Mike Nelson during his campaign presented a lengthy slide presentation on his
approach to water and affordable housing for Bainbridge Island. Following is a summary of Mike’s recommendations and presentation.
Background
The water and housing issues were put into sharp focus by a 1990 Washington State
law, the Growth Management Act (GMA), amended in 2021 by House Bill 1220 (HB 1220). The
GMA requires each fast growing city and county in Washington State to develop a
Comprehensive Plan to manage population growth. In 2021 HB 1220 amended the GMA, which
already required cities to encourage affordable housing, to “plan for and accommodate”
housing for all economic segments of the population. The GMA also requires cities to
encourage preservation of existing housing.
The GMA, however, is not a housing plan. Rather, it sets a comprehensive requirement
for planning with 15 different stated goals, including environmental concerns, water quality and
the availability of water, conservation of forests, open green spaces and fish and wildlife
habitat, shoreline management and historic preservation, as well as others. In short, it requires
each city and county to consider a broad range of important issues in planning growth.
The Comprehensive Plan
Bainbridge Island is tasked with balancing these goals in setting its Comprehensive Plan.
The State of Washington wisely did not attempt in the GMA to dictate results for cities and
counties. Instead, the GMA gives cities and counties broad discretion in how they plan for
future growth, recognizing that each local community will know best the needs and
requirements of its area. The GMA also includes citizen participation and coordination as one
of the stated 15 goals.
Bainbridge’s current Comprehensive Plan, which includes 10 listed elements, needs to
be updated. Mike Nelson’s proposed approach to the GMA recommends revising and updating
the existing Comprehensive Plan, with particular focus on the issues of water and housing. In
Mike’s words, these two issues need to be “deeply considered.”
The Water Issue
Water is an issue of special importance for Bainbridge Island. The Island is designated
by EPA as a Sole Source Aquifer, which means that Bainbridge gets all of its drinking water from
groundwater. Groundwater also supplies the surface streams on Bainbridge that are critical for
wildlife and fish habitat. This groundwater has only one source of recharge - rainwater.
Bainbridge is required by the GMA to protect critical areas, defined to include “areas with a
critical recharging effect on aquifers used for potable water.” RCW 36.70A.030. The
Washington Department of Ecology has designated the entire Island a Critical Aquifer Recharge
Area, which is required to be protected. The Washington Department of Commerce in its
guidance for Critical Areas Protection, states that “[a]ll critical areas must be designated and
their functions and values protected using the best available scientific information – known as
best available science or BAS.”
Bainbridge’s current Comprehensive Plan requires that “[n]ew development and
population growth are managed so that water resources remain adequate and affordable for
the indefinite future.” However, Bainbridge already is experiencing net drawdown of its
aquifers, a situation that is unsustainable in the long run and contrary to the Comprehensive
Plan already in place.
Current modeling has revealed potentially concerning trends across all of the Island’s
aquifer systems. Mike therefore recommends the following as policy priorities:
1. Complete the Groundwater Management Plan (GMP) and have it peer reviewed
before completing the Comprehensive Plan. Make sure the GMP prioritizes
sustainable management of the aquifers over growth. [Author’s Note: The peer
review referenced by Mike during his campaign in fact has been completed and
shows several serious flaws in the GMP, which should be addressed before it is
finalized.]
2. Complete a Comprehensive Water Study to determine the exact carrying capacity of
Bainbridge Island.
3. Consider revising the Comprehensive Plan to prioritize the availability of water
above all else, requiring population growth to yield to responsible stewardship of
water resources.
4. Consider appropriate water conservation strategies.
Housing
The science and the “just plain math” of the water and housing issues provide the
boundaries needed to effectively address the situation. Under current requirements
Bainbridge Island is supposed to plan for 4,524 new people and 1,977 new units. These targets
were set for Bainbridge without regard to the Island’s unique water situation and may
themselves need to be adjusted once true water carrying capacity is fully determined. Even
with the current targets, any approach that uses massive housing growth to produce marginal
affordable housing will not work because the finite water resources of the Island simply cannot
support massive growth in market housing.
Taking this into account, Mike recommends:
1. Reject market rate upzoning, which allows developers to build mostly market
housing in exchange for a relatively small number of affordable housing units.
2. Reject inclusionary zoning, which also requires just a certain percentage of units in
new developments to be affordable housing units.
3. Reject affordable housing overlay, which allows builders an option of greater density
in market housing in exchange for a certain amount of affordable housing.
Instead, Mike recommends using a program of subsidies to directly add affordable and
workforce housing without overbuilding market housing. Mike proposes that Bainbridge
consider subsidizing:
1. Denser Units
2. ADUs
3. Single Family Homes/Large Units for Families
4. Workforce Housing (which, if owned and maintained by COBI, can give preference to
those who work on Bainbridge).
Funding Affordable Housing
Once a program is designed, it will need to be funded. Most affordable housing requires
state and/or federal funding. In fact, Washington State requires Comprehensive Plans on
affordable housing to include documentation of gaps in local funding. RCW
36.70A.070(2)(d)(ii). The Washington Department of Commerce in its Guidance for Updating
Your Housing Element acknowledges that, while local funding can play a role, “[t]ypically, most
affordable housing funding comes from state and federal sources.”
Mike recommends:
1. Explore state and federal funding programs for housing.
2. Reject increases in local taxes, which would further undercut affordability.
3. Design the program, determine the cost, document the gap in local funding and look
to the state to fund the gap.
The Unfunded Mandate
Washington State passed a law effective in 1995 that the state could not impose
responsibility for new or expanded programs on political subdivisions like cities unless the city
“is fully reimbursed by the state for the costs of the new programs or increases in service
levels.” RCW 43.135.060. In other words, this law prohibits what are called “unfunded
mandates” by the state.
This law appears to conflict, however, with a recent decision involving Mercer Island
that seemed to suggest that a housing subsidy program that was not implemented with a
guaranteed outcome did not meet GMA requirements.
Mike suggests:
1. Develop a subsidy program and apply for state funding for any gap in funding not
met at the local level.
2. Resist any argument that the state can impose an unfunded mandate.
3. Pursue additional legislative fixes:
a. Work with legislative representatives to obtain an exemption from HB 1220
based on Bainbridge Island’s Sole Source Aquifer status similar to the
exemption from ADU density already provided in HB 1110.
b. Clarify that HB 1220 does not have an implementation requirement in
violation of the unfunded mandate rule
Download or View Mike Nelson’s 10/13/25 PowerPoint presentation HERE.