Whatcom County

Council Committee of the Whole

COUNTY COURTHOUSE

311 Grand Avenue, Ste #105

Bellingham, WA 98225-4038

(360) 778-5010

Committee Minutes - Draft Minutes

Tuesday, April 14, 2026

1:35 PM

Hybrid Meeting - Council Chambers

HYBRID MEETING - MAY BEGIN EARLY/LATE - ADJOURNS BY 4:30 P.M.

(PARTICIPATE IN-PERSON, SEE REMOTE JOIN INSTRUCTIONS AT

www.whatcomcounty.us/joinvirtualcouncil, OR CALL 360.778.5010)

COUNCILMEMBERS

Elizabeth Boyle

Barry Buchanan

Ben Elenbaas

Kaylee Galloway

Jessica Rienstra

Jon Scanlon

Mark Stremler

CLERK OF THE COUNCIL

Cathy Halka, AICP, CMC

Call To Order

Roll Call

Council Vice Chair Jon Scanlon called the meeting to order at 1:46 p.m. in

a hybrid meeting.

6 -

Present:

Barry Buchanan, Ben Elenbaas, Kaylee Galloway, Jessica Rienstra, Jon

Scanlon, and Mark Stremler

1 - Elizabeth Boyle

Absent:

Announcements

Executive Appointment

AB2026-302

Request confirmation of the County Executive’s appointment of Deborah Arthur as

Deputy Executive/Administrative Services Director effective April 13, 2026

Scanlon stated this item is on this agenda for discussion only and is on

tonight’s Council agenda for confirmation.

Satpal Sidhu, County Executive, spoke about Arthur and her career

experience.

Debbie Arthur, appointee, spoke about her goals and focus as she takes on

this role, including strengthening public trust, improving organizational

effectiveness, continuing to provide high-level transparency, and being

community-centric.

Elenbaas stated he was happy to hear this was the outcome of the

appointment.

Scanlon asked about her vision for trying to get to longer term projections

to help with budgeting into the future, and she stated she would like to

explore having a budgeting office.

Arthur answered how she might build greater transparency in the county, and

stated she would like to see financial things (data, metrics, etc.…) be more

present on the County’s website.

Sidhu answered if he could outline the deputy executives’ responsibilities,

and stated they plan to do that. He and Arthur answered if there are plans to

do any back-filling in the EMS office at the moment. Sidhu stated Arthur

will be continuing with the EMS work and they are not in a rush to back-fill

right now. Arthur stated she would like to get the levy planning started and

rolling.

This agenda item was DISCUSSED.

Committee Discussion

Scanlon continued as chair

AB2026-261

Discussion and preliminary Council direction on Whatcom County Comprehensive

Plan Chapter 10, Environment

Rienstra moved to begin review of Chapter 10 using preliminary Council

draft dated April 14th, 2026, which is the current version of the chapter

with Planning Commission recommendations from January 2026 and

additional edits proposed by Council members as listed on the chart of

proposed Council changes.

The motion was seconded by Elenbaas.

Clerk’s note: The revised preliminary Council draft for 4.14.2026 (on file)

just included additional staff comments and councilmembers referred to

those comments throughout their discussion. They also referred to

amendment numbers in the “Chapter 10 - Chart of Proposed Council

Changes for 4.14.2026” (on file) as they made their motions.

Elenbaas stated he wants to make sure the public understands they are just

putting preliminary documents (chapters) together so they can gather

feedback, and the chapters are not closed for good.

The motion carried by the following vote:

Aye: 6 - Buchanan, Elenbaas, Galloway, Rienstra, Scanlon, and Stremler

Nay: 0

Absent: 1 - Boyle

Amendment number 27 (new section “Water Quality and Quantity”)

Galloway moved and Elenbaas seconded to amend the second to last

sentence of the section to strike "recent trends in monitoring show that

these improvements of the past may be at risk" and insert the staff

recommendation which is, "water quality improvements may be at risk" so

that the sentence would read, “Unfortunately, water quality improvements

may be at risk.”

Councilmembers discussed the motion, that if they do not keep their

heightened awareness of water quality they risk reverting to a poorer

outcome, that this section is broad and does not just refer to one body of

water, and that they should make sure natural system functions (with high

nutrient loads and algal blooms) are not hindered by what they are doing.

The motion carried by the following vote:

Aye: 6 - Buchanan, Elenbaas, Galloway, Rienstra, Scanlon, and Stremler

Nay: 0

Absent: 1 - Boyle

Amendment number 32 (new Policy 10F-6)

Galloway moved that they include amendment number 32.

The motion was seconded by Rienstra.

Galloway stated this is in line with development strategies they have been

discussing as part of the Comprehensive Plan process that aim to balance

the need for development with the needs of our environment and natural

resources, and it builds consistency within the Comprehensive Plan.

Elenbaas stated he is concerned that they use the word “require the use of”

and then it is not defined. He moved to amend the motion to change the

word "require" to "encourage."

The motion was seconded by Stremler.

Councilmembers discussed the motion and if there is a definition of

low-impact sustainable development strategies.

The motion to amend carried by the following vote:

Aye: 6 - Galloway, Rienstra, Scanlon, Stremler, Buchanan, and Elenbaas

Nay: 0

Absent: 1 - Boyle

The motion to include Policy 10F-6 as amended carried by the following

vote:

Aye: 4 - Galloway, Rienstra, Scanlon, and Buchanan

Nay: 2 - Elenbaas and Stremler

Absent: 1 - Boyle

Amendment number 36 (amending Policy 10H-8)

Galloway moved to include amendment number 36.

The motion was seconded by Scanlon.

Galloway stated she is fine with changing the word “require” to something

different but this is getting at what the future of development is going to

need to look like. Impervious surface leads to increased stormwater runoff,

oftentimes containing chemicals that impair water bodies, so this is trying

to do a better job of using development strategies that improve buffers and

native shrubs and other sorts of ways to reduce impact.

Elenbaas moved to amend the motion to strike “require” and replace with

“encourage,” to change “to ensure increased development…” so that it

would say “minimize the effects of increase development so it does not

lead to increased impermeable surfaces and increased stormwater runoff,”

and so that the first sentence would read:

Encourage the use of low-impact sustainable development strategies

to minimize the effects of increased development so it does not lead

to increased impermeable surfaces and increased stormwater runoff.

The motion was seconded by Stremler.

Elenbaas stated his concern is that the way it read before would be a

complete and utter prohibition on impermeable surfaces. What we want to

do is make sure that any impervious surface can be mitigated in a way that it

does not increase runoff, and his language would look at this under a lens

that would say they are not going to stop growth, but are going to look for a

solution and do it intelligently.

Elenbaas amended his motion so that the first sentence reads:

Encourage the use of low-impact sustainable development strategies

to minimize the effects of increased development in order to

mitigate the effects of increased impermeable surfaces and

increased stormwater runoff.

Mark Personius, Planning and Development Services Department Director,

discussed the motion with councilmembers. They discussed whether there

is any concern about the term “low-impact sustainable development" as

opposed to "low-impact development" and if it impacts implementation of a

policy like this, if the way this is worded hinders Planning’s ability to have

incentives in place for people to implement best practices that would

replace impervious surfaces, and how this policy might affect how the

Planning Department does business.

The motion to amend the motion carried by the following vote:

Aye: 5 - Rienstra, Scanlon, Stremler, Elenbaas, and Galloway

Nay: 1 - Buchanan

Absent: 1 - Boyle

The motion to include amendment number 36 as amended carried by the

following vote:

Aye: 4 - Scanlon, Elenbaas, Galloway, and Rienstra

Nay: 2 - Stremler and Buchanan

Absent: 1 - Boyle

Elenbaas stated he voted yes for this because it was amending an existing

policy, and not voting yes would have left the policy un-amended.

Amendment number 37 (amending Policy 10H-10)

Galloway moved to include amendment number 37.

The motion was seconded by Scanlon.

Galloway stated the State obligates them to achieve no net loss, so

encouraging net gain is just aiming to achieve a little higher than that, and

she thinks it is their moral responsibility to do the best they can for the

environment.

Councilmembers spoke in favor of the motion, and they and Mark

Personius discussed what the incentives are to encouraging a net gain of

ecological function in critical areas.

The motion carried by the following vote:

Aye: 6 - Stremler, Buchanan, Elenbaas, Galloway, Rienstra, and Scanlon

Nay: 0

Absent: 1 - Boyle

Amendment number 38 (amending Policy 10H-12)

Galloway moved to include number 38 but with the staff's recommendation,

which would involve amending the first sentence of section 5 so that it

reads:

Focus on the Lake Whatcom watershed as a high priority in

implementing stormwater management programs and ensuring the

proper function of public and private stormwater systems.

The motion was seconded by Rienstra.

Galloway stated she is fine with the staff recommendation for the language

and that it gets at what she is looking to achieve.

Councilmembers discussed how the staff recommended language around

“ensuring the proper function of…” would be different than the language

originally proposed by Galloway (“including inspections of…”), and that the

staff’s language reads more as a value, while Galloway’s language was the

implementation of that value. It is also likely a body of work that has been

identified since the last major Comprehensive Plan update.

The motion carried by the following vote:

Aye: 6 - Buchanan, Elenbaas, Galloway, Rienstra, Scanlon, and Stremler

Nay: 0

Absent: 1 - Boyle

Amendment number 39 (new Policy 10H-13)

Galloway moved to approve the staff recommendations for amendment

number 39, for new Policy 10H-13.

She stated it would break the first and second sentence into two policies

(new policies 10H-13 and 10H-14), replace “toxics” with “water quality,”

and remove the work “toxic” from “toxic pollution.”

The motion was seconded by Scanlon.

Elenbaas stated he believes these goals are unnecessary and a sort of

unfunded mandate for staff where they already have a fairly well

thought-through program that the public participates in, and that does not

preclude anyone else from doing it as well.

Gary Stoyka, Public Works Department, answered whether presenting

technical expertise already occurs in the Marine Resources Committee, and

whether it would require county staffing or funding in order to be able to do

what the policy is saying.

Galloway stated there are no specific fiscal requests from this at this time

but it is just reinforcing what they do and also giving them the grounds to

continue and expand that should the need arise.

Scanlon stated he is concerned about potentially adding unfunded staffing

levels or costs to the county.

The motion failed by the following vote:

Aye: 3 - Galloway, Rienstra, and Buchanan

Nay: 3 - Elenbaas, Scanlon, and Stremler

Absent: 1 - Boyle

Kiana Oos, Council Office Staff, stated the proposed amendment was

already preliminarily approved at the Council’s last April 7 meeting, so she

wanted to clarify if Council would like this policy to not be included in the

final ordinance or to be included in the form before the amendments that

were made today.

Elenbaas moved to not include (strike) new policy 10H-13.

The motion was seconded by Scanlon.

The motion carried by the following vote:

Aye: 4 - Rienstra, Scanlon, Stremler, and Elenbaas

Nay: 2 - Galloway and Buchanan

Absent: 1 - Boyle

Amendment number 40 (Policy 10I-5)

Galloway moved to include the original staff recommendation for Policy

10I-5 (amendment number 40) which reads:

Encourage water users and purveyors to quantify water use and make

the data publicly available to promote conservation.

The motion was seconded by Elenbaas.

Galloway stated from what she can tell, the original Chapter 10 language

said “Quantify water use to promote conservation.” Then, it appears as a part

of this update, staff's recommendation was, as read into the record (to

"encourage"). Then, it appears the Planning Commission struck this policy

in its entirety. So, if they vote no on this motion, it would revert back to the

Planning Commission recommendation, which just removed this policy

altogether. The “encourage” part reflects the original staff recommendation

prior to the Planning Commission's review of the chapter.

Stoyka answered, given the previous concerns, if there are any concerns

about using the term “encourage” here or about the text shown on the

screen, and he stated he does not think there are any issues.

Elenbaas stated he would vote yes on this version of the language, but he

would rather just not include the language at all. A no vote on this motion

would go back to the Planning Commission recommendation which is

nothing (to remove the policy).

Councilmembers discussed how this proposed language came to be, that the

Planning Unit changed the original staff version to insert the word

“require,” if they should just go back to the 2016 language for this policy

which read, “Quantify water use to promote conservation,” what a “water

user” is, and whether data being publicly available applies to private systems

as well as public.

The motion failed by the following vote:

Aye: 3 - Rienstra, Buchanan, and Galloway

Nay: 3 - Scanlon, Stremler, and Elenbaas

Absent: 1 - Boyle

Elenbaas moved that, pursuant to the Planning Commission's

recommendation, they remove Policy 10I-5.

The motion was seconded by Stremler.

Stoyka answered how the 2016 policy was put into practice, and stated they

do not do anything with quantifying water use and he does not think the

Health Department does either. He stated he thinks the purpose was to be a

tool for the water user.

Scanlon stated he would like to go back to the language which says,

"Quantify water use to promote conservation" if this motion does not pass.

Elenbaas spoke about how he might amend the language if this motion fails,

but that he is partial to the deletion of it.

The motion failed by the following vote:

Aye: 2 - Stremler and Elenbaas

Nay: 4 - Scanlon, Buchanan, Galloway, and Rienstra

Absent: 1 - Boyle

Scanlon moved to revert back to the 2021 version where Policy 10I-5

simply states, "Quantify water use to promote conservation."

The motion was seconded by Galloway.

Elenbaas suggested a friendly amendment to amend the policy to say,

“Encourage quantification of water use to help promote conservation."

Scanlon accepted the friendly amendment.

The motion carried by the following vote:

Aye: 6 - Stremler, Buchanan, Elenbaas, Galloway, Rienstra, and Scanlon

Nay: 0

Absent: 1 - Boyle

Amendment number 41(new Policy 10J-9)

Galloway moved to include amendment number 41 but to amend it so that it

reads:

Policy 10J-9: Update County phosphorus neutral development code

in the Lake Whatcom watershed, with a goal of meeting or exceeding

the standards set by the corresponding City of Bellingham policies

to ensure they are protective of lake water quality.

The motion was seconded by Scanlon.

Galloway stated she believes it is really important to be clear that our goal

is to meet or exceed the city of Bellingham's policy. Primarily the interest

is in consistency, as well as making sure that we are updating our code using

best available science and best management practices.

Elenbaas stated he does not want this version but also thinks they do not

need this language.

Stoyka answered why staff recommended to remove “a goal of meeting or

exceeding the standards set by the corresponding City of Bellingham

policies,” and stated the way he read it was that the goal was just to meet

whatever the City of Bellingham did, instead of the goal being the

development codes need to be updated because they represent a water

quality issue. He does not, however have concerns with the way the

proposed amendment is written.

Elenbaas stated he would prefer language that says they are “in alignment

with” and to do the best that they can.

The motion carried by the following vote:

Aye: 4 - Buchanan, Galloway, Rienstra, and Scanlon

Nay: 2 - Elenbaas and Stremler

Absent: 1 - Boyle

Amendment number 42 (new Policy 10J-10)

Elenbaas moved that they strike new Policy 10J-10.

The motion was seconded by Stremler.

Elenbaas stated staff did a wonderful job in their comments and he read the

staff comment. Staff recommends deleting the policy.

Galloway stated her interest in this is just getting to an improved

monitoring and inspection of both public and private stormwater systems. If

a previous amendment got to that she is agnostic if they want to strike it or

propose something slightly different.

The motion failed by the following vote:

Aye: 3 - Elenbaas, Scanlon, and Stremler

Nay: 3 - Buchanan, Galloway, and Rienstra

Absent: 1 - Boyle

Galloway moved to amend Policy 10J-10 so that it reads:

Use BMPs as approved by the Department of Ecology and ensure

proper functionality to minimize development impacts within the

Lake Whatcom watershed through regular monitoring and

inspections of public and private stormwater systems.

The motion was seconded by Scanlon.

Galloway stated she is trying to incorporate staff's comments and retain the

interest in what this is hoping for, which is minimizing development

impacts on the drinking watershed, and doing that through regular

monitoring and inspections of stormwater systems.

Stoyka stated the biggest concern was that it was implying that the county

was out there testing or determining what BMPs work, and they really do

not do that. He thinks this addresses the main concern though.

Scanlon suggested a friendly amendment to strike "and ensure proper

functionality" from the stated motion so it would read:

Use BMPs as approved by the Department of Ecology to minimize

development impacts within the Lake Whatcom watershed through

regular monitoring and inspections of public and private stormwater

systems.

Galloway accepted the friendly amendment.

The motion carried by the following vote:

Aye: 5 - Elenbaas, Galloway, Rienstra, Scanlon, and Buchanan

Nay: 1 - Stremler

Absent: 1 - Boyle

Amendment number 50 (new Policy 10K-9)

Elenbaas moved that they remove Policy 10K-9.

The motion was seconded by Stremler.

Elenbaas stated if staff has any concern over this language (which they do)

they should just not include it because they have all of Chapter 11 which

covers shoreline permitting and development.

Galloway stated she is fine striking this and moving to the next amendment.

The motion carried by the following vote:

Aye: 6 - Galloway, Rienstra, Scanlon, Stremler, Buchanan, Elenbaas

Nay: 0

Absent: 1 - Boyle

Amendment numbers 56 and 57 (new policies 10L-7 and 10L-8)

Elenbaas moved to strike amendment numbers 56 and 57 (new policies

10L-7 and 10L8).

The motion was seconded by Stremler.

Elenbaas stated this is specific to armoring and he believes it is all covered

in Chapter 11, which is probably the appropriate place for it to be covered.

Galloway stated she would rather just approve the Planning staff

recommendation for revised language on this. She stated Lucas Clark,

Planning and Development Services Department, just sent an email that

included alternative language for Policy 10L-7 and a minor amendment to

10L-8.

Elenbaas cautioned against operating outside of the Shoreline Management

Program process by addressing shoreline management in Chapter 10.

The motion failed by the following vote:

Aye: 2 - Stremler and Elenbaas

Nay: 4 - Rienstra, Scanlon, Buchanan, and Galloway

Absent: 1 - Boyle

Galloway moved to include the staff revised versions for amendment

numbers 56 and 57 as follows:

Policy 10L-7 Explore ways to fund an updated mapping of shoreline

armoring and/or use Ecology's updated shoreline conditions

inventory to create a database of existing shoreline armoring.

Policy 10L-8: Ensure that amendments to the Shoreline Master

Program and Critical Areas Ordinances protect marine shorelines.

Seek ways to reduce existing shoreline armoring, prevent expansion

that would impact forage fish spawning and salmonid migratory

pathways, and re-establish or widen intertidal corridors for migrating

juvenile salmon that have been lost due to shoreline armoring.

The motion was seconded by Rienstra.

Mark Personius, Planning and Development Services Department Director,

answered questions about whether they are concerned that making changes

in Chapter 10 might open it up to challenge or review since they have an

approved shoreline management plan (SMP) through the Department of

Ecology, or if policies in Chapter 10 would be considered as changing the

SMP.

Scanlon spoke about how mapping some of these systems may be helpful as

it relates to sea level rise.

Rienstra stated she is reading it a little bit differently and does not share the

concerns she is hearing.

The motion carried by the following vote:

Aye: 4 - Scanlon, Buchanan, Galloway, Rienstra

Nay: 2 - Stremler and Elenbaas

Absent: 1 - Boyle

Amendment number 59 (amending Policy 10L-12, renumbered to 10L-14)

Galloway moved to amend the last sentence of Policy 10L-14 to reflect

staff comments so that the policy reads:

In coordination with FLIP, consider establishing formal channel

migration zones for the Nooksack River, precluding additional

development within these zones, actively pursue voluntary

acquisitions to promote flood risk reduction and riverine and marine

shoreline restoration. Work with property owners on levee setback

projects to provide more flood storage and improve natural river

processes and meandering, riparian buffers, and salmon habitat.

The motion was seconded by Scanlon.

Councilmembers discussed the motion and Elenbaas stated he hopes they

never interpret the word “development” to include things that they do and

need to do within those areas outside of housing (such as roads, agricultural

buildings, or other things that would prevent the ability to farm).

Gary Stoyka answered what the difference is in the previous definition

which said “formal meander limits” and the current proposed language

which says “formal channel migration zones.” He stated he thinks “channel

migration zones” is a legal definition, and that they did not think the

language here was problematic.

The motion carried by the following vote:

Aye: 6 - Stremler, Buchanan, Elenbaas, Galloway, Rienstra, and Scanlon

Nay: 0

Absent: 1 - Boyle

Elenbaas stated he would like the Flood Control Zone District Advisory

Committee to weigh in to the Council more on language like this since

there are quite a few new people on the advisory committee, and Stoyka

stated the committee did weigh in over a year ago but they can see if they

can get input on the later version of this.

Amendment number 60 (new Policy 10L-15)

Galloway moved to include amendment number 60 and to reflect the staff's

comments so that Policy 10L-15 would read:

During and after emergency flood repairs, ensure that any repair is

mitigated to applicable permitting conditions to reduce impacts to

salmon habitat.

The motion was seconded by Scanlon.

Galloway stated as they recover in big infrastructure ways, they should be

redeveloping that infrastructure in a way that minimizes impacts to salmon

habitat.

Stoyka answered what kind of influence the County has over the Army

Corps of Engineers if they are doing emergency repairs on the levees which

would be impacting salmon habitat, and if he sees any ability for the County

to follow through with this goal in a situation like that. He stated he was

thinking more about projects that the County implements. The point was to

clarify that they mitigate to the permitting conditions, and depending on

what is approved in the permit, that may or may not be fully mitigated.

Elenbaas suggested a friendly amendment to amend the motion so that the

policy would address County work and would read:

During and after emergency flood repairs conducted by Whatcom

County, ensure that any repair is mitigated to applicable permitting

conditions to reduce impacts to salmon habitat.

Galloway accepted the friendly amendment.

Stoyka answered whether it would apply to maintenance and operation work

on roads, and stated he does not believe so. It would likely be for projects

that have some sort of in-water work or salmon-bearing stream impact

work. He answered questions about how he would interpret “emergency” in

this policy.

The motion carried by the following vote:

Aye: 6 - Buchanan, Elenbaas, Galloway, Rienstra, Scanlon, and Stremler

Nay: 0

Absent: 1 - Boyle

Amendment number 65 (new Policy 10N-2)

Elenbaas stated he is wondering if this is an attempt by the Marine

Resources Committee (MRC) to get more staff time and more County

budget to do more of what they want to do, but that the Council has to

balance that with the needs of other committees.

Scanlon moved to include amendment number 65 (new Policy 10N-2).

The motion was seconded by Elenbaas.

Galloway stated, if the concern is directly referencing the MRC, they could

strike that reference, but the question becomes whether they still feel that

the projects and data within the cited examples are worthy of incorporating

in or informing county planning processes. If there is a way to amend this to

get to a yes, she would interested in that.

Councilmembers discussed what this is trying to fix, how it relates to

policies in amendment numbers 66-71, when the Marine Resources

Committee started, and if they provided comments on the last

Comprehensive Plan.

Gary Stoyka stated they have been around since 1999 or 2000 and have been

pretty good about providing comments on the Comprehensive Plan.

Elenbaas stated the proposed policy almost seems like it is trying to use

citizen science instead of the State’s or NOAA’s data, and seems like a

large shift in policy.

Galloway suggested a friendly amendment to amend the policy so that it

reads:

Incorporate projects and data collection such as kelp and eelgrass

monitoring, forage fish monitoring, Olympia oyster restoration,

water quality monitoring, harmful algal bloom monitoring, beach

cleanups, mussel watch, and European green crab monitoring to

inform County planning processes.

Councilmembers discussed the suggested friendly amendment.

Scanlon amended his motion to add in “the Marine Resources

Committee’s” before the word “kelp” so that the policy would read:

Incorporate projects and data collection such as the Marine

Resources Committee’s kelp and eelgrass monitoring, forage fish

monitoring, Olympia oyster restoration, water quality monitoring,

harmful algal bloom monitoring, beach cleanups, mussel watch, and

European green crab monitoring to inform County planning

processes.

Elenbaas stated he would still prefer to not incorporate these goals.

The motion carried by the following vote:

Aye: 4 - Buchanan, Galloway, Rienstra, and Scanlon

Nay: 2 - Elenbaas and Stremler

Absent: 1 - Boyle

Amendment numbers 66-67 (new policies 10N-4 and 10N-5)

Scanlon moved to include amendment numbers 66 and 67.

The motion was seconded by Buchanan.

Elenbaas stated there are many things that can harm eelgrass populations

that the County cannot regulate or do anything about, and cautioned against

adding the language because it is out of the county's purview and control.

Addressing the shoreline management plan is in their purview and control

and they have already gone over that rigorously. He also spoke about

funding.

Scanlon amended the motion to change 10N-5 (amendment 67) to say

"Explore external grant opportunities to fund mapping Whatcom County

eelgrass and kelp beds to establish a baseline dataset, and add this data to

statewide maps used in planning and development.”

Both polices would read:

Policy 10N-4: Conserve kelp and eelgrass as critical marine

resources, recognizing their importance in providing diverse and

productive ecosystems, contribute to carbon and nutrient

sequestration, and help protect and stabilize coastal environments.

Ensure any potential commercial opportunities are pursued

responsibly.

Policy 10N-5: Explore external grant opportunities to fund mapping

Whatcom County eelgrass and kelp beds to establish a baseline

dataset, and add this data to statewide maps used in planning and

development.

Galloway stated the MRC is predominately funded by State and Federal

grants and it leverages volunteer work, so she does not see this as having an

impact on local funds.

The motion carried by the following vote:

Aye: 4 - Galloway, Rienstra, Scanlon, and Buchanan

Nay: 2 - Elenbaas and Stremler

Absent: 1 - Boyle

Amendment number 69 (new Policy 10N-7)

Scanlon moved to include amendment number 69 (Policy 10N-7).

The motion was seconded by Galloway.

Elenbaas suggested a friendly amendment to strike the word “decreasing”

before “water quality” so that the policy reads:

Monitor current trends for population growth, aging infrastructure,

water quality, and climate change, and how these factors impact the

state of marine resources and reduced populations of salmon, forage

fish, kelp, and eelgrass. Measure county progress towards

restoration.

Scanlon accepted the friendly amendment.

The motion carried by the following vote:

Aye: 5 - Galloway, Rienstra, Scanlon, Buchanan, and Elenbaas

Nay: 1 - Stremler

Absent: 1 - Boyle

Cathy Halka, Clerk of the Council, stated staff can prepare another

preliminary Council draft for their next meeting on this chapter and it will

reflect the items that are still pending.

This agenda item was DISCUSSED AND MOTION(S) APPROVED.

MOTION 1

Motion approved to begin review of Chapter 10 using preliminary Council draft dated April 14th, 2026, which is the

current version of the chapter with Planning Commission recommendations from January 2026 and additional edits

proposed by Council members as listed on the chart of proposed Council changes.

MOTION 2 – Amendment number 27

Motion approved to amend the second to last sentence to strike "recent trends in monitoring show that these

improvements of the past may be at risk" and insert "water quality improvements may be at risk" so that the sentence

would read, “Unfortunately, water quality improvements may be at risk.”

MOTION 3

Motion approved to amend the motion to include amendment number 32 to change the word "require" to "encourage"

in amendment number 32.

MOTION 4

Motion approved to include amendment number 32 from the amendment chart to add new policy 10F-6 as amended

which reads:

Encourage the use of low-impact sustainable development strategies to ensure water quality and quantity. Strategies

may include installing water catchment systems.

MOTION 5

Motion approved to amend the motion to include amendment number 36 (10H-8) to change the first sentence so that

it reads:

Encourage the use of low-impact sustainable development strategies to minimize the effects of increased development

in order to mitigate the effects of increased impermeable surfaces and increased stormwater runoff.

MOTION 6

Motion approved to include amendment number 36 in the amendment chart as amended (in motion 5).

MOTION 7

Motion approved to include amendment number 37 from the chart of amendments.

MOTION 8

Motion approved to include amendment number 38 (from the chart of amendments) with the staff's recommendation

to amend the first sentence of section 5 so that that sentence reads:

Focus on the Lake Whatcom watershed as a high priority in implementing stormwater management programs and

ensuring the proper function of public and private stormwater systems.

MOTION 9

Motion approved to strike new policy 10H-13 (amendment number 39).

MOTION 10

Motion approved to amend Policy 10I-5 so that it reads:

Encourage quantification of water use to help promote conservation.

MOTION 11

Motion approved to include amendment number 41 and to amend it so that it reads:

Policy 10J-9: Update County phosphorus neutral development code in the Lake Whatcom watershed, with a goal of

meeting or exceeding the standards set by the corresponding City of Bellingham policies to ensure they are protective

of lake water quality.

MOTION 12

Motion approved to amend Policy 10J-10 so that it reads:

Use BMPs as approved by the Department of Ecology to minimize development impacts within the Lake Whatcom

watershed through regular monitoring and inspections of public and private stormwater systems.

MOTION 13

Motion approved that they remove Policy 10K-9 (amendment number 50).

MOTION 14

Motion approved to include the staff revised versions for amendment numbers 56 and 57 so that they read:

Policy 10L-7 Explore ways to fund an updated mapping of shoreline armoring and/or use Ecology's updated shoreline

conditions inventory to create a database of existing shoreline armoring.

Policy 10L-8: Ensure that amendments to the Shoreline Master Program and Critical Areas Ordinances protect

marine shorelines. Seek ways to reduce existing shoreline armoring, prevent expansion that would impact forage fish

spawning and salmonid migratory pathways, and re-establish or widen intertidal corridors for migrating juvenile salmo

that have been lost due to shoreline armoring.

MOTION 15

Motion approved to amend the last sentence of Policy 10L-14 (amendment number 59) so that the policy reads:

In coordination with FLIP, consider establishing formal channel migration zones for the Nooksack River, precluding

additional development within these zones, actively pursue voluntary acquisitions to promote flood risk reduction and

riverine and marine shoreline restoration. Work with property owners on levee setback projects to provide more

flood storage and improve natural river processes and meandering, riparian buffers, and salmon habitat.

MOTION 16

Motion approved to include amendment number 60 to reflect the staff's comments so that new Policy 10L-15 would

read:

During and after emergency flood repairs conducted by Whatcom County, ensure that any repair is mitigated to

applicable permitting conditions to reduce impacts to salmon habitat.

MOTION 17

Motion approved to include amendment number 65 (new Policy 10N-2) as amended so that it reads:

Incorporate projects and data collection such as the Marine Resources Committee’s kelp and eelgrass monitoring,

forage fish monitoring, Olympia oyster restoration, water quality monitoring, harmful algal bloom monitoring, beach

cleanups, mussel watch, and European green crab monitoring to inform County planning processes.

MOTION 18

Motion approved to include amendment numbers 66 and 67 (new policies 10N-4 and 10N-5) and amend number 67

so that the policies read:

Policy 10N-4: Conserve kelp and eelgrass as critical marine resources, recognizing their importance in providing

diverse and productive ecosystems, contribute to carbon and nutrient sequestration, and help protect and stabilize

coastal environments. Ensure any potential commercial opportunities are pursued responsibly.

Policy 10N-5: Explore external grant opportunities to fund mapping Whatcom County eelgrass and kelp beds to

establish a baseline data set, and add this data to statewide maps used in planning and development.

MOTION 19

Motion approved to include amendment number 69 (Policy 10N-7) as amended to strike the word “decreasing” so

that it reads:

Policy 10N-7: Monitor current trends for population growth, aging infrastructure, water quality, and climate change,

and how these factors impact the state of marine resources and reduced populations of salmon, forage fish, kelp, and

eelgrass. Measure county progress towards restoration.

AB2026-262

Discussion and preliminary Council direction on Whatcom County Comprehensive

Plan Chapter 12, Climate

This agenda item was NOT ACTED UPON.

AB2026-263

Discussion and preliminary Council direction on Whatcom County Comprehensive

Plan Appendices (Appendix A: Glossary, Appendix B: Acronyms, Appendix D:

Bibliography, Appendix E: 20-Year Capital Facilities Plan, Appendix G: Airport

Overlay Zones, Appendix H: Airport Imaginary Surfaces, Appendix I: Housing

Needs Analysis, Appendix J: Subsidized Housing Needs and Funding) and Foothills

Subarea Plan Amendments

This agenda item was NOT ACTED UPON.

Items Added by Revision

There were no agenda items added by revision.

Other Business

Councilmembers and Cathy Halka, Clerk of the Council, discussed the

possibility of adding another meeting to discuss this and the other chapters

they did not get to today on April 21st.

Adjournment

The meeting adjourned at 4:35 p.m.

ATTEST:

WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL

WHATCOM COUNTY, WA