Whatcom County Council Special Committee of the Whole

**Ben Elenbaas, on Columbia Valley commercial development:** "This plan is business as usual. We're not changing anything to help that community have what all the other communities have. And it's just status quo. And so we're going to have 10 more years of the people in Kindle feeling like they're an afterthought still." **Ben Elenbaas, on development feasibility:** "Are we fooling ourselves by saying we have these areas where we could do this, but then when you put yourself on the ground, oh, well, we can't build here because, you know, that's like four old growth trees, and we can't do it here because there's 10 square feet of canary grass." **Jed Holmes, on flood project scope:** "We have probably close to half a billion dollars worth of projects that we're looking at. This ask was calculated based on what we thought we might be able to get from the State, and so we took $15 million and spread it across these project areas." **Mark Stremler, on flood mitigation approach:** "It's

# Whatcom County Council Charts Path Forward on Flood Mitigation and Housing Growth The Whatcom County Council's Special Committee of the Whole gathered on February 3rd, 2026, for three hours and four minutes of wide-ranging discussion that would shape the county's approach to disaster recovery, housing development, and long-term planning. Meeting in hybrid format with Council Vice Chair Jon Scanlon presiding, all seven council members were present — including Chair Kaylee Galloway joining remotely from Olympia where she was attending the legislative session. The meeting's gravity was evident from the outset. Just weeks after devastating November floods ravaged communities like Everson, Nooksack, and Sumas, the council faced pressing questions: How do we protect these communities from future disasters? How do we accommodate projected housing growth while preserving rural character? And how do we balance immediate needs with long-term planning requirements? ## Emergency Flood Mitigation Funding Request The session began with Jed Holmes from the County Executive's Office presenting what would become the day's most urgent business — a $15 million request to the state legislature for flood hazard mitigation projects. The ask wasn't just about money; it represented a coordinated strategy emerging from the Flood Integrated Planning (FLIP) process to address vulnerabilities exposed by the recent disasters. "In the wake of the floods, there's an extra urgency around addressing these projects that the County and our partners have been working on," Holmes explained to the council. The funding would support what he called "early action items" — an 18-month plan focused on two critical areas: acquiring key properties and easements, and advancing design work on flood protection projects. The scope was ambitious. Holmes outlined plans for widening river corridors, potentially designing protective berms around Everson and Nooksack, building flood walls, and flood-proofing critical infrastructure. Lower in the river system, the projects would include relocating or replacing tide gates on Jordan Creek, elevating access routes to Lummi Nation lands, and improving access to Nooksack tribal housing — particularly Potter Road, which the Nooksack tribe had specifically identified as needing attention. Council members peppered Holmes with questions that revealed both their support and their frustrations with the pace of progress. Council Member Rienstra wanted to understand the timeline: "Is this based on a cost that potentially includes all three of those, or a cost that would potentially address, like might include one of those areas?" Holmes's response was telling about the challenges facing flood planning: "We have probably close to half a billion dollars worth of projects that we're looking at. This ask was calculated based on what we thought we might be able to get from the State, and so we took $15 million and spread it across these project areas." Council Member Elenbaas pressed harder on whether the administration would support the more immediate actions that mayors from the affected cities were demanding. His concern was palpable: "When I was listening to what the mayors in Everson and Nooksack and Sumas were asking for for action, like now, like what are our plans this summer, I heard some things that you're not requesting funding for." Holmes assured him that widening the corridor near Everson would include sediment removal and increasing water conveyance — addressing the mayors' concerns about getting "into the river now" rather than waiting years for comprehensive solutions. But it was Council Member Stremler who voiced the frustration many felt: "As I read these following project areas, advanced design, advanced design, isn't that what they've been doing for years?" His concern went deeper — that millions of dollars would go toward more studies while communities remained vulnerable. Holmes acknowledged the tension: "There's been a lot of conceptual development and moving to the next phase of saying, what plan can we move forward for permitting? That's kind of, that's the next step. But yeah, we certainly have heard the frustration about how long it's taken to get to the actual design and entering the permitting phase." Council Member Boyle moved to support the funding request, and after discussion, the motion passed unanimously. But the conversation revealed the delicate balance between urgent community needs and the complex requirements of securing state funding and environmental permits. ## Comprehensive Plan Updates: Housing Growth vs. Rural Character The meeting's longest and most complex discussion centered on proposed changes to the county's comprehensive plan — a document that would guide development patterns for the next decade. Matt Aamot from Planning and Development Services walked the council through proposals for urban growth areas and rural lands, each carrying implications for housing affordability and community character. ### Birch Bay: Preserving Future Options The Birch Bay discussion revealed the intricate dance between growth accommodation and environmental protection. While the proposal made no changes to the urban growth area boundaries, it included significant zoning modifications designed to meet new state requirements for housing diversity. "The zoning code text would be amended to allow duplex, triplex, and fourplex development in the urban residential zone, and that would apply countywide," Aamot explained. Importantly, as Council Member Stremler confirmed, this wouldn't eliminate single-family options but would provide developers with more choices. The change was driven by House Bill 1220, which requires counties to accommodate housing for different income levels. As Aamot explained, "single family is for higher income families. Duplex, triplex, fourplex is for middle, moderate income families. Multifamily, high density is for lower income families." One significant change involved reducing development potential in some areas to preserve future urban capacity. About 100 acres in the existing UGA reserve would be rezoned from 5-acre to 10-acre minimums — essentially halving development potential in the near term to prevent premature subdivision that could complicate future urban development. Council Member Elenbaas questioned the fairness of this approach: "This is basically a take of what they assumed that they had for value in their property, which I understand down the road, their property will be even more valuable. But to somebody that is thinking about retiring in the next 10 years, you may have just cut the value of their property in half." ### Columbia Valley: Unfulfilled Commercial Promise The Columbia Valley discussion exposed one of the county's ongoing challenges: providing rural communities with basic commercial services. Council Member Elenbaas delivered an impassioned critique that went to the heart of rural planning philosophy. "When I talk to people that live up there, and the family members that I have that, you know, live up there or have owned land up there, it's like, they're driving to either Everson to go to the [store], or I guess Dodson's is back open again. But, you know, they're driving to Everson, they're driving to Dodson's, or they're driving all the way to Costco for just for groceries." His frustration was deeply personal and policy-driven: "To me, the amount of people that live up there deserve the opportunity to have some commerce up there. And the way I read the Growth Management Act is it dictates to us that we will provide that opportunity. And I guess my problem with this plan is the same problem that I had with this plan 10 years ago when we did the comp plan update." The discussion revealed a fundamental tension. The county had designated areas for commercial development, but Council Member Elenbaas questioned whether those designations were realistic given regulatory constraints. "Are we fooling ourselves by saying we have these areas where we could do this, but then when you put yourself on the ground, oh, well, we can't build here because, you know, that's like four old growth trees, and we can't do it here because there's 10 square feet of canary grass?" Council Member Buchanan added historical context, describing a past developer's serious effort to build a shopping center in the area: "There was actually schematics of a small shopping mall that would accompany the development. And it went as far as even doing some research around what kind of a tenant, anchor tenant might anchor something up there." That project failed due to water infrastructure challenges, illustrating the gap between zoning permissions and development reality that frustrated Elenbaas: "I want somebody at PDS to look me in the eye and look the Council in the eye and say, yes, we're serious that we want to make sure that this can happen. We're not just providing this area on the map and checking a box that it's done." ### Rural Housing: Balancing Growth and Character The rural lands discussion brought the housing diversity mandate into areas traditionally dominated by single-family development. The county's proposal would allow duplexes, triplexes, and fourplexes in rural residential zones when public water is available, but the Planning Commission had recommended limiting these options to just three specific Limited Areas of More Intensive Rural Development (LAMIRDs): Custer, Poland Guide, and Hinote's Corner. Council Member Scanlon moved to support the original, broader proposal, noting its connection to workforce housing needs: "This proposal ties into conversation from the Glacier and Maple Falls business community about how staff are unable to find affordable housing." The motion passed 6-0, with Council Member Galloway temporarily away, reflecting the council's recognition that rural communities needed more housing options for working families. ## Gravel Extraction for Flood Management In one of the meeting's most unexpected moments, Council Member Elenbaas introduced a motion that would ultimately pass, requesting the Executive to explore adding the shores of the Nooksack River to the Mineral Resource Lands Special District. This seemingly technical change carried significant implications for flood management. "The amendment would make it clear that gravel extraction could take place on the banks of the Nooksack River," Elenbaas explained. His reasoning connected directly to the flood discussions: removing sediment and gravel from river channels could improve water flow and reduce flood risk. The motion reflected frustration with regulatory complexity. As Mark Personius from Planning and Development Services explained, existing regulations provide a path for "gravel bar scalping" but "no one has ever attempted to take that permit path because of its challenging nature." Elenbaas acknowledged this wasn't a fully developed proposal but rather a signal of policy direction: "People in Nooksack and Everson want to know that this conversation is happening now, not in the distant future." The motion passed 6-0, representing the council's willingness to explore regulatory changes that could support both flood management and economic activity. ## Council Member Priorities: A Vision for Action The meeting concluded with council members sharing their individual priorities for the coming year, revealing a shared focus on housing, mental health, and community resilience in the wake of recent disasters. Council Member Boyle emphasized shelter expansion: "I am interested in increasing shelter options, including micro shelters, as everyone deserves a safe place to sleep." She wanted to see smaller communities follow Ferndale's lead in developing micro shelter programs. Council Member Stremler called for "a menu of options for long-term river management and flood mitigation" while also prioritizing expanded access to mental health treatment — a theme that resonated with multiple colleagues. Council Member Scanlon painted a picture of trauma in flood-affected communities: "I have heard from community members that kids are struggling in Everson and Sumas because they have been so traumatized by the floods. I would like to see a coalition effort similar to Birch Bay Blaine Thrives and other similar groups." Council Member Elenbaas outlined an ambitious regulatory reform agenda, including revising concomitant agreements, allowing ATV use on county roads, and clarifying departmental processes. His focus on practical governance changes reflected his broader frustration with regulatory barriers to development and resource management. The priority sharing revealed a council grappling with immediate crisis response while maintaining focus on longer-term systemic improvements in housing, healthcare, and community development. ## Looking Ahead As the meeting adjourned after more than three hours, the council had charted a course that balanced immediate flood recovery needs with longer-term growth management requirements. Their unanimous support for state flood mitigation funding demonstrated unity on emergency response, while their housing and commercial development discussions revealed ongoing tensions between regulatory compliance and community needs. The decisions made — from supporting duplex development in rural areas to exploring gravel extraction for flood management — reflected a council willing to push boundaries when community needs demanded creative solutions. Whether at the state capital seeking flood funds or in county planning meetings redesigning rural zoning, the council was clearly operating in crisis response mode while trying to build more resilient systems for the future. The real test would come in implementation: Could the county actually deliver on its promise to accommodate growth while protecting rural character? Could flood mitigation projects move from design to construction? And could regulatory systems adapt quickly enough to serve communities still recovering from disaster? The February 3rd meeting provided the policy framework; the coming months would reveal whether that framework could deliver tangible results for Whatcom County residents.

A structured study guide helping readers understand the meeting's content and context. ### Meeting Overview The Whatcom County Council held a Special Committee of the Whole meeting on February 3, 2026, to discuss three main items: updates on the 2026 State Legislative Session, urban growth area proposals for the comprehensive plan update, and councilmember project priorities. ### Key Terms and Concepts **FLIP (Flood Plate Integrated Planning):** A multi-jurisdictional planning process addressing flood mitigation in the Nooksack River watershed, involving county and partner agencies to develop coordinated flood response strategies. **Urban Growth Area (UGA):** Designated areas under the Growth Management Act where urban development is encouraged and where cities are expected to expand, with urban-level services like water and sewer systems. **UGA Reserve:** Areas designated for potential future inclusion in Urban Growth Areas when growth demands require expansion, but not immediately available for urban development. **LAMIRD (Limited Area of More Intensive Rural Development):** Special rural designations under the Growth Management Act for historic rural communities that allow slightly higher densities than typical rural areas. **House Bill 1220:** State legislation requiring counties to accommodate housing for different income levels, with duplex/triplex/fourplex housing considered "moderate income" options. **Land Capacity Analysis:** Technical planning study that calculates how much development can be accommodated within existing zoned areas, considering factors like critical areas and infrastructure. **Growth Management Act (GMA):** Washington State law requiring counties to direct growth to urban areas while protecting rural and resource lands. **Mineral Resource Lands (MRL):** Areas designated for long-term commercial mineral extraction, including gravel and sand operations. ### Key People at This Meeting | Name | Role / Affiliation | |---|---| | Jon Scanlon | Council Vice Chair, presiding over meeting | | Jed Holmes | County Executive's Office | | Matt Aamot | Planning and Development Services | | Mark Personius | Planning and Development Services Director | | Kaylee Galloway | Council Chair, attending remotely from Olympia | | Elizabeth Boyle | Councilmember | | Barry Buchanan | Councilmember | | Ben Elenbaas | Councilmember | | Jessica Rienstra | Councilmember | | Mark Stremler | Councilmember | ### Background Context This meeting occurred in the wake of devastating November 2021 floods that severely impacted Whatcom County communities, particularly Everson, Sumas, and Nooksack. The flood emergency has created urgency around infrastructure improvements and flood mitigation, driving the county's $15 million request to the state legislature. Simultaneously, the county is conducting its required 10-year comprehensive plan update under the Growth Management Act, with new state requirements (House Bill 1220) mandating accommodation of housing for different income levels. These dual pressures — flood recovery and growth accommodation — frame much of the policy discussion, as the county must balance development needs with natural hazard risks while complying with state mandates for both flood safety and housing provision. ### What Happened — The Short Version The council unanimously supported the county's $15 million flood mitigation funding request to the state legislature. This money would pay for property acquisition and advanced design work on projects like widening river corridors, building flood walls, and improving emergency access routes. Planning staff then presented proposals for urban growth areas, including allowing duplexes and fourplexes in more areas to meet new state housing requirements. The council made two significant decisions: they asked county staff to explore adding Nooksack River banks to mineral resource lands (for potential gravel extraction to help with flood control), and they supported allowing more housing types in rural historic communities. Finally, councilmembers shared their individual project priorities, including mental health services, housing, and flood recovery efforts. ### What to Watch Next - February 24 Council meeting for detailed flood operations briefing from River and Flood team - Upcoming zoning ordinance package implementing the comprehensive plan changes - Development of the docketed UGA reserve discussions for 2026-27 - State budget publication revealing actual flood mitigation funding decisions - Council strategic planning retreat on February 17 ---

**Q:** What is the total amount Whatcom County is requesting from the state for flood mitigation projects? **A:** $15 million for acquisition of properties and easements, plus advanced design work on flood protection projects. **Q:** Which three communities are the primary focus of the county's flood mitigation efforts? **A:** Everson, Sumas, and Nooksack, which were severely impacted by the 2021 floods. **Q:** What does FLIP stand for and what is its purpose? **A:** Flood Plate Integrated Planning — a multi-jurisdictional process to coordinate flood mitigation projects across the Nooksack River watershed. **Q:** Why is the county proposing to allow duplexes, triplexes, and fourplexes in more areas? **A:** To comply with House Bill 1220, which requires counties to accommodate housing for different income levels, with these housing types considered "moderate income" options. **Q:** What is a UGA Reserve and how does it differ from a UGA? **A:** UGA Reserve areas are designated for potential future inclusion in Urban Growth Areas but remain rural until needed, while UGAs allow immediate urban development with city services. **Q:** Who is presiding over this meeting and why? **A:** Council Vice Chair Jon Scanlon, because Council Chair Kaylee Galloway is attending remotely from Olympia and asked him to chair the meeting. **Q:** What motion did Council Member Ben Elenbaas make regarding mineral resource lands? **A:** To request the Executive work with Planning Staff to explore adding the shores of the Nooksack River to the Mineral Resource Lands Special District. **Q:** What is the estimated 2023 population living in rural and resource lands? **A:** Just under 71,000 people, representing about 30% of Whatcom County's total population. **Q:** How many Urban Growth Areas does Whatcom County currently have? **A:** Ten UGAs total, shown in yellow and purple on county planning maps. **Q:** What concern did Council Member Mark Stremler raise about the flood mitigation funding? **A:** He was concerned that money would go to advanced design work rather than actual construction and execution of flood projects. **Q:** What change is proposed for Birch Bay's urban residential zoning? **A:** Allow duplex, triplex, and fourplex development in addition to single-family homes, without increasing overall density limits. **Q:** How many acres of agricultural lands are designated in Whatcom County? **A:** More than 85,000 acres of designated agricultural lands. **Q:** What is the timeline for UGA Reserve discussions that were deferred? **A:** They will be docketed for consideration in 2026-27, after the current comprehensive plan update is completed. **Q:** What was Council Member Ben Elenbaas's concern about Columbia Valley commercial development? **A:** The area lacks basic services like grocery stores and laundromats, creating a "food desert" situation for residents who must drive long distances for necessities. **Q:** When is the next major flood mitigation briefing scheduled? **A:** February 24, when the River and Flood team will provide a detailed operations briefing to the Council. **Q:** What vote count supported both housing-related motions? **A:** Both motions passed 6-0, with Council Chair Galloway temporarily away during the votes. **Q:** How much general fund money does the county currently provide to the health department? **A:** Approximately $2 million, down from $3 million previously. **Q:** What is the purpose of changing some areas from R5A to R10A zoning? **A:** To preserve land for future urban development by preventing subdivision into smaller parcels that would be harder to redevelop later. **Q:** What did Council Member Barry Buchanan reveal about past Columbia Valley commercial development attempts? **A:** There was serious planning for a shopping center with anchor tenant research, but it failed due to water district infrastructure issues. **Q:** When is the Council's strategic planning retreat scheduled? **A:** February 17, 2026, where councilmembers will engage in comprehensive strategic planning discussions. ---