Affordable housing was the big winner at Tuesday night’s Bainbridge Island City Council meeting.
Housing Resources Bainbridge will receive $2 million for its 13-unit project at Madison and Wyatt. And another $1.75 million will be available in the future for another affordable housing project.
The money comes from the $7.061 million available to the city from the American Rescue Plan Act. The nationwide $1.9 trillion ARPA is an effort to help the country recover from the COVID-19 pandemic.
Mayor Rasham Nassar voted against the $1.75 million motion because it lacked specifics. Councilmember Kirsten Hytopoulos said the money should go to acquisition of units; she said such a project should be in the works soon. Councilmember Michael Pollock said the money should be reserved for a permanent affordable housing project.
Another big winner was the sustainable transportation plan, which also received $2 million. That passed without much discussion.
Receiving $1 million was a project for wastewater reuse. Pollock said, “It benefits everyone on the island.”
City manager Blair King said the total project will cost about $20 million to make city wastewater clean enough to reuse for things like landscaping, which would help recharge island groundwater.
“It’s a down payment,” Councilmember Leslie Schneider said. “It feels like the future to me. It shows what a critical resource water is on the island.”
King said it should cost less than $1 million to see if the project is possible with the city’s affluent.
Councilmember Brenda Fantroy-Johnson wasn’t impressed. She didn’t want to spend $1 million to see if the city has “the right grade of poop.”
Nassar also voted against it, even though she initially said she wanted $4 million for various wastewater upgrades so BI could be a “regional leader in cleaning up Puget Sound.”
Shot down was using $700,000 of the funds to clean BI wastewater before it goes into Puget Sound.
“This is something you have to do,” King said. “It will be paid for one way or the other.”
Councilmember Joe Deets added: “This needs to happen. But is this the best way to fund it?”
Nassar said this project already is going to happen. “ARPA money should go beyond what we must do and are already doing.”
Two other projects did receive funding: $250,000 for solar panels and storage for emergency preparedness and $61,885 for health and human services to provide premium pay for essential child care workers.
The solar project barely passed 4-3 because it lacked specifics, Hytopoulos said, just before she pushed for the affordable housing funds that also lacked specifics. Deets disagreed, saying there are five sites available and working with Bainbridge Prepares will help decide the best way to spend the money.
Fantroy-Johnson pushed for funds for child care workers. Originally she had pushed for much more. “They are on the front lines. That’s what the funds are all about, helping people directly affected by COVID.”
Schneider agreed. Let’s give “back to the people who really need it.”
Nassar originally had pushed for much more for social services. Schneider had asked for funds for fish passage – “an unfunded mandate from the state.” And Pollock has requested funds for only affordable housing and wastewater reuse. “Two big projects – let’s do them right.”
ARPA background
The ARPA program has four categories of eligible expenses: Support Public Health response efforts and economic impacts to households and businesses; Provide premium pay for essential workers; Replace lost public sector revenue; and Support investments in water or sewer.
The council earlier approved its own guidelines for how the money should be spent: To achieve long-lasting benefits; To support projects that would not be accomplished without a large one-time sum; To promote fiscal and environmental sustainability; And to avoid cost reoccurrence.
Staff presented a list of proposed projects to the council related to water and sewer infrastructure upgrades, nonmotorized transportation improvements, climate mitigation projects, affordable housing and emergency response infrastructure upgrades. In total, the list represented approximately $35 million in costs.
The list under consideration Tuesday night had been reduced to: 1. Winslow water tank replacement; 2. Water system climate resiliency upgrades; 3. Wastewater treatment plant near-term capacity upgrades; 4. Wastewater beneficial reuse; 5. McDonald Creek culvert/Springbrook Creek mitigation; 6. Springbrook fish passage; 7. Stormwater/nonmotorized transportation demonstration project; 8. Sustainable Transportation Plan implementation set-aside; 9. Affordable housing; 10. Biodigester; 11. Premium pay for child care workers; 12. Solar panels on emergency hubs/shelters.
At least three city committees were consulted.
The Environmental Technical Advisory Committee prioritized the culvert projects, water system upgrades, wastewater reuse, wastewater upgrades, biodigester and stormwater projects.
The Climate Change Advisory Committee supported solar panels and a biodigester.
The Race Equity Advisory Committee said the money should not be distributed until full community input is given. It also recommended providing money to populations most affected by the pandemic. And it announced its displeasure at being asked for input so late in the process.
