## Meeting Overview The Whatcom County Council Committee of the Whole convened Tuesday, January 14, 2025, at 2 p.m. in the County Courthouse chambers, with all seven council members present in this hybrid meeting. Chair Kaylee Galloway led the session that would stretch nearly two and a half hours, packed with substantive discussions on economic development partnerships, health officer appointments, building permit reforms, and major debt financing decisions looming ahead. The meeting showcased the collaborative yet sometimes challenging work of county governance — from celebrating economic development successes like Title Vision's transformation from garage startup to global water treatment innovator, to wrestling with practical questions about how fast the county can spend $15 million in children's health funds, to debating whether two small city mayors or one council member better represents rural interests on advisory boards. What made this meeting particularly significant was its forward-looking character: council members grappled with fundamental questions about their role in financing what will likely be the largest capital projects in county history, while also working to clarify governance structures that haven't been updated since the early 2000s. ## Economic Development Partnership: Celebrating Success, Planning Growth Tyler Schroeder, Economic Development Director for the Port of Bellingham, opened the substantive portion of the meeting with an extensive presentation on the regional economic partnership between the county, cities, and port. This partnership, funded through the county's economic development allocations, has produced measurable successes over the past several years. Schroeder highlighted the comprehensive economic development strategy (CEDS) document covering 2022-2026, noting it represents "a much more thorough document in regards to coordinated economic development" compared to previous versions. The strategy focuses on six key areas: building the base economy, developing critical infrastructure, workforce development, creating dynamic relationships with Canada and neighboring counties, promoting diversity and inclusion, and enhancing economic resiliency. The most compelling success story Schroeder shared was Title Vision, a company that began in 2017 with a $100,000 revolving loan fund grant from the port. "They relocated from a 5000 square foot facility to 10 employees with finance through revolving loan fund," Schroeder explained. Today, the company has grown to over 200 employees worldwide, developing innovative technology that uses crab shells to separate heavy metals from water for agricultural and storm water applications. "That's a business we want to help keep supporting in Bellingham with the headquarters here," Schroeder said. "Yes, they'll probably expand, but that's okay if we can keep them in a headquarters here and provide that resource and high wage jobs associated with it." Council Member Ben Elenbaas raised an important point about agricultural diversity in economic development planning. While noting that berry farmers appear prominently in promotional materials and are "doing better than most in AG," Elenbaas pointed to a significant opportunity in dairy farming. He cited a 2013 WSU study showing dairy as a $5 billion industry statewide, with 20% of the state's dairy cattle residing in Whatcom County. "There's not one USDA processor here," Elenbaas observed. "So all those animals to fully fulfill their economic potential are getting shipped somewhere else. And that's a tragedy to me." Schroeder acknowledged the input and committed to working with dairy farmers on retention strategies. "We need to be able to make that connection with some of these businesses and a recommendation from yourself or from others is a good way to do that." The discussion also touched on cross-border economic relationships, particularly relevant given uncertainty around potential tariffs under the new federal administration. Schroeder noted increased interest from Canadian companies in foreign trade zones, saying, "There is a lot of benefit to foreign trade zones if we have the opportunity to do so." Council Member Tyler Byrd asked about collaboration with Canadian partners on cross-border economic issues, noting concerns from Point Roberts and Sumas residents who have utility agreements across the border. Schroeder mentioned ongoing work to strengthen relationships with Surrey Board of Trade and Delta, emphasizing the importance of maintaining "friendly relationships that we have in this region between Whatcom County and BC or Washington state and BC." ## Health Officer Appointments: Strengthening Public Health Leadership The council received briefings on two health officer appointments, representing both continuity and new leadership for the county's public health efforts. Dr. Amy Harley, who has served as co-health officer since December 2021, requires confirmation for her ongoing role, while Dr. Meghan Lelonek joins as the second co-health officer effective January 20, 2025. Erika Lautenbach, Director of Health and Community Services, praised Dr. Harley's contributions since joining the county. "Dr. Harley is a pediatrician, she's really taken the lead on a lot of our child and family as well as youth programs," Lautenbach said. "She's provided incredible expertise for the Healthy Children's Fund as it relates to making connections and relationships to develop health care partnerships." Dr. Harley also serves as the county's tuberculosis doctor, seeing patients weekly with latent or active tuberculosis, and has championed efforts to provide refugee health screenings locally rather than requiring refugees to travel to Snohomish County for these legally mandated services. Dr. Lelonek brings extensive experience in Whatcom County healthcare, having worked for Family Care Network, CMR Community Health Center, and currently as an adult hospitalist with PeaceHealth St. Joseph. Her adult-focused expertise complements Dr. Harley's pediatric background. "Both of these doctors are 0.6 FTE and they both serve other roles," Lautenbach explained. "That ongoing practice of medicine is really valuable to us." Council Member Todd Donovan asked about potential shared services with San Juan County, which has struggled to recruit a health officer. Lautenbach confirmed that Dr. Harley and Dr. Lelonek would provide health officer services to San Juan County as a separate arrangement, not part of their 0.6 FTE commitment to Whatcom County. "I think it makes a lot of sense for us to provide that role," Lautenbach said. "So Dr. Harley and Dr. Lelonek are working on something separate... but we do intend to be able to provide that service in addition to the 1.2 FTE that you will receive from these two physicians." Council Member John Scanlon noted a letter from the Public Health Advisory Board strongly recommending Dr. Lelonek's appointment, highlighting the support these appointments have from the public health community. ## Building Permit Reform: Balancing Speed with Quality Amy Keenan from Planning and Development Services presented the latest version of code amendments required by state Senate Bill 5290, which mandates faster permit review timelines. After extensive stakeholder engagement, including a December meeting that Keenan described as "a long meeting late in the day," staff developed revisions that addressed most concerns while maintaining necessary oversight. The proposed changes include updated application requirements, clearer review processes, and specific timelines for different permit types. However, staff and stakeholders couldn't reach agreement on a few key issues. "The stakeholders discussed a desire to have a timeframe attached to type four permits and they were looking at 170 days," Keenan explained. "Staff does not believe it was required or appropriate to include time frames for those type four permits." Type four permits include development agreements, major project permits, and plan unit developments — complex, unique projects that typically require council review. Perry Eskridge from the Building Industry Association clarified one remaining disagreement about site plan review. "Some of us were arguing that the site plan should be included with the permit process and both subject to one time frame," he said. "Staff was saying no, they're separate processes... so they each should get a 60-some day time frame for each one of them, meaning it would be 130 days total." Rather than resolve this dispute immediately, both sides agreed to continued discussion. "We would make the arguments to you and then let you all decide," Eskridge said. Council members praised the collaborative process that emerged after earlier difficulties. Council Member Galloway noted: "I think this in the last six weeks or so has been a really great process. I think the stakeholders hopefully feel like they were engaged more authentically over the last six or so weeks." The discussion also covered the county's administrative manual, which will be updated and published online to provide clear guidance on application requirements. "The problem with manual today is that it is from 2018," Keenan said. "That's pre-digital copies of everything and it's pre our new permit tracking system." ## Capital Project Financing: Council Seeks Greater Role Council Member Donovan raised fundamental questions about the council's role in financing major capital projects, expressing concern about the pace and transparency of information sharing. Four major projects — including the jail facility, Northwest Annex, and ferry systems — may require significant debt financing in the coming years. "I don't think any of us know what any of this stuff's going to cost and I'm pretty nervous about it," Donovan said. "I don't know what my job actually is except that this is the legislative branch and our role is oversight and we're looking for information, and I don't think that information has been coming very quickly or adequately." Donovan emphasized that the council serves as the debt issuer for the county, noting concern about involving council too late in the process. "There are times recently where we wait too long to involve council and it doesn't necessarily go well and this shouldn't be one of those times." Deputy Executive Aly Pennucci acknowledged the feedback: "We understand we have observed how things go poorly or things go well as we do or do not bring the council along and we have every intention of not putting major, major financial decisions before the council without adequate information." County Treasurer Steve Oliver provided context on the legal framework: "State statute requires the county council to approve any kind of debt that the county is going to take on. And you have to approve it by ordinance." Oliver noted it's been approximately 30 years since the county's last major debt issuance — the courthouse expansion. The discussion revealed tension around the financing timeline. A memo from financial consultant PFM projects council approval of debt financing by October 2025, but councilmembers questioned whether adequate information would be available by then. Pennucci committed to providing "analysis and recommendation by the end of the first quarter that lays out this information with context in a way that facilitates decision making." She also noted extensive behind-the-scenes work: "We have been over the last year in particular engaged in a lot of precursor activities to getting to these decisions." The conversation touched on the politically sensitive issue of the jail facility size and voter expectations. Donovan expressed concern about changing what voters thought they were approving: "Are we going to get to the point where we're going to have to change what people thought they had voted for? Then that's tough." Schott-Bresler outlined the jail planning timeline, with the Finance and Facility Advisory Board expected to make recommendations by the end of April. The small cities' financial participation includes stipulations about booking restrictions that could complicate facility planning. ## Healthy Children's Fund: Ambitious Goals Meet Practical Constraints Council Member Barry Buchanan presented a substitute resolution setting ambitious goals for spending Healthy Children's Fund money, including $15 million by June 30, 2025. The resolution emerged from extensive stakeholder engagement and aims to address community frustration about the pace of fund deployment. "This latest version from 22 through 26 really took as a broad stakeholder and really looked into a long term vision for the region," Buchanan said about the collaborative approach used to develop the resolution. However, Erika Lautenbach, Director of Health and Community Services, provided a reality check: "The goal that you have for spending before June is about $15 million and I can just tell you that that's not possible. We will not in the matter of four and a half months be able to spend $15 million of healthy children's fund." Lautenbach explained the practical constraints of the contracting process: "It's very, very, very best form just because of the process, it's four to six months from council sign off on moving forward with a proposal or an RFP to the time that it comes in your inbox." She outlined what the department can realistically accomplish by June, including completing requests for proposals for innovation funding ($1.8 million), third-party administrator for subsidy programs ($3.8 million), and small childcare grants. "So we're talking about several million dollars that we can get into the community by June, but just not $15 million." The resolution includes provisions for multiple external audits and evaluations to assess program effectiveness and process improvements. Council Member Mark Stremler sought clarification about the various review mechanisms, leading to confirmation that different external entities would examine different aspects of the program. Deputy Executive Kayla Schott-Bresler thanked county staff for their efforts while acknowledging council's message: "We understand that council is trying to send a message here. We understand that the community and council want to see this good work delivered as quickly as possible." Council Member Scanlon noted ongoing frustration with the pace of progress: "The items that are in this resolution are things that the task force has been asking for help on for what, a year, maybe more than that... when I ask folks questions about what can we do to help, there's a lot of pointing at others." ## Board of Equalization: Clarifying Structure and Authority Cathy Halka, Clerk of the Council, presented amendments to clarify Board of Equalization membership and procedures, noting "the code was not clearly aligned with how the council office had been operating for some time." The changes address practical operational issues while preventing potential legal disputes. George Roche from the Prosecuting Attorney's Office explained: "The way that the code is currently written there have been assertions from the Assessor's Office that they intend to argue that with the five regular members that we have quorum numbers of three. These changes are intended to prevent the Council from litigating against the Assessor at the Board of Tax Appeal over these issues." The amendments establish that two board members constitute a quorum, allowing hearings to proceed even when only two of the typically three assigned members can attend. "Whenever I've seen them function, they typically do have three, but there's been some instances in the recent scheduling that we could only get two people and all of a sudden we got a fight on our hands," Roche said. Council members made one amendment, striking the phrase "on a rotating basis" as unnecessarily confusing. Council Member Scanlon moved the change, noting "if we just have three showing up as three, do we need the term rotating basis?" The urgency of these changes became clear when Halka noted: "We have two board of equalization members whose terms will end January 31st and we have about a hundred hearings scheduled in February." ## Economic Development Investment Board: Balancing Representation The council considered changes to the Economic Development Investment Board composition, updating structure that hadn't been revised since 2000. Council Member Donovan explained the changes stem from "reflection changes in state law that allow us to be using some of the money for housing and also just because the original composition was defined in 2000 and hadn't been updated." A key debate emerged over rural representation. Mayor Scott Korthuis of Lynden argued for retaining two small city mayors rather than adding a county council representative: "I don't understand why a second county counselor is needed on this particular committee when you guys get the ultimate say we're advisory to you anyway." Council Member Galloway supported the mayor's position: "I do think having two small city mayors allows for sort of the boots on the ground municipal perspective, which I think has served this body well." However, Council Member Donovan favored council representation: "I thought there's value in having one more council member on there just so we have prior to us getting the proposal recommendations from the board, we have voices in the room more than one voice in the room." After extensive discussion, council members sided with the mayors, retaining two small city positions while adding three new appointed positions for housing, nonprofit, and philanthropic representatives. The council also clarified appointment procedures, distinguishing between ex-officio members designated by their organizations and appointed members confirmed through the county's standard appointment process. ## Homelessness and Shelters: Deferred to Evening Time constraints prevented discussion of a proposed letter to the county executive regarding homelessness and shelter services. Chair Galloway noted that new information had arrived, including communication from Health and Community Services about extending shelter operations, requiring more detailed review than the remaining minutes allowed. ## Closing and What's Ahead The meeting concluded at 4:28 p.m. with council members having addressed most of their agenda through substantive discussion and formal recommendations. Three ordinances advanced to the full council for evening consideration, along with the Healthy Children's Fund resolution. The session demonstrated the council's increasing assertiveness in seeking information and involvement in major decisions, particularly around capital financing. Multiple members emphasized the importance of early engagement rather than receiving final proposals without input on development. Chair Galloway announced the council would reconvene at 6 p.m. for the evening meeting, where some of these items would come to formal votes. The homelessness shelter discussion was postponed to allow proper consideration of new information that had emerged since the agenda was set. The meeting showcased county government wrestling with fundamental questions about representation, process, and priorities — from ensuring small cities maintain voice in economic development decisions to clarifying how many people need to show up to hear property tax appeals. These seemingly technical discussions reflect broader questions about how local government balances efficiency with inclusivity, speed with deliberation, and innovation with accountability.