Tumwater report finds economic displacement highest local risk; staff to correct consultant figures before finalizing housing element

City of Tumwater planning staff on July 22 presented a housing displacement analysis prepared for the region by Uncommon Bridges and BHC Consultants that concluded economic displacement poses the most significant risk for Tumwater and recommended actions focused on preserving existing affordable stock and reducing barriers to new affordable units.

Erica (presenter) reviewed definitions used in the study—physical, economic and cultural displacement—and said consultants combined national literature, Department of Commerce tools, TRPC data, census inputs and local outreach (including a 167‑response regional survey and four roundtables) to assess who is at risk and what policies could reduce that risk. Erica summarized consultants’ top recommendations for Tumwater: establish a community land trust option for manufactured‑home parks, support mobile‑home ownership and preservation, and streamline permitting and preapproved plans for accessory dwelling units to speed production of smaller, lower‑cost units.

Erica told commissioners the analysis showed limited rental availability for households at 50% of area median income and below, and cited demographic signals including an aging population and a reported decrease in the American Indian and Alaska Native population in Tumwater. The staff presentation included a numeric figure that the report labeled a “64% decrease” in that population; commissioners flagged inconsistencies in the consultant math during the meeting. Commissioner Kirkpatrick questioned the percentage calculation and staff later confirmed the report also listed an absolute decrease of 154 people; commissioners and staff agreed the percentage needed verification before publication. Commissioner Kirkpatrick noted, “64% — that’s a pretty big number,” and staff said they would re‑check the underlying census numbers and consult with management on corrections.

When the consultants’ slides were briefly hidden by a technical error, staff unhid them and the report’s overall conclusion was visible: the consultants ranked economic displacement as the highest local risk. Erica stated during the meeting, “we are at most risk for economic displacement,” and cited indicators the team used: a relative decline in availability of affordable rental units for very low‑income households (30–50% AMI), a relative decrease in cost‑burdened households in several lower income bands, and an overall pattern of higher‑income households increasing as lower‑income availability fell.

Staff also highlighted a Tumwater policy asset: a protective zoning overlay for manufactured‑home parks that preserves those sites’ use if the park sells. The presentation noted existing Department of Commerce notice requirements for manufactured‑home park sales (a short public notice window described in the presentation) and recommended the city consider financing approaches such as community land trusts and local preservation programs to help park residents acquire and preserve their communities.

No formal action was taken; commissioners provided substantive policy feedback and asked staff to (1) verify consultant statistics in the report and correct any calculation errors before publishing the housing analysis as part of the comprehensive plan record, (2) clarify which recommended policies address which displacement type, and (3) continue coordination with regional partners (Olympia, Lacey and Yelm), the Thurston Regional Planning Council and stakeholders in manufactured‑home communities.

Staff said the consultants’ full report and the accompanying policy‑analysis spreadsheet are in the meeting packet and available online; staff requested comments be submitted to the comp‑plan email address so they can be tracked as part of the record.