# Training and Critical Planning for Lake Whatcom's Future The Water Resources Advisory Board convened on September 23, 2025, for a meeting that balanced mandatory compliance training with substantive policy discussions affecting the city's most vital resource: Lake Whatcom. Meeting at Pacific Street Operations with remote participation options, the board tackled annual transparency requirements while wrestling with complex questions about land management guidelines that will shape how the city protects its drinking water source for years to come. The evening brought together all nine board members — Bret Beaupain, Carl Benson, Rick Eggerth, Martin Kjelstad, Fiona McNair, Kirsten McDade, John Peppel, Alicia Toney, and Francesca White — along with city staff including Deputy Director Mike Olinger, Superintendent Michael Parelskin, and Senior Assistant City Attorney Sarah Chaplin. ## Open Government Training: The Foundation of Transparency Sarah Chaplin opened the meeting with the annual Open Public Meetings Act and Public Records Act training, a requirement under state law that serves as both legal obligation and civic principle. Speaking briskly through slides that normally take an hour, Chaplin compressed two laws into thirty minutes while emphasizing the fundamental purpose behind Washington's sunshine laws. "The principle is that all of our meetings are going to be open except in very limited circumstances," Chaplin explained, noting the historical context of the 1970s legislation born from the Watergate era. "We don't get to be the ones to decide what the people have a right to know. It's the people that have the right to know." The training covered crucial practical matters that board members navigate regularly. Chaplin warned about "serial meetings" — the inadvertent creation of a quorum through email chains that could violate the law. "It can be really easy to unintentionally, inadvertently violate the Open Public Meetings Act by email," she cautioned. "Somebody sends out something really interesting, and at first, that's passive receipt of information, an article, something like that, and then somebody replies all, and then everybody starts talking about something that's on the agenda for the next meeting." The records management portion proved particularly relevant for board members who don't have city email addresses. Chaplin advised creating separate folders for board-related correspondence. "Your personal stuff, never gonna be interested in what your emails with your family about what you're having for dinner," she assured them. "But your WRAB stuff that is within the scope of your WRAB duties, I recommend creating a separate folder where it's separate from all your other emails." ## Water System Plan: State Delays Continue The water system plan update brought disappointing news about continuing delays. Mike Olinger reported that the Department of Health's 90-day extension for reviewing the city's water system plan expired on September 24, but the state agency still hadn't completed its review. "We reached out to the Department of Health today, and the feedback we got was they're not done. So, we don't know what that means," Olinger explained. The holdup stems from the Department of Health waiting for confirmation from the Department of Ecology regarding the city's water source details. Olinger expressed optimism that once the state responds, the remaining comments should be relatively straightforward to address. "We've already responded with their initial comments, and we've addressed all of those already, so I think, really, what we're waiting for is for Department of Ecology to weigh in on it, and we're hoping to not have a whole lot of comments to have to address." The plan, which was expected to come before the council for final adoption in December 2025, remains in limbo as the city waits for state agencies to complete their coordination. ## Lake Whatcom Land Management: Updating Twenty-Year-Old Guidelines The meeting's substantive heart involved Michael Parelskin's presentation on proposed updates to the Lake Whatcom Land Acquisition and Preservation Program's land management guidelines. The current framework, established by Resolution 2005-09, has guided the city's stewardship of watershed lands for two decades, but changing pressures necessitate an update. "At the current time, for the 2025 to 2029 Lake Whatcom Management Program 5-year work plan, which was adopted by the Joint Councils and Commissions, part of that work plan was to redo the management program guidelines," Parelskin explained, noting that the board's bylaws require their input on any changes to land management policies. The numbers tell the story of the program's growth. When the original guidelines were adopted in 2005, the city owned 700 acres in the watershed. Today, that figure has grown to 3,600 acres, representing an investment of over $50 million. The management infrastructure has similarly expanded from one part-time real estate person to a dedicated team of six full-time staff members focused on acquisition and stewardship. ### The Need for Clearer Guidelines Parelskin identified a key problem with the existing document: "It's very difficult to find these specific, prohibited and allowed uses for the program properties." The 2005 document served primarily as justification for creating the acquisition program, containing extensive background information that's now codified in city municipal code. "A lot of what I feel about 2005-09 is a justification. That justification is codified now in the BMC." The new resolution aims to provide "clear, and concise, allowed and prohibited uses that are more accessible, because when people ask us for a trail, or what's allowed, it's difficult to point to this and be like, oh yeah, somewhere in that, we've got a set of rules." ### Board Discussion and Concerns The board engaged in detailed discussion about the proposed changes, raising several important concerns. John Peppel, apparently the only carryover from the original Watershed Advisory Board, appreciated the original document's approach to addressing tensions in the system. "I thought it did a nice job of laying out, you know, there are tensions in the system. But, fiscally, you're better off to address these tensions now, because it costs less to address the problem now versus build up other infrastructure." Peppel worried that the new document might be too accommodating to competing interests. "I see this document saying, well, we're just going to follow them. Whereas, how would that somehow to be brought up. That, where there are tensions, you know, maybe there's a committee on that that would try to figure out a path forward." Rick Eggerth raised practical questions about enforcement authority, noting that the original document had a section on jurisdiction and enforcement that wasn't carried forward. "We don't have legal... We can't send Bellingham PD out there to protect people," Parelskin acknowledged, explaining that the city must rely on the Whatcom County Sheriff for law enforcement on watershed properties outside city limits. ### Climate and Coordination Concerns The board also grappled with questions about climate resilience and inter-agency coordination. Rick Eggerth asked about coordination with the Department of Natural Resources on adjacent timber sales, noting that "the water doesn't know that it's supposed to stay on the DNR land when it goes down to the lake." Parelskin explained that such coordination efforts fall under the broader Lake Whatcom Management Program rather than the specific property management guidelines. "This is just focusing on the land that the city purchases for water quality protection in the Lake Whatcom Watershed... These guidelines guide staff on how to manage the properties that we own." ### Technical Details and Definitions The discussion revealed several technical issues requiring clarification. Rick Eggerth noted potential conflicts in forest management language, pointing out that "acceleration of forest succession is wildly different from forest management" when it comes to wildfire resilience strategies. Parelskin agreed to revise the language to reference "ecological forest management" to resolve the apparent contradiction. Board members also requested clarification of vague terms like "limited gathering," which could be interpreted differently by various users. Parelskin indicated that better language had been developed for similar issues in other documents and could be incorporated. ### Balancing Water Quality and Recreation When asked whether the guidelines strike an appropriate balance between water quality goals and recreational pressure, board members expressed general satisfaction with current management but uncertainty about future challenges. Kirsten McDade noted that the recreational guidelines seemed generic rather than specifically tailored to TMDL requirements. "To me, it sounded like the same guidelines as anywhere. You said you keep your dogs on the leash, and no unauthorized trails." Parelskin acknowledged that specific research linking trail impacts to water quality is limited, making it difficult to develop more targeted restrictions. "There's never been a study on how a trail impacts water quality... We have BMPs that manage water for... that are part of those trail standards, which I think is probably the best we can do." ## Aquatic Invasive Species: Simplifying the Response Plan The meeting concluded with a brief update on the aquatic invasive species rapid response plan. Parelskin explained that while the board had previously supported both the plan and a memorandum of understanding with partner agencies, the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife ultimately couldn't sign the MOU due to legal constraints under state law. The revised resolution simply supports plan adoption by the various councils and commissions without the formal MOU structure. "The MOU was taken out. That's because they couldn't do it," Parelskin explained. The board unanimously approved the revised resolution supporting the plan. ## Looking Forward As the meeting concluded at 7:33 PM, the board confirmed plans to meet in both October and November, with no December meeting scheduled. The land management guidelines will return with revisions incorporating the board's feedback, while the water system plan awaits state agency coordination. The evening exemplified the careful balance the Water Resources Advisory Board must strike between compliance with transparency laws and substantive policy deliberation. As guardians of Lake Whatcom — the drinking water source for over 120,000 residents — their decisions ripple through both immediate management practices and long-term watershed protection strategies. With climate change adding new pressures to forest systems, increasing recreational demands on public lands, and the ongoing challenge of meeting Total Maximum Daily Load requirements for Lake Whatcom, the board's work grows ever more complex. Yet as Sarah Chaplin reminded them at the training's outset, their commitment to open government ensures that this vital work remains accessible to the public whose water supply hangs in the balance.

### Meeting Overview The Water Resources Advisory Board met on September 23, 2025, to receive mandatory Open Public Meetings Act training, updates on the Water System Plan, and to discuss new land management guidelines for the Lake Whatcom watershed properties. The board also approved a revised resolution supporting the Lake Whatcom Freshwater Mussel Rapid Response Plan. ### Key Terms and Concepts **Lake Whatcom Land Acquisition and Preservation Program (LWLAPP):** City program that has spent over $50 million to purchase and protect over 3,600 acres of land in the Lake Whatcom watershed to protect drinking water quality. **Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL):** Federal water quality standard established in 2016 for Lake Whatcom to address low dissolved oxygen levels caused by excess phosphorus from development. **Open Public Meetings Act (OPMA):** Washington state law requiring government meetings to be open to the public, with limited exceptions for executive sessions. **Serial Meeting:** An OPMA violation that occurs when board members discuss official business via email or other means outside of public meetings, potentially reaching decisions without public oversight. **Public Records Act:** Washington law giving the public broad rights to access government records, including emails and text messages related to city business, even on personal devices. **Forest Succession:** Natural process of forest development that the city accelerates on its watershed properties to improve water quality protection. **Phosphorus Loading:** Primary water quality concern in Lake Whatcom, where excess phosphorus from development leads to low dissolved oxygen levels. **Climate Resilience:** Management approach to prepare watershed properties for future climate impacts, including wildfire risk and changing forest conditions. ### Key People at This Meeting | Name | Role / Affiliation | |---|---| | Rush Duncan | WRAB Chair | | Sarah Chaplin | Senior Assistant City Attorney / Public Records Officer | | Mike Olinger | Deputy Director of Public Works | | Michael Parelskin | Public Works Superintendent | | Michael Wilson | Assistant Director, Public Works Engineering | | Nelson Lee | Lake Whatcom Field Supervisor | | John Peppel | WRAB Member (longest-serving) | ### Background Context The City of Bellingham manages over 3,600 acres of land in the Lake Whatcom watershed to protect drinking water quality for over 120,000 residents. The current management guidelines date from 2005 and need updating to address contemporary pressures from recreation, climate change, and development. The Water System Plan, required by state law every six years, is currently under review by state agencies with final approval expected by December 2025. All city boards and commissions must receive annual training on open government laws to ensure transparency and public accountability. ### What Happened — The Short Version The board received required annual training on open meetings and records laws, emphasizing the importance of transparency and avoiding email discussions that could violate public meeting requirements. Staff provided an update that the Water System Plan approval is delayed while state agencies complete their review, with final adoption likely in December 2025. The main agenda item was discussion of proposed new land management guidelines to replace the 2005 resolution, focusing on clearer rules for public use while prioritizing water quality protection. The board provided feedback on strengthening language about coordination with other agencies and addressing policy tensions. Finally, they approved a revised resolution supporting the invasive mussel response plan after learning the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife could not sign the original memorandum of understanding. ### What to Watch Next - **October/November 2025:** Revised land management guidelines return to board with incorporated feedback - **December 2025:** Water System Plan likely to come before City Council for final adoption - **October 28, 2025:** Next WRAB meeting to approve minutes from July and September meetings ---

**Q:** What is the primary goal of the Lake Whatcom Land Acquisition and Preservation Program? **A:** To reduce phosphorus input into Lake Whatcom by purchasing, protecting, and stewarding undeveloped land to safeguard the city's drinking water supply. **Q:** How much money has the city spent on the watershed land acquisition program? **A:** Over $50 million to purchase and protect over 3,600 acres of land in the Lake Whatcom watershed. **Q:** What year was the original land management resolution adopted that is being replaced? **A:** Resolution 2005-09, adopted in 2005, nearly 20 years ago. **Q:** What is a "serial meeting" under the Open Public Meetings Act? **A:** When board members inadvertently discuss and take action on official business through email chains or other communications outside of public meetings, violating transparency requirements. **Q:** Who is Sarah Chaplin and what was her role at this meeting? **A:** Senior Assistant City Attorney and the City's Public Records Officer who provided required annual training on open meetings and records management laws. **Q:** Why is the Water System Plan approval delayed? **A:** The state Department of Health requested a 90-day extension that ended September 24, and they're still waiting for input from the Department of Ecology on water source details. **Q:** When is the Water System Plan likely to be adopted by City Council? **A:** December 2025, according to staff projections. **Q:** What major water quality issue affects Lake Whatcom? **A:** Low dissolved oxygen levels caused by excess phosphorus, leading to the lake being listed as impaired under federal Clean Water Act in 1997. **Q:** How many acres of watershed land does the city now own and manage? **A:** Over 3,600 acres, up from 700 acres when the original 2005 guidelines were created. **Q:** What happened with the invasive mussel rapid response plan? **A:** The Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife could not sign the original MOU due to legal restrictions, so the board approved a revised resolution supporting plan adoption without the MOU. **Q:** Who is John Peppel and why is he significant? **A:** A long-serving WRAB member who appears to be the only carryover from the previous Watershed Advisory Board, providing institutional memory. **Q:** What are the three main goals of the new land management resolution? **A:** Affirm the acquisition program goal, clarify management focus areas, and adopt clear rules for public use of the properties. **Q:** How often does Nelson Lee's crew inspect watershed properties? **A:** At least annually for all properties, with high-use properties visited up to 25 times per year depending on activity levels. **Q:** What enforcement authority does the city have on watershed properties outside city limits? **A:** Limited authority - they must contact Whatcom County Sheriff like any private property owner, as Bellingham Police cannot enforce on properties outside city jurisdiction. **Q:** When is the next board meeting scheduled? **A:** October 28, 2025, when they will approve minutes from both July and September meetings. ---