Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPacket Water Work Session Apr 19 2022Whatcom County Council Water Work Session COUNTY COURTHOUSE 311 Grand Avenue, Ste #105 Bellingham, WA 98225-4038 (360) 778-5010 Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 19, 2022 10:30 AM Virtual Meeting VIRTUAL MEETING - VIEW ONLINE COUNCILMEMBERS Barry Buchanan Tyler Byrd Todd Donovan Ben Elenbaas Carol Frazey Kaylee Galloway Kathy Kershner CLERK OF THE COUNCIL Dana Brown -Davis, C.M.C. Council Water Work Session Meeting Agenda April 19, 2022 Call To Order Roll Call Announcements Individuals who require special assistance to participate in the Council's meetings are asked to contact the Council Office at 360.778.5010 at least 96 hours in advance. Water Resources Update Water Solutions Table Proposed Charter Potential Drayton Harbor Shellfish Downgrade South Fork Acquisitions Update Discussion with WRIA 1 Planning Unit Other Business Adiournment Whatcom County Page 2 Printed on 21912024 WHATCOM COUNTY PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT JON HUTCHINGS Director MEMORANDUM NATURAL RESOURCES 322 N. Commercial Street, Suite 110 Bellingham, WA 98225 Telephone: (360) 778-6230 FAX: (360) 778-6231 www. whatcomcounty. us TO: The Honorable Satpal Singh Sidhu, Whatcom County Executive, and Honorable Members of the Whatcom County Council THROUGH: Jon Hutchings, Director FROM: Gary S. Stoyka, Natural Resources Program Manager DATE: April 13, 2022 RE: April 19, 2022 Council Water Work Session Please refer to the proposed agenda below for the next Water Work Session. Additional supporting documents may be distributed at or before the meeting. AGENDA Date: Tuesday, April 19, 2022 Time: 10:30 a.m. to 12:00 p.m. Place: Virtual Meeting. For instructions on how to watch or participate in this meeting, please visit us at www.whatcomcounty.us/ioinvirtualcouncil or contact the Council Office at 360.778.5010. View meeting schedules, agendas, minutes, videos, and archives at www.whatcom.Iegistar.com. Time Topic Council Action Background Information Requested Attached 10:30 AM — Water Resources Update Informational None 10:45 AM 10:45 AM — Water Solutions Table Proposed Charter Input Proposed Charter 11:15 AM 11:15 AM — Potential Drayton Harbor Shellfish Downgrade Informational None 11:30 AM 11:30 AM — South Fork Acquisitions Update Informational Map 11:45 AM 11:45 AM — Discussion with WRIA 1 Planning Unit Discussion None 12:00 PM If you have questions, please feel free to call me at (360) 778-6218. cc: Dana Brown -Davis Erika Douglas Cathy Craver Roland Middleton Mike McFarlane Kristi Felbinger John Thompson Beth Bushaw Mark Personius Brandy Reed Jill Nixon Paula Harris Jim Karcher Josh Fleischmann Chris Elder Jennifer Schneider Lonni Cummings Atina Casas Tyler Schroeder Karen Frakes Kraig Olason Doug Ranney Sue Sullivan Cascadia Policy Solutions ENVIRONMENT I CLIMATE I ENERGY Nooksack Watershed Solutions Table Draft Charter Vision: The Nooksack Watershed is a healthy ecosystem that consistently supports healthy and abundant salmon populations. The treaty rights of the Lummi Nation and Nooksack Indian Tribe are consistently met. Adequate water for agriculture is reliably available and conversion of agricultural lands occurs only occasionally and only in appropriate areas. Communities and local industry likewise have a reliable and adequate water supply, and people, communities, and habitat are protected from the adverse impacts of water shortages and drought associated with climate change. Whatcom County remains one of the most attractive places in Washington to live, work, and visit, in part, because the community has worked together to achieve a mutually agreed vision that is equitable, provides predictability and opportunity, and maintains and improves the ecosystem health throughout the watershed, including resilience to climate impacts. Purpose: The purpose of the Nooksack Watershed Solutions Table is to develop, through a collaborative process, a Nooksack River Basin Integrated Water Supply Strategy. This Strategy will describe those actions necessary to consistently achieve instream flows that support healthy and abundant salmon populations while also ensuring an adequate and reliable water supply for agriculture, municipal, industrial, and domestic uses. The Strategy will also describe actions needed to protect, people, communities, and habitat from impacts to streamflow and water supply because of climate change. The Solutions Table will rely on best available science to identify and support such water management strategies. The Solutions Table will support the implementation of the Nooksack River Basin Integrated Strategy by actively seeking state and congressional legislative authorization and funding. Operating Principles Recommended Process: We recommend that an Executive Committee for the Solutions Table first be established to support selection of Solutions Table representatives. The Executive Committee members will also serve as representatives on the Solutions Table. The Executive Committee should be authorized to make ministerial decisions for the Solutions Table, but policy and strategic decisions reside with the full Solutions Table. The Solutions Table can also establish additional subcommittees as necessary. Subcommittees can be authorized to develop recommendations to be presented to the full membership. Page 1 of 5 Solutions Table Representatives*: • 2- Lummi Nation • 2- Nooksack Indian Tribe • 1- Federal Representative • 2- Whatcom County • 1- City of Bellingham • 1- City of Lynden • 1- Public Utility District No. 1 • 1- Department of Ecology • 1- Department of Fish & Wildlife • 3- Agriculture Community • 1- Environmental/Environmental Justice Community • 1- Permit -Exempt Well Community • 1- Water District Representative • 1- Commercial Fishing Interest • 1- Local Forest Practices Expert *Solutions Table Executive Committee (each entity listed below has one representative that will serve on the Executive Committee): City of Bellingham Lummi Nation Nooksack Indian Tribe Public Utility District No. 1 Washington Department of Fish & Wildlife Washington Department of Ecology Watershed Improvement District Representative Whatcom County Proposed Process for Selecting Membership: As sovereign nations, Tribal representatives will be decided by their respective Tribes. Government agencies will each choose their own representative. Each interest or user group will provide the names of up to three candidates per position and one candidate will be selected for each position by the executive committee. Ground Rules: There are essentially two options for Solutions Table decision -making. One is to make decisions by consensus. This approach does not require all parties to agree to everything, just that no parties object to a certain course of action. The other approach is to make decisions by consensus, if possible, but resorting to a majority vote if consensus cannot be reached. We suggest making decisions by consensus. A "consensus continuum" protocol (an example of such an approach is described in Attachment A) that clearly describes the various positions that any one party may take will be helpful. The key is a very serious commitment by all members of the Solutions Table to reach consensus. Page 2of5 The question we suggest be discussed by the Solutions Table members is whether to make decisions by majority vote if consensus is not reached. We have experienced situations where consensus is repeatedly blocked by a single difficult party. In those cases, it can be important to have a mechanism available to move the discussion forward. Another option to consider is the use of mediation to resolve issues that the Solutions Table is unable to resolve. Generally speaking, use of mediation in this context would involve bringing together a small number of parties — those that care most about the unresolved issue — for private mediation sessions. Cascadia could provide mediation services, or an outside mediator could be brought in for this purpose. Regardless of this question, it is critical that the members engage in good faith, focus on desired outcomes, and commit to a professional and respectful dialogue. We recommend a "no personal attacks" rule and that all members agree that they will make every effort to listen carefully to each other and acknowledge concerns of fellow members. Members should seek to understand issues raised by each other by politely asking for clarifications and responding with non- judgmental responses. Meeting Logistics: We recommend that the Solutions Table maintain an inventory of decisions made, along with key information needed to fill gaps to reach decisions and any issues that have yet to be resolved. Concise summaries of all meetings, including subcommittee meetings, should be memorialized and include: 1) a list of attendees, 2) topics addressed, 3) decisions reached, 4) information gaps, 5) recommendations for future consideration, and 6) other findings or considerations. Such meeting summaries will be distributed to the Solutions Table in draft form to enable input. Finally, we recommend that the Solutions Table provide opportunities for public input whether at dedicated times during Solutions Table meetings and/or through written comment. Scope of Solutions Table Discussions: It is clear to us that water quantity, whether for in -stream flows or out of stream use, will likely be the focus of the Solutions Table discussions. All parties that we interviewed so agreed. Whether to add other categories like water quality and salmon habitat restoration, is a topic that we recommend the Solutions Table discuss early in the process. We see advantages to each approach and believe the Solutions Table should discuss topics to be addressed and decide for itself what the scope of its discussions will be. Regardless of the scope decided upon, the Solutions Table process should coordinate with other existing related processes, such as the salmon recovery process, to minimize conflicts and identify potential mutually -beneficial remedies. Relationship to the Adjudication: Generally, the adjudication and the Solutions Table will develop two very different outcomes and will involve different participants. The adjudication will utilize a judicial process to identify existing water rights in the basin, including the volume of water authorized for beneficial use, what the water can be used for, the location where the water can be used, and the water right's priority date. All persons in the basin who believe they hold a valid water right will have the opportunity to file a claim and participate as litigants in the Page 3of5 adjudication. The process will be in the Superior Court and will take a decade at least to complete. The Solutions Table, on the other hand, will focus on development of a plan for how water supply can be increased to better meet demand for an instream flow that supports healthy salmon runs and for a reliable and adequate water supply for out -of -stream use. Actions developed by the Solutions Table could be used to address existing and future water resources challenges that may become more apparent as the result of an adjudication. Of course, other topics may be added by the Solutions Table, but there is wide -spread support for the Solutions Table to at least initially address the issues involving water supply and instream flows. Page 4 of 5 Attachment A Nooksack Watershed Solutions Table This framework defines consensus along a continuum.* Solutions Table members have the latitude to register their agreement through the scale described below. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Endorse Endorse with Agree with Abstain Stand Aside Formal Cannot a small point reservation disagreement, Support of contention but will go with the majority "Yes, I like "Generally, "I can live "I don't have "I don't like "I want my "I disagree this" I like this" with this" an opinion" this, but I don't disagreement and I will not want to hold up noted in writing, support the the table" but I'll support decision" the decision" Notes: 1) Agreements with scores ranging from 1 to 6 are considered "agreement by consensus." 2) Registering a score of 7 is considered "blocking" the agreement and does not result in consensus. *Adapted from: Facilitator's Guide to Participatory Decision -Making (1996). Page 5of5 - Potential South Fork Nooksack Acquisitions