# Council Planning and Development Committee: A Quick Start to 2025 The Whatcom County Council Planning and Development Committee convened for its first meeting of 2025 on Tuesday, January 14th, at 1:30 PM in the County Courthouse's Council Chambers. What was scheduled as a brief organizational meeting stretched only 13 minutes, but managed to accomplish essential housekeeping and resolve a lingering administrative issue from the previous year. Committee members Todd Donovan, Ben Elenbaas, and Jon Scanlon were all present, with Elenbaas calling the meeting to order at 1:35 PM. Also in attendance were Council members Barry Buchanan, Tyler Byrd, Kaylee Galloway, and Mark Stremler, making for a well-attended start to the year's committee work. The agenda was streamlined: elect a chair and clean up paperwork from November's open space application decisions. The meeting's brevity belied the substantive policy questions that emerged during discussion — questions about how Whatcom County evaluates conservation projects and whether decades-old criteria still serve the community's evolving environmental priorities. ## Committee Leadership for 2025 The first order of business was electing a committee chair, a process that unfolded with characteristic informality. Elenbaas, apparently unsure of the proper procedure, asked "1st order of business is well, probably roll call. Right? So who's on that committee now? It's Scanlon myself and Donovan. Isn't that what it was last year too?" After confirming the committee composition remained unchanged, Donovan nominated Elenbaas for chair. Scanlon seconded the nomination. With no other nominations forthcoming, the vote was unanimous: Scanlon yes, Donovan yes, Elenbaas yes. The continuity in leadership reflected the committee's stability heading into what promises to be a busy year of land use and planning decisions. ## The Open Space Resolution: Fixing a Technical Error The committee's substantive work focused on AB 2025-019, a resolution that essentially corrected a paperwork mistake from November 2024. Alexander Harris from the Planning and Development Services Department explained the situation with the careful precision of someone who had spent weeks sorting through administrative requirements. "We had brought forward 4 applications for your review back in November," Harris told the committee. "However, the request that staff had put forward for council action was an inaccurate request with the requires is that a resolution is approved. And so we included a draft resolution before, but it wasn't the right file type." The technical issue was straightforward: in November, the committee had reviewed four open space applications and recommended approval of two — Green Bomb and Knock Reiner. Staff and the planning commission had recommended the same two applications. The committee and full council had voted unanimously to approve those recommendations. But the file type in the system had been listed as a "Request for Motion" rather than the required resolution format. Clerk of the Council Cathy Halka clarified the procedural distinction: "I believe it was a request for motion and there was a motion approved, but the resolution itself was not approved." Donovan acknowledged the administrative necessity while adding some levity: "This is easier than forgetting the 10 million dollars." He moved to recommend approval of the resolution to fix the error. ## Policy Questions About Conservation Criteria Before voting, however, Donovan raised substantive policy concerns that had emerged during the November discussion. He recalled one application that had generated interest from committee members despite failing to meet the county's scoring criteria. "There was 1 of the proposals. I think we were interested in, but it did, because it had a lot of wooded property. I think near Ferndale or something," Donovan said. "But it didn't meet the scores, the metrics that we use and I think there were some interest from council in the committee to like, sometime I may have a scheduled discussion where we re, examine how those metrics work." The application Donovan referenced was apparently within Ferndale's city limits, raising questions about jurisdictional coordination. "What is Ferndale plan to do with that area?" Donovan asked. "If that's an area, they want to do something else. I would be happy to support the city and what they would want to do within their city limits." Council member Galloway, though not a committee member, chimed in with additional context about the broader policy challenges. She noted that previous research had been conducted on updating the county's public benefit rating system, potentially by an intern working with former council member Kiana. "I was interested in having this policy discussion as well. And I do believe it might require an RCW fix because currently the way it's written is, if you change the criteria, you have to go back and reevaluate every single active open space," Galloway explained. "Which would just become an administrative burden." The discussion revealed the tension between the county's existing conservation criteria and evolving understanding of environmental priorities. Galloway suggested the issue might require state-level legislative fixes to avoid the burden of retroactively reviewing all existing open space properties under new criteria. "We should be thinking about best available science and, um, things that we're thinking about today that we were maybe thinking about a couple decades ago," she said, advocating for policy updates that could be pursued during the 2025 legislative session. ## Staff Perspective on Program Updates Harris acknowledged the complexity of the open space program and the desire for updates. "This is a kind of a complicated antiquated program," he said. "Um, so I, I think updating it would make a lot of sense." He noted that other counties face similar challenges with outdated public benefit rating systems. "We've reached out to a handful of other counties, because this isn't just an issue that we're facing. A lot of other counties are wanting to update their public benefit rating system." Harris suggested the committee could revisit the policy discussion in the second quarter of 2025, by which time staff would have more research on legal questions about retroactivity and updates to the rating criteria. He also expressed interest in reviewing any materials from the previous intern research that Galloway had mentioned. The brief exchange highlighted how seemingly routine administrative items can reveal deeper policy questions about how local government adapts to changing priorities and scientific understanding. ## Committee Action and Looking Ahead Despite the policy discussion, the immediate task remained straightforward. Donovan's motion to recommend the resolution for full council approval passed unanimously: Scanlon yes, Donovan yes, Elenbaas yes. The technical correction will allow the county to finalize its approval of the Green Bomb and Knock Reiner open space applications, clearing the way for those conservation projects to move forward. But the broader questions about the county's approach to evaluating conservation priorities remain on the table for future discussion. ## A Purposeful Start to 2025 The meeting adjourned at 1:43 PM after just eight minutes of substantive discussion. Elenbaas noted that the next meeting would be January 28th, though he quickly clarified he was thinking of the Criminal Justice and Public Safety Committee schedule. The Planning and Development Committee will continue to meet as needed based on agenda items. While brief, the meeting accomplished its essential purposes: maintaining committee leadership continuity and resolving the November paperwork issue. More significantly, it surfaced important questions about how Whatcom County evaluates conservation projects in an era of evolving environmental science and changing community priorities. The discussion suggested that 2025 could bring more substantive policy conversations about updating the county's approach to open space preservation — conversations that may require coordination with state legislators, other counties, and city partners like Ferndale. For a committee responsible for some of the county's most consequential land use decisions, starting the year with both administrative efficiency and substantive policy awareness seems like a promising foundation. The committee's work in the coming months will likely involve not just reviewing individual applications under existing criteria, but potentially advocating for systemic updates that better serve the county's conservation goals in the decades ahead.