Lake Whatcom Policy Group

**Mike Kan, on forest management plan progress:** "84% of the respondents express support for our objectives, which makes sense because we had a round one of engagement on the plan where we kind of truth what staff thought was important out in the watershed with our water quality objectives for and goals for the forest in the watershed." **Morgan R, on climate vulnerability assessment goals:** "One of the things that I'm really interested in and we'll see how it turns out is integrated water resource conceptual model that helps to define all the different, you know, legal, political, social, hydrologic mechanisms that go into managing the lake, the watershed and the system." **Skip Williams, on administrative improvements:** "I do like the idea of having the chair more involved in some of the agenda setting. But council member Donovan said, that's not how we do it at our council level, and it's helpful. So then we're not caught off guard, and we can help say, oh, actually, we think t

## Meeting Overview The Lake Whatcom Policy Group convened on December 3, 2025, for what proved to be both a routine year-end planning session and a moment of transition. The meeting brought together representatives from Bellingham City Council, Whatcom County Council, and the Lake Whatcom Water and Sewer District, along with key staff members and one Southern Valley resident. The agenda focused on project updates, administrative improvements for 2026, and scheduling the coming year's meetings. The session had a distinctly end-of-year feel, with cookies on the table and acknowledgments for departing members. County Councilmember Donovan Walker was completing his service on the policy group, as was Brian Hatchell from the City of Bellingham's communications team, whose last day was that very meeting. Despite the transitions, the group demonstrated a clear appetite for more structured coordination and expanded engagement in the coming year. ## Project Updates: Mussels, Forests, and Climate Staff began with updates on three major initiatives, starting with the Lake Whatcom freshwater invasive mussel rapid response plan. City staff member Mike Kan reported that the plan had successfully navigated the adoption process across all three jurisdictions. "The Lake Whatcom freshwater, invasive freshwater mussel rapid response plan was completed and then adopted by city council on October 21st with a joint resolution shared by the Whatcom Water and Sewer District as well as Whatcom County," Kan explained. The Lake Whatcom Water and Sewer District had adopted it on October 29th, with Whatcom County Council scheduled to take action on December 9th. With the plan formally in place, attention was turning to practical implementation. "We are kind of looking what to do next. You know, you've got a nice plan on the shelf," Kan said. Staff was researching permit requirements that would be triggered during actual implementation and exploring tabletop exercises with the Department of Fish and Wildlife. "We're talking to Department of Fish and Wildlife about potentially doing some tabletop exercises or actual practical like mock response to see how the groups can actually form, if we can actually deploy the incident command in the way we've said that we would," Kan noted. The forest management plan update revealed significant progress through the public engagement process. After the October 1st presentation by Northwest Natural Resource Group consultants, staff had refined the plan based on comments and launched a two-week public comment period in November. The results were encouraging: "84% of the respondents express support for our objectives," Kan reported, attributing this strong support to earlier engagement that had aligned the plan with community priorities. The remaining concerns were largely predictable. When District representative Jeff Nackel asked about the 16% who didn't express support, Kan explained that recreation dominated the feedback. "I think that a lot of the comments were more about how to make this more of a rec plan than a forest management plan," he said. Some wanted more trail expansion and recreational facilities, while others approached forest management from a commercial timber perspective. Staff communications specialist Stephanie Asuncion clarified that the 16% included both opposition and neutral responses, with 88 people total participating in the November survey. The plan was now headed to the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) review process. "The next step is going to be taking the final plan through the SEPA non-project permitting phase," Kan explained, estimating a two-to-four-month timeline. This non-project SEPA review would be managed by Whatcom County Planning and Development Services and would trigger additional public comment and formal tribal consultation. If all went smoothly, the plan would go to city and county councils in the first quarter of 2026. Morgan R from the City of Bellingham provided a brief update on the climate vulnerability assessment, acknowledging that contract finalization had slipped past the year-end target. "I was really hoping to have it under contract by the end of the year, but it's going to be maybe a couple of weeks past," she said. The delay reflected the complexity of defining the scope with consultants, but Morgan was optimistic about launching the work quickly once contracts were signed. The assessment would include development of visual tools, with particular emphasis on what Morgan called an "integrated water resource conceptual model." This tool would map "all the different, you know, legal, political, social, hydrologic mechanisms that go into managing the lake, the watershed and the system." The goal was to help everyone understand climate impacts more holistically: "when you put that layer of climate over when you're pulling this string, how does it affect? What are the downstream effects?" ## Administrative Improvements: Structure and Coordination The meeting's most substantive discussion centered on improving the policy group's operations for 2026. Gary Stoika from Whatcom County Public Works introduced the topic by explaining ongoing confusion about meeting chairs and agenda development. The group had originally operated on a rotating chair system among the three jurisdictions, but cancellations and poor record-keeping had made the rotation inconsistent. "I think we kind of laid out who it was going to be for the year. And then when the meeting got canceled, that so maybe you were one of the meetings that got canceled and we canceled it. And so then it went to the next person," Stoika explained. City Councilmember Hannah Stone raised practical concerns about chair assignments spanning multiple jurisdictions. "Like sometimes if the chair is, say, at the county or the city, right, or the district, then does then the bulk of that work end up, is that then carried by that particular entity?" she asked. She also noted that new members wouldn't be known until January, potentially delaying chair assignments. The discussion evolved toward a more structured approach. County Councilmember Skip Williams suggested pre-assigning all meeting chairs for the year to enable better preparation and coordination. "If we just pre-assigned all the meetings next year to who is gonna do it so then each of us can be prepared for that," he said. This would allow chairs to decline meetings they couldn't attend and enable better agenda coordination. Lake Whatcom Water and Sewer District General Manager Justin Clary proposed a practical solution for agenda development. Rather than requiring chairs to attend lengthy Inter-jurisdictional Coordinating Team (ICT) meetings, staff liaisons would schedule separate briefings with upcoming chairs. "Maybe whoever's going to be chairing that meeting, then it's the Gary or the me or the whomever from the city is the kind of the management liaison. They schedule time with that individual that's going to chair the week prior," Clary explained. This approach drew support from the group, as it mirrored successful practices in their respective councils. County Councilmember Michael Kircher, participating online, noted that their council used similar coordination: "The administration and the staff meet and then at a certain point in time they bring in the council president to sit down and go over things." Williams raised another important point about recurring agenda items. Beyond better chair coordination, he wanted to see "round the room updates. So I'm not sure that there's like really an opportunity for each of us to give like updates on what we're working on, or what we're hearing in community or things like that." This would complement the staff project updates with policy-maker perspectives from each jurisdiction. The group also emphasized the importance of receiving materials in advance. "It's been super helpful to get these materials in advance," Williams said. "I like to read the materials before I get to my meeting. So I have time to think about questions, or I'll have an opportunity to do some of the outreach." ## 2026 Schedule: Balancing Routine and Innovation Staff presented a proposed schedule of six meetings in even-numbered months, each with suggested focus areas. The February meeting would serve as orientation for new members while covering the annual Aquatic Invasive Species (AIS) program report and forest practices updates. As Clary explained, "February meeting that one will have at least one new policy group member. So we'll have a brief orientation as to what the policy group is, what we do, what our purpose is." The April meeting would be replaced by the annual Joint Councils and Commissions meeting, with June reserved for follow-up discussions and the climate vulnerability assessment presentation. August would feature the group's first field tour in recent memory, focusing on stormwater treatment facilities. "I know there's been some interest voiced with touring some stormwater treatment facilities to see the different processes that the city and the county have implemented," Clary said, referencing successful forest management field trips with consultants. October remained open for emerging issues, while December would return to year-end planning and scheduling. The proposal drew general support, though Council Member Walker expressed particular enthusiasm for the field tour: "Never got a field trip whenever." Williams quickly corrected him: "You just did," referring to the forest management site visits. Walker raised important questions about foundational topics that newer members—and even veterans—might need refreshed on. "The landscape plan originally... I feel like I don't understand it really. And I was talking about having, have we had a presentation here?" Staff confirmed there had been a 2022 presentation, but Walker pressed for updated context. "Understanding what it is and where it came from would be worth a few minutes, especially if there's a new member or two." This led to broader discussion about orientation needs. As Walker put it, "What's the IACC? What was the that's when you're just talking about that... what do they do who's on and what are their history at the 30,000 foot level for for folks." District representative Nackel agreed: "Even the person that did this role before me kind of had that comment of, well, what do we do and what, you know, what are the things that." Stoika noted that staff had developed an orientation packet earlier in the year to address exactly these needs. "Jamie put together, because we had some of these things and other of these things were written in various places, would be put together that orientation packet that we can give any new people or recharging people." ## Representation and Emerging Issues The conversation turned to Southern Valley representation, with Williams asking whether the Sudden Valley Association had formally appointed a representative. Clary explained that board member Rick Asai had attended one or two meetings but had since resigned from his Southern Valley positions. "Rick Asai, one of their board members was assigned and he attended one or two policy group meetings and then... Oh, did he? I think if you being a Southern Valley resident." Williams emphasized the importance of this representation: "I think maybe Sudden Valley challenges have been underrepresented in some of these spaces, and I just want to make sure that they have representation." He highlighted specific issues affecting the community, including "the wildland urban interface, the fire wise type" concerns, stormwater inspections of private systems, and septic system management. Clary committed to reaching out to the returning general manager John Jensen to secure a new board appointment. "I can reach out to at least John and Jensen, the returning new GM, and see about getting somebody for the board appointed. I'll do that tomorrow," he said. Williams also suggested incorporating comprehensive plan discussions into the schedule, noting that the county's plan would likely be delivered to council by February. He wanted to ensure coordination between the comprehensive plan, forest management plan, and climate vulnerability assessment: "I just wanna make sure that they're all talking to each other and that they're all consistent and coordinated. Because it would make it wouldn't make sense like if the comp plan was saying one thing and then the management plan was saying something else." Walker raised questions about long-awaited phosphorus load modeling updates. "Where are we like with all of the new modeling for phosphorus load, or whatever that where are we with all that in terms of... Is it done? Do we have these like like new metrics based on new models?" City stormwater representative Eli Mackwood explained that the modeling was complete and under review by the Department of Ecology, but final approval was still pending. "We have been preparing to adopt the new calculations for some time, but we're still waiting on ecologies, okay, that that's going to satisfy the TMDL review process." The timeline remained uncertain, with ecology representatives providing no recent updates on their review progress. As Clary noted from recent data group meetings, "The ecology rep said he had not heard from those within ecology that were reviewing the model. So he didn't really have an update." The process was expected to continue into 2026, potentially providing another agenda item if ecology completed its review. ## Enforcement and Engagement In the final moments before adjournment, Williams raised the possibility of involving the sheriff's office in future discussions. "I'm wondering if we can figure out a way to bring in the sheriff's office and talk a little bit about some of the enforcement elements, about the AIS enforcement," he said, suggesting this could potentially be incorporated into the August field tour. ## Closing & What's Ahead The meeting concluded on a celebratory note, with Williams providing cookies and expressing appreciation for the collaborative work. Clary offered formal thanks to departing members: "Thank you, Council Member Donovan, for your many years of service on the policy group and on the county council. And also thank you, Brian Hatchell, whose last day with the city is today." The transition represented both an ending and a beginning for the Lake Whatcom Policy Group. While losing experienced members like Walker and Hatchell, the group was positioning itself for more structured and comprehensive engagement in 2026. The administrative improvements, expanded schedule, and commitment to better coordination suggested a maturing approach to the complex challenges facing Lake Whatcom and its watershed. As Walker adjourned the meeting with characteristic brevity—"Thanks, everybody. With that, we are adjourned"—the group faced a new year with clearer processes, broader engagement plans, and a strengthened commitment to the collaborative governance that makes the Lake Whatcom Policy Group unique in regional environmental management.

### Meeting Overview The Lake Whatcom Policy Group met on December 3, 2025, to discuss project updates and plan their 2026 meeting schedule. The meeting focused on completed work including the invasive mussel response plan, ongoing forest management planning, and administrative improvements for the coming year. ### Key Terms and Concepts **Lake Whatcom Policy Group:** A collaborative body with representatives from Bellingham City Council, Whatcom County Council, and Lake Whatcom Water and Sewer District that coordinates policy decisions affecting Lake Whatcom watershed management. **SEPA (State Environmental Policy Act):** Washington state's environmental review process that requires analysis of potential environmental impacts before major projects or policy decisions. The forest management plan will undergo this review. **Invasive Freshwater Mussel Rapid Response Plan:** A coordinated emergency response strategy to detect and respond to invasive zebra or quagga mussels if they are discovered in Lake Whatcom, which could devastate the lake ecosystem. **Forest Management Plan:** A comprehensive strategy for managing forests in the Lake Whatcom watershed using ecological principles to protect water quality while allowing for some recreation and forest health activities. **ICT (Interjurisdictional Coordinating Team):** A staff-level working group that coordinates technical work between the three jurisdictions and develops agenda items for the Policy Group meetings. **Climate Vulnerability Assessment:** An upcoming study to evaluate how climate change may affect Lake Whatcom and the surrounding watershed, informing future management decisions. **Sudden Valley Association:** A homeowner association representing a large residential development within the Lake Whatcom watershed that has a designated seat on the Policy Group. **TMDL (Total Maximum Daily Load):** Federal water quality standards that set limits on pollution entering water bodies. New phosphorus modeling for Lake Whatcom is under review by the state Department of Ecology. ### Key People at This Meeting | Name | Role / Affiliation | |---|---| | Donovan Walker | Whatcom County Council (outgoing) | | Hannah Stone | Bellingham City Council | | Skip Williams | Bellingham City Council | | Mike Kan | City of Bellingham Staff | | Morgan R | City of Bellingham Staff | | Gary Stoika | Whatcom County Public Works | | Justin Clary | Lake Whatcom Water and Sewer District General Manager | | Jeff Nackel | Lake Whatcom Water and Sewer District | | Eli Mackwood | City of Bellingham Stormwater | | Michael Kircher | Whatcom County Planning Department (online) | | Nancy Alienapp | Sudden Valley resident | | Various other staff | Communications and support roles | ### Background Context The Lake Whatcom Policy Group was created to coordinate management of the Lake Whatcom watershed, which serves as the primary drinking water source for over 100,000 people in Bellingham and surrounding areas. The watershed faces ongoing challenges from development pressure, climate change, invasive species threats, and balancing water quality protection with recreational access. The group brings together elected officials from three jurisdictions to make unified policy decisions rather than having each entity work separately. This meeting occurred at the end of 2025 as the group prepared to transition some members and plan their work for 2026, with several major planning documents nearing completion after years of development. ### What Happened — The Short Version The meeting covered three main project updates. First, staff reported that the invasive mussel response plan was successfully adopted by all three jurisdictions and will move into practical testing phases in 2026. Second, the forest management plan completed public comment (84% support) and will now go through state environmental review before coming to councils for final adoption in early 2026. Third, the climate vulnerability assessment is still being scoped but should launch soon with innovative visual tools. The group then spent significant time discussing administrative improvements, agreeing to rotate meeting chairs in advance and have chairs work with staff on agendas beforehand. They approved a six-meeting schedule for 2026 focusing on orientation, project updates, joint meetings, field tours, and year-end planning. The meeting concluded with thanks to outgoing members and staff. ### What to Watch Next • Forest management plan environmental review results and council adoption scheduled for first quarter 2026 • Launch of the climate vulnerability assessment with new visual modeling tools • New Policy Group membership appointments following election transitions • First 2026 meeting in February featuring new member orientation and annual invasive species program report ---

**Q:** Which three jurisdictions make up the Lake Whatcom Policy Group? **A:** City of Bellingham, Whatcom County, and Lake Whatcom Water and Sewer District. **Q:** What percentage of public commenters supported the forest management plan objectives? **A:** 84% expressed support for the objectives in the November public comment period. **Q:** What is the next step for the forest management plan after completing public comment? **A:** A SEPA (State Environmental Policy Act) non-project environmental review with Whatcom County PDS, expected to take 2-4 months. **Q:** When was the invasive mussel rapid response plan adopted by Bellingham City Council? **A:** October 21st, 2025, with a joint resolution shared by the other jurisdictions. **Q:** What practical next steps will be taken with the invasive mussel response plan in 2026? **A:** Research on permits, tabletop exercises, and mock response drills with Department of Fish and Wildlife to test the plan. **Q:** What administrative change did the Policy Group agree to implement for 2026? **A:** Pre-assign rotating meeting chairs for the entire year and have chairs work with staff on agenda development beforehand. **Q:** How many people responded to the November public comment survey on the forest management plan? **A:** 88 people took the survey during the two-week comment period. **Q:** What are the two main objections people had to the forest management plan? **A:** Wanting more focus on recreation and trail expansion, and wanting more emphasis on commercial timber harvesting. **Q:** What innovative tool is being developed for the climate vulnerability assessment? **A:** An integrated water resource conceptual model showing legal, political, social, and hydrologic mechanisms affecting lake management. **Q:** Who is the outgoing County Council member being thanked for their service? **A:** Donovan Walker, who served on the Policy Group for many years. **Q:** What is the ICT and what role does it play? **A:** The Interjurisdictional Coordinating Team is a staff-level group that coordinates technical work and develops Policy Group agenda items. **Q:** When is the forest management plan expected to come to councils for final adoption? **A:** Sometime in the first quarter of 2026, after completing the SEPA environmental review process. **Q:** How many meetings per year did the Policy Group agree to hold in 2026? **A:** Six meetings, scheduled for even-numbered months (February, April, June, August, October, December). **Q:** What special meeting format is planned for April 2026? **A:** A joint councils and commissions meeting will take place instead of the regular Policy Group meeting. **Q:** What field tour activity is being planned for August 2026? **A:** Tours of stormwater treatment facilities to see different processes implemented by the city and county. **Q:** What is the current status of the new phosphorus load modeling for Lake Whatcom? **A:** The modeling is complete but still under review by the state Department of Ecology to confirm it meets TMDL requirements. **Q:** Who is the new staff contact point for natural resources at the City of Bellingham? **A:** Mike Olinger, the Public Works deputy director, will serve as the interim point person while they hire a natural resources assistant director. **Q:** What position is currently vacant on the Policy Group? **A:** The Sudden Valley Association representative position, after Rick Asai resigned from their board. **Q:** When will the climate vulnerability assessment likely be ready for a Policy Group presentation? **A:** By June 2026, when it's scheduled as a presentation topic for the Policy Group. **Q:** What recurring agenda items did the group agree to add to future meetings? **A:** Round-the-room updates from each jurisdiction and discussion of topics for upcoming meetings. ---