Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Housing Allocation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Steering committee backs housing‑share inputs, recommends rural→urban reallocations to county
Summary
After public testimony and lengthy debate, the Spokane County Steering Committee of Elected Officials voted to recommend using housing‑share inputs under the A‑prime HAP methodology and to adopt the county’s proposed rural→urban growth‑area reallocations; the recommendation will go to the Board of County Commissioners for final action.
The Steering Committee of Elected Officials for Spokane County voted to recommend that the Board of County Commissioners adopt the A‑prime Housing Allocation Plan methodology using housing‑share inputs, and to accept the county’s proposed reallocation of units from rural areas into urban growth areas.
The recommendation followed a public hearing and more than two hours of debate in which city staff, mayors and housing advocates warned that a late switch to population‑share inputs would upend planning work jurisdictions have already completed. "Most, if not all, of the jurisdictions are using those numbers and we believe that at this point in the process it's quite late to change that," said Melissa Aloi, the Department of Commerce representative, urging caution about late changes that she said could create vulnerability for municipalities working to meet statutory deadlines.
Supporters framed the housing‑share inputs as the established, locally used approach. "PTAC urges the steering committee of elected officials to recommend housing allocations based on the A‑prime methodology using the housing share inputs," said Steve Rober, the PTAC vice chair. City officials said the housing‑share inputs have been the basis for months of local planning and public outreach and that reversing course now would be disruptive.
Business developers and others pushed a different view. Jim Frank of Greenstone Corporation said PTAC’s housing‑share spreadsheet "was made up" and relied on pre‑Growth Management Act-era data that, in his view, skewed allocations toward rural areas; he urged the committee to stick with population‑share inputs tied to recent growth projections.
The committee first rejected a motion to send the HAP item to the county commissioners with no recommendation. After roll call, members approved a motion to recommend adoption of the A‑prime methodology with housing‑share inputs and the county’s rural→UGA reallocations. The committee’s recommendation and the public record will be transmitted to the Board of County Commissioners, which retains final authority.
Why it matters: The choice of inputs affects how many housing units the county assigns to cities, the unincorporated UG and rural areas across multiple income bands. Those allocations drive local land‑use planning, infrastructure investment projections and compliance with state Growth Management Act deadlines.
What’s next: The steering committee’s recommendation will be forwarded to the Board of County Commissioners for decision. Several speakers urged that whichever input set is adopted be monitored over time and compared to actual growth during the statutory check‑in periods.
Sources: Committee hearing and public comments; Commerce letter referenced by Melissa Aloi; statements by Steve Rober, Spencer Garner, Jim Frank and others at the public hearing.
