can’t be bothered with. Things are NOT looking good. We need another option for mayor than any of the current council members or the current mayor. One that belives in transperancy and can think more than 3 months ahead.  

I’m hoping James Erb will run,   but he needs some recovery time before we set up a draft….

Yeah Dianne, James seems like a good guy to me too. For example, I really appreciate his help with getting the city to actually respond to public record requests. Also, he seems progressive on many fronts. Mostly, he seems well organized, intelligent, willing to do proper research, and willing to listen. Still, I am not sure that he grasps the role that new technology plays in every aspect of daily life or cares to. This can be because either:

1. He is still a staff member of the COB and doesn’t want to go against the pro big-telecom Linville administration. (He will need to do this to grab the progressive vote…)

2. He actually just lacks interest in learning about technology. Even technology that would give us more humane, more cost effective, alternatives to incarcertaion.

Personally I’m hoping that Matthew Endrizzi runs for mayor. Who is more progressive than Matthew on any issue, including James? 

Either way, most of the people on this list (note the keyword most here) would be way better than most of the current members of the city and county councils or our current mayor, who are all still putitng all of their eggs in one basket with the Waterfront… Note: There are some scary ones on the list too.