The newly adopted Newcastle Comprehensive Plan sets a target of 1,480 new housing units from 2025 to 2044. This target—mandated by the Puget Sound Regional Council, King County, and the state—includes 956 units for no or low-income households and 283 emergency housing beds.

Affordable housing matters, but it must be planned responsibly. Growth should never outpace infrastructure. Before adding housing, we must ensure our water, sewer, roads, and schools can support it.

We also need to place affordable housing where it makes sense—near jobs, transit, and retail. Increasing density without addressing traffic and public safety, especially in areas near schools, can seriously impact quality of life.

Many residents told me that responsible growth and quality of life is the issue matters most to them. Our residents value "Small, Quiet and Safe". I will put Newcastle first and preserve the quality of life for our residents.

To address traffic congestion, one proposal being discussed is to establish Newcastle as a transit hub. This would be a multi-million-dollars project that, in reality, solves very little local traffic problem. Newcastle is not a good candidate for a transit hub — the direct route is always more efficient.

My approach is both more effective and more efficient: partner with major nearby employers like Amazon, T-Mobile, and Microsoft to advocate for adding a Newcastle stop on their commuter buses. This would benefit Newcastle residents, reduce traffic congestion, and save the city millions of dollars. Plus, it could be implemented much faster than building a new transit hub.

And we should all ask — where would the money for the transit hub come from? Don’t be surprised if the answer is a new transportation levy, which would mean another tax on Newcastle residents for the benefit of people simply passing through our city.

The 10% affordability requirement with a fee-in-lieu sounds good on paper, but it doesn’t work in practice. Developers can simply pay a proposed fee ($13/sq. ft) instead of building affordable units. For example, if the developer is building 4 units, per requirement, one of the four unit needs to be affordable housing and sold under the market rate ($1M). For a 3,500 square foot home, the developer can also pay $45,500 fee—easily offset when selling the home for $2 million. Most developers will take the cheaper route and pay the fee. The result: no affordable units built, and one more multi-million-dollar home in Newcastle.

Worse, the fee-in-lieu acts as a hidden tax that inflates surrounding home values, raising property taxes for everyone—especially longtime residents and those who are on fixed income.

Plus, the fees collected often fund projects elsewhere and will not deliver affordable housing in Newcastle and will not benefit Newcastle residents.

That’s why I oppose the current proposal. If we’re serious about affordable housing in Newcastle, we need real solutions —not loopholes that lead to more million-dollar homes and higher taxes. Let’s plan smart and protect our community’s quality of life.