# When the County Takes on Homelessness and the City Embraces Middle Housing ## A February Afternoon of Housing Solutions in Bellingham On a quiet Monday afternoon in February, the Bellingham City Council gathered in their committee chambers for what would prove to be a three-hour deep dive into the community's most pressing housing challenges. All seven council members were present as Council President Hollie Huthman called the Committee of the Whole to order at 1:10 PM, setting the stage for presentations that would span from countywide homelessness strategy to neighborhood-scale housing reform. The meeting represented a convergence of housing policy at multiple scales — from Whatcom County's systematic approach to reducing homelessness to the city's efforts to create more diverse housing options in existing neighborhoods. What emerged was a portrait of a community wrestling with the fundamental question of how to house everyone who calls this corner of Washington home. ## The County's $15 Million Homelessness Strategy The afternoon began with Whatcom County staff introducing their upcoming five-year homeless housing plan — a state-mandated blueprint that will guide how the county spends roughly $15 million annually to address homelessness. Jason Korneliussen, the city's new Strategic Initiatives Manager for Health and Human Services, introduced the county team and noted his role as Bellingham's representative on the planning committee. Janie Oliphant, a housing specialist with Whatcom County Health and Community Services, walked the council through the complex ecosystem of services that make up the county's continuum of care. At its heart is "coordinated entry" — a system designed to replace the old days when people experiencing homelessness had to call multiple providers hoping to find an available bed or service. "It used to be that if I found myself homeless and I needed a place to go, I would call various providers and say, hey, do you have room for me? Can I get on your wait list?" Oliphant explained. "That made it so that people who were really good at calling and getting on waitlists were most likely to get access to services." The new system funnels people through a single assessment process into what's called the "housing pool" — essentially a prioritized waiting list where those with the highest vulnerability scores move to the front of the line. It's a system born of scarcity, where demand far outstrips available resources. Council Member Hannah Stone probed this prioritization system, identifying what seemed like a troubling paradox. "If you have an individual, maybe the barrier is quite low to keep them in housing, but if that opportunity is lost... are we setting people up then to need to worsen their circumstances in order to qualify for assistance? Which seems counterintuitive to what we're hoping to achieve for our community." Oliphant acknowledged the tension: "I mean, I think in some cases that could be what occurs." Her colleague Chris D'Onofrio added that these are "values based judgments" where "we have this conflict between equity and efficiency. And that's where we really want the community to step in, because I don't think we feel comfortable making those determinations alone." The data they shared painted a stark picture of growing need. Between 2020 and 2024, the county increased the number of people served from about 1,043 to 1,255 — but the number of people seeking services jumped dramatically, particularly between 2022 and 2023. The point-in-time count of homeless individuals rose from 555 in 2020 to 671 in 2024. Council Member Michael Lilliquist asked whether the jump coincided with the end of the eviction moratorium. D'Onofrio confirmed that timing likely played a role, though multiple factors contributed to the increase. The conversation revealed the complex funding streams that keep the system running. About half the county's budget comes from Washington State through the Department of Commerce. Local sources include document recording fees (about $1.5 million annually) and a sales tax approved by voters in recent years that generates about $1 million annually for services, with the rest reserved for affordable housing development. But federal uncertainty looms large. Mayor Kim Lund shared that approximately $3.6 billion in continuum of care dollars have been frozen at the federal level, leaving communities watching nervously to see how federal changes might impact local programs. Council Member Dan Hammill pressed on this federal vulnerability, asking about the potential impact of the new administration's efficiency efforts. The answer was sobering: even a short-term freezing of federal housing funds would have "a really big impact" on the community, affecting not just development programs but direct rental subsidies that keep people housed. The county team outlined the plan's framework, built around assumptions about external factors beyond local control, guiding principles that reflect community values, and specific objectives for reducing homelessness. A public survey is currently live through March 7th, asking residents to rank objectives from most to least important, with options ranging from "reduce unsheltered homelessness" to "create and preserve more affordable housing." Council Member Stone asked about coordination with the Justice Project Oversight Program, noting that many people reentering from incarceration would fall into categories served by the homelessness plan. The county acknowledged there hasn't been formal coordination but welcomed the opportunity. As the presentation concluded, Lilliquist offered a strategic observation about the previous plan that he hoped would carry forward: "One of the things I noted favorably... is that none of the strategies was about shelter. Shelter is mentioned, but the strategy is really focused on getting people into more permanent or stable forms of housing." He argued this was the right approach because "shelter is a necessary thing you have to do, but it doesn't actually ever get you out of the hole that people are in." ## State Politics and Local Priorities The meeting then shifted to Olympia, where the city's contracted lobbyists Nick Federici and Luke Esser joined virtually from the state capitol. Their message was sobering: the 2025 legislative session is overshadowed by a $16 billion state deficit over the next four years, fundamentally changing the nature of political conversations. "A lot of the conversations, unfortunately, that we're having down here are around what can they cut or delay or circumscribe rather than aggressive policy items moving forward," Federici explained. Despite the challenging fiscal environment, the lobbying team was working on several city priorities. Two Bellingham Bay cleanup grants were in play, though Governor Inslee's proposed budget didn't include quite enough funding to get both city projects funded. The team was also pursuing funding for the Central Library renovation ($2 million already secured, seeking an additional $1 million) and the waterfront skate park project. But it was the discussion of law enforcement funding that revealed the complexity of state politics. Esser outlined six different proposals floating through the legislature, each with different funding mechanisms and restrictions. Some would provide direct grants for new officers with strict anti-supplanting rules. Others would increase funding for existing criminal justice assistance accounts or create "free money" scenarios where cities could impose a 0.1% sales tax but receive a full state credit, making it invisible to taxpayers. Council Member Lilliquist wanted to know about anti-supplanting provisions — rules that would prevent cities from using new funding to relieve existing budget pressure rather than genuinely expanding services. "Let's say we were to get new funding. We'd like to use it to bolster our police department, hire a few new officers. But we might also want to relieve budget pressure," he explained. Esser confirmed that at least some proposals included such restrictions, particularly those focused exclusively on law enforcement officers. The housing discussion proved equally complex. Federici outlined multiple bills addressing everything from local funding flexibility to rent stabilization. House Bill 1867, sponsored by local Representative Alex Ramel, would allow voters to increase real estate excise taxes for affordable housing. But Lilliquist had concerns about timing — cities couldn't act until 2027, meaning money wouldn't flow until 2028. "Far too long for me," Lilliquist said, asking whether language could be added allowing counties to signal their intentions earlier, clearing the way for cities to act sooner. The lobbyists confirmed they'd been having exactly that conversation with Ramel and House Finance Committee Chair Rep. Liz Berry, seeking ways to "front load" funding availability. Council Member Anderson inquired about a vacant property bill that would give municipalities tools to address long-empty buildings. Federici reported extensive conversations with legislators, but constitutional questions around taxation authority remained unresolved. "There wasn't a bill introduced, but we're still pushing that conversation," he said, noting that Senator Emily Shewmake had been particularly helpful in connecting them with staff to explore the constitutional pathway. The condo liability reform bill (HB 1403) was moving through "intense negotiation," attempting to reduce insurance costs and legal risks that have essentially killed condominium development in Washington. Meanwhile, rent stabilization proposals that would cap annual rent increases at 7% were working their way through the process. Mayor Lund thanked the lobbying team, calling their first year representing Bellingham "a joy" despite challenging fiscal circumstances. "They've done an extraordinary job keeping us in the loop and having open dialog as we identify and work towards both our requests for additional funding, but most importantly for the legislative priorities that we think are in our community's best interest." ## Middle Housing: From Infill Toolkit to Citywide Policy The afternoon's final and most detailed presentation came from Planning and Community Development Director Blake Lyon, who laid out the case for expanding the city's "Infill Toolkit" — a set of development regulations that allow housing types beyond traditional single-family homes — to all residential areas of the city. Lyon framed the discussion around three "E words": efficiency (better use of land served by existing infrastructure), environment (protection of sensitive areas), and equity (the equitable distribution of housing opportunities). It was the last that seemed to drive his passion for the proposal. "You heard earlier this afternoon some of the challenges... the challenges that this community is facing with those that are experiencing homelessness, but also just a range of people and housing choices and housing options," Lyon said. The Infill Toolkit has been available in Bellingham since 2009, but only in limited areas. Originally applied to small zones (shown in pink on Lyon's maps), it was expanded in 2018 (adding green areas) but still excluded most residential neighborhoods. The proposal would make these housing options available citywide, with the notable exception of the Lake Whatcom watershed. The numbers Lyon shared revealed both success and missed opportunity. Since the toolkit's inception, 443 units have been completed under its provisions, with another 91 under construction and 94 in various stages of permitting. Townhouses dominate the production — a reflection of their appeal to buyers seeking homeownership opportunities. But Lyon stressed that these housing forms aren't new to Bellingham. "We like to say, for those that may have some concerns or reservations that these examples already exist within our community," he explained, noting that the toolkit allows housing types with "strong representation" in pre-World War II neighborhoods. The presentation walked through the various housing types allowed: small lot homes (on lots 5,000 square feet or smaller), cottage developments clustered around common areas, duplexes, triplexes, fourplexes, shared courts with vehicular access, garden courts with landscaped courtyards, and townhouses. This local initiative is driven partly by state law. Washington's House Bill 1110, passed in 2023, requires cities like Bellingham (with populations over 75,000) to allow middle housing by June 30, 2026, or have state model code supersede local regulations. The state law requires allowing at least four units per lot (up to six if two are affordable), at least six of nine specified housing types, and administrative rather than discretionary review. Mayor Lund's Executive Order 2024-02, issued in November, directed staff to move ahead of the state mandate, applying the existing Infill Toolkit citywide as an interim step while preparing more comprehensive compliance with state law. Council Member Anderson sought clarification about the 443 completed units, confirming these represented the full history since 2009. She then turned to a topic clearly close to her heart: adaptive reuse of historic homes. "We've had conversations about the adaptive reuse of the historically contributing older homes and neighborhoods where being able to convert like a three story Victorian into three apartment units. That way the old building stands, but the inside gets reconfigured." Lyon confirmed this approach would be addressed as the city moves toward state compliance. "One of the things we've been talking about is ways to incentivize the preservation of those existing units. And one of the ways to do that is to not apply a density calculation to that," he explained. Anderson pressed further, asking about condominiumization — allowing these converted units to be sold as condos rather than remaining rentals. Lyon clarified that condominium is "more of a description of ownership" than a housing type, and that state law would indeed allow ADUs and middle housing units to be condominiumized. Council Member Hammill raised concerns about permitting delays and costs that might undermine the policy's effectiveness. Lyon acknowledged these challenges, noting that the mayor's executive order had established a prioritization system giving middle housing projects expedited review. He distinguished between building permit fees (covering plan review and inspections) and impact fees and utility charges, which were receiving separate examination. "Especially with this type of work coming in, is the system that we have right now supportive of where we as a community need to be in total?" Lyon asked. "That's certainly something that we're aware of and we need to be able to address." Lilliquist, while supporting the proposal, flagged the continued use of "single family" terminology. "We don't regulate families. We really don't and don't need to care about who's in a household," he pointed out, asking when the city might move toward talking about a "continuum of housing types" instead. Lyon said the upcoming Bellingham Plan update would provide the opportunity to shift away from "single family zoning language" toward residential unit types like R1, R2, R3. He described the current approach as a "hybrid code" moving away from traditional Euclidean zoning toward more form-based regulations. The design standards question proved particularly complex. While the existing Infill Toolkit includes design guidelines, state law requires "objective" rather than "subjective" standards. Kurt Nabbefeld, the Planning Development Services Manager, offered an example: instead of saying "buildings should minimize impact of garages on the streetscape" (subjective), the objective standard might be "garages can't exceed more than 40% of the total facade." Council Member Stone asked why the city hadn't gone citywide when it expanded the toolkit in 2018. Lyon explained it was about "incremental change versus drastic change." After learning from the 2009 implementation that feared impacts hadn't materialized, the city took a smaller step in 2018. "I think now we're ready for that larger step. Citywide." Anderson, who had clearly been thinking about neighborhood concerns, offered her perspective on potential opposition: "I think people that I've heard from, their biggest concern is the tearing down... the 1910 four square that's on the corner of a street with big established trees. And when I talked to them about what if we're able to convert this to a four plex or a six plex or a condominium... people, for the most part, that I've spoken to have been overwhelmingly in favor of that." She suspected much neighborhood resistance wasn't to density itself but to losing historic character. "I think some of the fear that came from neighborhoods isn't so much that they didn't want the density, they just didn't want the old homes tore down." Lyon agreed, plugging the walking tours his department conducts in neighborhoods like the lettered streets and York, where visitors can see how middle housing has been successfully integrated into historic areas. "There's multiple examples of exactly what you're talking about... where you take an existing period piece home, and you can see now that what was a single family home is now three, 4 or 5 units." Lilliquist offered both support and perspective. "I think this is a really important and valuable step forward. That's been a while in coming," he said, noting that the toolkit was "sort of misapplied" in 2009 to higher-density areas rather than allowing flexibility in residential neighborhoods. But he also emphasized scale: "At that conference we went to Cascadia Innovation Corridor to really meet our population [and] housing numbers, we need to go big on multifamily. It doesn't mean we should neglect this because if we get hundreds of units this way, it means there's other hundreds of units we don't need to look for some other way." ## What's Ahead As the meeting wound down, Lyon outlined next steps. The city will bring an interim ordinance to the council on March 24th — about a month away — that would "do some really surgical language that says, okay, we're going to allow this infill tool kit citywide." A public hearing would be held that same night. If the council approves the interim ordinance, staff would continue working toward full compliance with state law by the June 30, 2026 deadline. Additional public outreach would follow, including more neighborhood walking tours and a formal Type VI legislative process. The meeting concluded with a brief discussion of old and new business (there was none) before the council moved into executive session to discuss labor relations, current litigation, and potential litigation matters. ## Closing & What's Ahead The February 24th Committee of the Whole meeting adjourned at 4:19 PM after the executive session, but not before providing a comprehensive look at housing policy from multiple angles. From the county's systematic approach to homelessness prevention and response to the city's efforts to diversify neighborhood housing options, the afternoon revealed a community grappling seriously with its housing challenges. The county's five-year plan process will continue through 2025, with public input opportunities through March 7th and final adoption expected in November. The state legislative session will run through April, with Bellingham's lobbyists continuing to advocate for the city's priorities despite challenging fiscal circumstances. Most immediately, the council will reconvene on March 24th to consider the middle housing interim ordinance, marking a potential turning point in how Bellingham thinks about neighborhood development and housing diversity. Whether measured in prevented evictions, new housing units, or preserved neighborhood character, the decisions made in these policy processes will shape how the community grows and who can afford to call it home. The convergence of county homelessness planning, state legislative advocacy, and city neighborhood policy in a single afternoon highlighted the interconnected nature of housing challenges — and the multi-level coordination required to address them effectively. As Council Member Anderson noted in discussing historic home conversions, the goal isn't just housing production but creating "win-win" solutions that serve both community needs and community character.