In response to last week’s letter by Mayor Faber about my take on affordable housing on the golf course, I offer the following questions to clarify the City’s position:

1) As stated by Mr. Faber in a City Council meeting last year, some market value housing would be required to “pencil out” the feasibility of affordable housing on some of the city’s most valuable land that is now an integral part of the Golf Park. What percentage of that repurposed land would be used for market (expensive) housing?

2) Why did the City spend over two hundred thousand dollars to study public attitudes about repurposing the Golf Course, if now you want to do a rezoning end run that negates the conclusion of that study that showed the golf course - combined with a park - was clearly the number one option of the citizenry?

Finally, I want to be clear that no one wants affordable housing in and around Port Townsend more than I.  However, there are far more feasible areas that are neither exorbitantly expensive, nor likely to destroy an already beloved 120-year-old Golf Park.  So, why, Mr. Faber, is this unpopular “repurposing” so important to you, Mr. Mauro, and select real estate folks?

George Bush

Port Townsend