13 The reconstituted Planning Unit’s initial task has been...

WRIA 1 2014-2018 Planning Unit Work Plan Prepared by the WRIA 1 Planning Unit and Eldred & Associates

1

1

2

3

4

WRIA 1 Planning Unit Work Plan 5

Working Draft Adopted by Consensus April 23, 2014 6

Modified October 22, 2014 7

November 19, 2014 Planning Unit Meeting Agenda Item #7 8

Introduction 9

After several years of inactivity the Water Resources Inventory Area (WRIA) 1 10 Planning Unit has taken steps to reform and reengage in the issues addressed in the 11 WRIA 1 Watershed Management Plan, adopted in 2005. 12

The reconstituted Planning Unit’s initial task has been to develop a 2014 Work Plan 13 and budget. The process of identifying Work Plan objectives included discussions of 14 caucus representation, Planning Unit Protocols and Procedures and the Planning 15 Unit’s authority and role in the WRIA 1 management structure. These items are 16 included in the Work Plan along with objectives that will familiarize caucus 17 representatives with the adopted work of the WRIA process, i.e. by review of the 18 2005 WRIA 1 Watershed Management Plan (WMP) and 2007 Detailed 19 Implementation Plan (DIP), and other relevant local and state initiatives. Another 20 theme of the discussions was to include objectives that assisted members’ efforts to 21 understand the current state of management elements. 22

Pursuit of these objectives will be directed by a Method of Proceeding which 23 outlines a process by which the Planning Unit can undertake or recommend actions. 24

Key objectives the Work Plan will address include: 1) What policies, programs and 25 projects have been undertaken in furtherance of the 2005 WMP? 2) What have 26 those efforts achieved? 3) Are the goals of the 2005 WMP acceptable as stated, or do 27 they require amendment? 4) How much more needs to be done to achieve the goals 28 and what specific steps should be taken to do so? 29

In order to address these questions, the Planning Unit agrees that the focus of their 30 2014 Work Plan must include a review of the primary 2005 WMP goals, and a 31 concerted review of the following issues: water quantity; water quality; instream 32 flows; habitat; public participation and public education, and the statutory and other 33 roles of the Planning Unit. 34

35

36


2

Management 37

Whatcom County is the Lead Agency for the WRIA 1 Watershed Management 38 Project, and will continue leading the watershed planning efforts accordingly. 39

Guiding principles: Transparency, Accountability, Effectiveness and Efficiency 40

The WRIA 1 Watershed Management Project, its various participating 41 entities, and its policies, plans, programs and projects shall be guided by the 42 principles adopted by Office of the governor, in the Results Washington program. 43 Source: www.results.wa.gov 44

Transparency: make goals, policies, plans, programs, projects and actions 45 accessible to stakeholders and general public in a timely manner 46

Accountability: ensure actions follow the chosen pathway(s) 47

Effectiveness: ensure goals are being achieved 48

Efficiency: effectiveness achieved at least total cost 49

Method of Proceeding: 50

Some WRIA 1 Planning Unit members have considerable experience with the 51 Project while others have little or none. To enable all Planning Unit members to 52 arrive at a common understanding in an expeditious manner, and to better inform 53 the County Council and other bodies to which its work might be submitted, the 54 Planning Unit will address each of its tasks using a time-honored method common 55 to both legislative and judicial bodies, as follows: 56

Conduct Investigations, intended to arrive at defensible Findings of Fact. 57

Draw Conclusions, based upon the Findings of Fact 58

Make Recommendations for action, based upon Conclusions. Such 59 recommendations may include, but not necessarily be limited to: 60

Further investigations; 61 WRIA 1 Watershed Management Plan revisions; 62

Direction actions on the ground by identified actors for specific 63 purposes; 64

State and local policy initiatives, amendments; 65 Changes in state legislation and local ordinances. 66

Table of Contents 67 68 Summary of Objectives and Cost Estimates 69 70 Objective 1: Planning Unit Process and Procedural Agreement 71 72 Objective 2: Address Instream Flow 73 74

http://www.results.wa.gov/


3

Objective 3: Review 2005 WRIA 1 Watershed Management Plan Phase 1 75 76 Objective 4: Review Technical Assessment 77 78 Objective 5: Provide Input on WRIA 1 Watershed Issues 79 80 Objective 6: Governance, Funding, Administration 81 Summary of Objectives and Cost Estimates 82

Objective Years 1-2 Years 3-5 Total for 5-years Strategy

1. Amend Process and Procedural Agreement

TBD TBD

2. Address Instream Flow TBD TBD 3. Update the WRIA 1 WMP TBD TBD 4. Review Technical Assessment TBD TBD 5. Provide Ongoing Input on WRIA 1 Watershed Issues

$ TBD TBD

6. Governance, Funding, Administration

TBD To Be Determined

83

[Return to Table of Contents] 84

Objectives, Tasks, and 2014-2015 Budget Estimates (Years 1-2) 85

PROCEDURAL NOTE: These Objectives are set forth without order of priority. 86 Tasks with each Objective might take place simultaneously with other tasks in 87 other Objectives. Task 6.0 provides for prioritization and sequencing of the 88 tasks within each Objective of this Work Plan. 89


Objective 1: Review and Consider Amendments to Process and Procedural 91 Agreement (PPA) 92

Justification: Planning Unit operating procedures and membership are addressed 93 through the PPA. This document has not been changed since it was originally 94 adopted in December of 1999 and thus should be reviewed and revisions 95 considered, where appropriate, to reflect current conditions. 96 97 98 99 100 101 Objective 1 Work Product: Planning Unit will either affirm PPA as is, or issue amended 102 PPA. 103 104 Task 1.1: Review the state Open Public Meeting Act (OPMA) 105


4

The Planning Unit is subject to the OPMA, which requires that all meetings of the 106 subject entity be open and accessible to the public. The OPMA also contains specific 107 provisions including, but not limited to, regular and special meetings, notice 108 requirements, conduct of meetings and penalties, and remedies for violations. The 109 Planning Unit has requested guidance from the Whatcom County Prosecuting 110 Attorney to assist with drafting the PPA in compliance with OPMA requirements. A 111 response is pending. Upon its receipt, Planning Unit will deliberate changes to the 112 PPA that might be required to bring its operations into compliance with OPMA. 113 114 115 Task 1.2: Consider Explicit Enabling of Committees within PPA 116

The Planning Unit has had committees, which allowed for more work to be 117 completed than in regular or special Planning Unit meetings. Committees can be 118 useful in detailed analysis and study and more in-depth discussion. No decisions 119 should be made by committees. How committees would function under the OPMA 120 would be clarified as part of Task 1.1. 121

122

Task 1.3: Review Governance and Decision Making Protocol 123

At present, consensus decision-making is applied to all issues that come before the 124 Planning Unit. The Watershed Planning Act only requires consensus decision-125 making in the limited circumstances of final plan approval and recommending 126 amended instream flows to Ecology. It may be more efficient to use parliamentary 127 procedures, except where consensus is legally mandated. 128

A first iteration of Tasks 1.1, 1.2, and 1.3 has been completed. 129 130 Future work: 131 Timeline: ongoing, as needed. 132 Budget: no additional funds requested beyond standard Planning Unit facilitation 133 and support. 134 135 136 [Moved to Objective 6] Task 1.4: Review Planning Unit Membership 137

It has been over fourteen years since the Planning Unit was formed in 1999. Altered 138 conditions may warrant consideration of changes to Planning Unit membership. 139 The PPA does not currently include any procedures for addressing such changes. 140 This element of the work plan requires consultation with the Prosecuting Attorney. 141 142 143

Objective 2: Review WRIA 1 Instream Flow Rule and Out of Stream (OOS) 144 Water Needs [Return to Table of Contents] 145

Justification: 146


5

The proposed Whatcom County Council Water Action Plan, Appendix A, calls for the 147 WRIA 1 Planning Unit to provide input on water quantity and availability issues. 148

The Washington State Department of Ecology (Ecology) recently circulated 149 information documenting their rejection of the Bertrand Creek Water Improvement 150 District’s request to modify instream flow rules for the Nooksack Basin as stated in 151 WAC 173-501. Ecology justified this action on technical and programmatic grounds. 152 In addition, Ecology referred to the Instream Flow Action Plan, an element of the 153 WMP calling for negotiations with the Tribes as the means to address instream 154 flows. These negotiations are at an impasse and the tribes have requested 155 adjudication of their water right claims in federal court. Ecology cited these facts as 156 further reasons not to move forward with the WID request. 157

The Planning Unit’s statutory powers include the ability to request modification of 158 instream flow rules by a unanimous recorded vote of the local government 159 members of the Planning Unit. RCW 90.82.080(1)(a)(i). Following such a vote, “The 160 department shall undertake rule making…” to adopt flows. RCW 90.82.080(1)(b). 161

The WRIA 1 Watershed Management Project previously issued a 2005 Instream 162 Flow Selection and Adoption Plan, which established a process designed to achieve a 163 negotiated settlement enforced through a federal court consent decree. The 164 negotiations were suspended in late 2010. 165

It is not clear if data and modeling of surface and ground water systems are 166 adequate to address key empirical questions, such as: minimum flows required in 167 the stream, water actually in the stream, effect of groundwater systems on stream 168 flow, and mitigation required to support additional groundwater withdrawals. 169

Minimum stream flows were adopted under the rule-making procedures of the 170 Administrative Procedures Act. RCW 34.05. This differs from the existing Instream 171 Flow Action Plan, which is based on optimal fish flows or ecological flows (rather 172 than minimum flows), which were to be incorporated into the negotiated 173 settlement. To accommodate these differences, a WMP amendment could update 174 the Instream Flow Action Plan and could be coordinated with ESA elements. 175

Outside consulting services may be required for some tasks within this Objective. 176

Goal: Objective 2 is intended to gather the necessary information required to bring 177 the WRIA 1 Planning Unit to a point of decision whether to expend additional 178 resources in the task of studying and recommending amendments to the existing 179 rule (WAC 173-501). 180

Task 2.1: Review WRIA 1 existing stream and closure rule (WAC 173-501) 181

Timeline: complete by end of 2014 Budget: $40,000 requested for 182 Tasks 2.1 and 2.2 183


6

Work product(s): A written report of findings, conclusions, and 184 recommendations. 185

Task 2.2: Review methodology used to set flows: Instream Flow Incremental 186 Methodology (IFIM) studies, including controversies arising from that work. 187

Timeline: complete by end of 2014 188

Budget: $40,000 requested for Tasks 2.1 and 2.2 189

Work product(s) 1) Report on findings, conclusions, and recommendations 190

Status: 191

DOE presentation on WRIA 1 ISF rule to PU expected on or before end of December 192

2014. 193

Major public workshop on ISF scheduled for December 5 2014. 194

Budget may be substantially reduced with APA support provided via Jennifer 195 Aylor, PU facilitator. No additional funds requested for 2015-16 biennium. 196

197

Task 2.3: Review May 2002 Instream Flow Selection Methodology Symposium 198

Link to aforementioned provided herein below: 199

: http://wria1project.whatcomcounty.org/uploads/PDF/ISF/Symposium_Proceedings.pdf 200

201

202

Status: no formal action taken by PU as of 141001. 203

Timeline: none set; presumably should be completed prior to decision 204 regarding embarking on attempt to recommend flow rule amendment. 205

Budget: no additional funds requested 206

207

Work Product: Written Summary of key technical, legal and policy issues to 208

guide further work 209

210

Task 2.4: Review 2005 Instream Flow Selection and Adoption Action Plan 211

Status: no formal action taken by PU as of 141001. This task might be the final action 212

taken prior to reaching a decision whether to proceed with the effort to work on 213

recommendation of flow rule modification. 214

http://wria1project.whatcomcounty.org/uploads/PDF/ISF/Symposium_Proceedings.pdf


7

Timeline: TBD 215

Budget: TBD 216

Work Product: 1) Report on findings, conclusions, and recommendations 217

Written Summary of key technical, legal, and policy issues to guide further work 218

219

[Amended] Task 2.5: Review previous WRIA 1 modeling work including instream 220

flows and OOS supply and demand. 221

Review the 2012 Lower Nooksack Sub-basin Water Budget and the proposed 222

approach of the currently proposed ground water modeling effort, as described in 223

the 2013 Groundwater Data Assessment document (possible peer review). Link to 224

the aforementioned provided herein below: 225

(http://wria1project.whatcomcounty.org/uploads/PDF/Studies%20and%20Reports/WRIA%201%20GW%2226

0Data%20Assessment_2013.pdf). 227

Timeline: to be completed prior to decision whether to work on 228 recommending flow rule amendment 229

Budget: TBD 230

Work product(s): 1) Report on findings, conclusions, and recommendations 231 Provide written recommendation on specific model domain (may include credible 232 peer review); and a 2) Letter documenting the Planning Unit recommendations, 233 thus providing the desired public opinion on decisions. 234

235

[NEW] Task 2.6 Review Current and Future Planned Data Collection and Modeling 236 Work, with a special focus on integrating instream and OOS supply and needs. 237

Timeline: ongoing, as needed 238

Buget: no funds requested at this time. Likely 2015-2016 biennium 239 supplemental requests will be forthcoming. 240

241

242

Objective 3: Review and Consider Update or Amendments to the 2005 243 Watershed Management Plan – Phase 1 (WMP)_ [Return to Table of 244 Contents] 245

Justification: It is approaching a decade since the 2005 Watershed Management Plan 246 – Phase 1 was completed. There have been many changes in the watershed since 247

http://wria1project.whatcomcounty.org/uploads/PDF/Studies%20and%20Reports/WRIA%201%20GW%20Data%20Assessment_2013.pdf

http://wria1project.whatcomcounty.org/uploads/PDF/Studies%20and%20Reports/WRIA%201%20GW%20Data%20Assessment_2013.pdf


8

that time. It may well be, then, that a review of the 2005 WMP will result in 248 recommendations for a WMP update or amendments to the existing WMP. 249 250 Task 3.1: Review the March 2005 Watershed Management Plan together with the 251 July 2007 Detailed Implementation Plan. 252

3.1.1. Determine Implementation Status of Each Element of the 2005 WMP 253

Timeline: complete by June 2015 254

Budget: no funds requested beyond standard Planning Unit facilitation and 255 support 256

Status: No formal PU action taken on Task 3.1. NGWS Caucus has previously 257 submitted a draft detailed review of both the 05 WMP and 07 DIP, along with 258 supporting documents. No action has been taken on said document. 259

Work product(s): 1) Written review of the 2005 WMP, 2007 DIP, and 260 supporting and succeeding documents and plans, including implementation status 261 of each Plan element. 262

263

[Amended] Task 3.2: Review the 2010 Lower Nooksack Strategy (2010 LNS). 264

Planning Unit approved 140724 Water Action Plan (WAP) memo to council 265 in which Items 1 through 5 recommended support of key substantive elements of 266 the 2010 LNS, and added an additional related Item 6 regarding Adaptive 267 Management. Planning Unit has deferred consideration of the “governance actions” 268 policy issues raised by the manner in which the LNS was promulgated. 269

Task 3.2.1. Investigate current implementation status of each Objective and 270 Task of the 2010 LNS. Status: Presentation have been made by Lummi Nation 271 staff and reiterated by County staff that addresses this task. What remains is for 272 Planning Unit to determine of the Task is complete. 273

[New language for Task 3.2] In examination of Objective 3 of the LNS, which 274 included updating the Coordinated Water System Plan and a water supply plan, 275 Council Resolution Item 9 reads as follows: “Coordination, including identification of 276 and provision for specific linkages, with other water resource management efforts, 277 including but not necessarily limited to the WRIA 1 Watershed Management Project, 278 in order to assure efficient use of time and funding, to avoid overlap and duplication 279 of effort and consistency of use of parameters such as per capita water use rates.” 280 The Planning Unit supports this item and incorporates it into Task 3.2 of this Work 281 Plan. 282

NOTE: A post-meeting revision to scope of the item has been suggested: 283 “Coordination, including identification of and provision for specific linkages, with 284 other water resource management efforts, including but not necessarily limited to 285


9

the WRIA 1 Watershed Management Project, land use planning including but not 286 necessarily limited to the GMA Comp Plan update, OOS water users supply 287 planning, and salmon recovery, in order to assure efficient use of time and 288 funding, to avoid overlap and duplication of effort and consistency of use of 289 parameters such as per capita water use rates.” 290

291

Timeline: complete by June 2015 Budget: TBD: Amended Task likely to 292 require additional staff time from Public Works, Planning, and Health. No direct 293 expenditures requested by Planning Unit at this time. 294

295

Work product(s): 1) Report on findings, conclusions, and recommendations 296

297

[Amended] Task 3.3: Review other WRIA 1 policies, plans, programs, and projects 298 undertaken since June 2009. 299

Timeline: complete by end of 2015 Budget: no additional funds 300 requested 301

Work product(s): . 1) Report on findings, conclusions, and recommendations 302

303 Task 3.4 Review Salmon Recovery efforts and results to date. 304 305 Like land use planning, salmon recovery planning requires water in certain amounts 306 and of specific quality to support planning decisions. Hence, salmon recovery and 307 instream flow decisions are mutually interdependent, but the status of WRIA 1 308 salmon recovery efforts is not known to the Planning Unit. The Planning Unit 309 should review Salmon Recovery status reports to ascertain that stream flow 310 assumptions are consistent with other watershed planning documents. Specifically, 311 the Planning Unit should review the ESA sections related to goals and attainment, 312 de-listing requirements for wild fish, harvestable surplus, and meaningful exercise 313 of Tribal fishing rights. 314 315

Review of WRIA 1 Salmon Recovery Program will provide the Planning Unit with 316 insight into the WRIA 1 watershed. Its review should include the limiting factors 317 analysis and programs to address those factors, and the following WRIA-wide 318 programs: natural resource policy integration, low impact development, water use 319 efficiency and compliance. 320

321 Other watershed issues affecting salmon recovery include surface and ground water 322 quality should be considered by reviewing Clean Water Act standards and Safe 323


10

Drinking Water Act standards. WRIA-wide programs to be reviewed include low 324 impact development, impervious surface limits, drainage based management 325 compliance, and natural resource policy integration. The Planning Unit should 326 include a brief review of these standards. 327

Additionally, Section 10 of ESA provides for development of a Habitat Conservation 328 Plan (HCP) that can allow economically important activities to continue within 329 designated areas of a recovery plan. The HCP is intended to allow relaxation of 330 requirements within such areas, while specifying mitigation actions and an 331 emphasis on priority habitat designed to ensure that the overall recovery effort is 332 effective. Section 10 provides for issuance of an Incidental Take Permit that 333 provides protection from the liabilities for “take” called out in ESA Section 9. 334 335 The proposed Whatcom County Council Water Action Plan, Appendix A, calls for the 336 WRIA 1 Planning Unit to provide input on habitat issues. 337

338 Timeline: complete by end of 2015 339

Budget: no additional funds requested at this time 340

Work product(s): 1) 1) Report on findings, conclusions, and 341 recommendations; 2) Matrix of related programs exploring such matters as 342 dependence of habitat upon instream flow levels and identification of potential or 343 actual linkages and potential synergies between salmon recovery and watershed 344 planning; 3) Exploration of the potential benefits of a Habitat Conservation Plan 345 centered on Agriculture. Agriculture 346

347

[NEW] Task 3.5: Issue report on findings, conclusions, and recommendations for 348 consideration regarding WMP amendments or updates. 349

Rationale: This Task was pulled from the Work Products section of Task 3.1, 350 since it is unreasonable for the Planning Unit to take action on a Plan amendment 351 until relevant tasks in Objectives 2, 3, 4 and even 5 and 6, upon which Plan 352 amendments would presumably be dependent, be completed. 353

Timeline: To be completed by end of 2015 354

Budget: no additional funds requested at this time; supplemental requests 355 may be forthcoming, including possibly consultant contracts, depending upon 356 outcome of related tasks. 357

358

359



11

361

Objective 4: Review Status of WRIA 1 Technical Assessment Programs 362

Justification: The Planning Unit should have easy access to a comprehensive set of 363 technical data, current activities, and results of work conducted in WRIA 1. The 364 Planning Unit should also be familiar with the standards by which scientific data is 365 developed in order to have a solid understanding by which to review technical 366 studies. The Planning Unit can and should participate in oversight of current and 367 future technical assessment programs and projects. 368 369 Task 4.1. Review scope, availability, and access to existing reports and data 370 repositories for all elements of the WRIA 1 Watershed Management Project. 371 372 Status: PU included this task as Item 8 of its 140724 memo to council on 373 WAP. Since then, county staff informed PU that the hardcopy library had been 374 electronically cataloged already, and that what remained was to review all of that 375 material to determine if more of it should be posted on the WRIA 1 website. The PU 376 generally accepted that explanation, but wants to follow through to ensure task is 377 completed. 378

Timeline: completed by end of 2014 379

Budget: revised downward to $5,000, plus $10,000 contingency in case more 380 materials have to be scanned, rendered and posted on website. 381

382 383 384 385 Work Products: 1) Report on findings, conclusions, and recommendations 386 387 Task 4.2: Evaluate the need to develop and host a large on-line data repository 388 The Planning Unit should consider whether the scope and quantity of data and 389 reports warrants development and hosting of a centralized data repository where 390 any and all WRIA 1 data is deposited, and any WRIA 1 activity can be posted. This 391 site should be easily accessible by all. Consider a substitute for some elements of 392 DSS, such as Data Viewer. 393 Status: Planning Unit included this task as Item 9 of its 140724 memo to 394 council on WAP. 395

Timelines: Scope project and complete coding: First quarter, 2015. 396

First rollout loaded with all available data compiled: First quarter 397 2016. 398

Budget: $30,000. Proponent of this task explained that county’s acquisition 399 methods and requirements might cause this task to cost more than comparative 400


12

activities in the private sector, where whence the budget estimate was derived. It is 401 thus more appropriate for the county to look at the functions involved in the task 402 and make its own estimate of the costs of each function. 403

County Admin response: more clarification on this item is needed. 404

405 406 407 408 409 Work Products: 1) Report on findings, conclusions, and recommendations 410 411 Task 4.3: Review existing data and monitoring 412 Review key data collection, methodologies, techniques, and reporting practices 413 including stream gaging, precipitation, evapotranspiration, groundwater static 414 water levels, possible other issues, consumptive uses including surface groundwater 415 and return flow. The Planning Unit will review the current status of the modeling 416 efforts in WRIA 1 for surface and groundwater data collection methods, including 417 conceptual and numerical (algorithms, computer simulations) data collection. The 418 Planning Unit will identify for correction any data inadequacies, incomplete 419 modeling, results, and provide peer review. 420 421

Timeline: ongoing as needed 422


Work product(s): 1) Written Report on findings, conclusions, and 424 recommendations identifying data gaps, issues and corrective actions. The report 425 will also include a funding plan. 426


428

Objective 5: Provide Ongoing Input on Related Watershed Issues 429

Justification: Planning Unit provides public input together with a broad depth of 430 technical expertise on watershed related issues. Therefore, it may be asked from 431 time to time to provide input on watershed related issues that are not specific to 432 WRIA 1 Watershed Management Project, but which may have implications for other 433 WRIA 1 efforts. Additionally the WMP calls out consideration of legislative changes 434 as one of the continuing duties of the Planning Unit. To take one example, the recent 435 Supreme Court decision in Swinomish Indian Tribal Community v. Ecology has 436 produced calls for developing legislative solutions. Per the adopted WMP, the 437 Planning Unit should serve as a forum for reviewing significant water-related 438 legislation, and a sounding board for other watershed related issues. 439


13

440 Task 5.1: Review pending and newly adopted state legislation relevant to WRIA 1 441 442 Timeline: ongoing, as needed. 443


Agency: County’s contact/lobbyist in Olympia would be logical first choice for 445 conduit of the information related to this Task. 446

Work product(s): 1) A written Report on findings, conclusions, and 447 recommendations regarding legislation and watershed related issues on an ongoing 448 basis. 449

[Amended] Task 5.2. Review local policies, plans, programs, projects and ordinances, 450 such as the Whatcom County Council Water Action Plan, the Puget Sound Partnership 451 Whatcom Action Agenda, and implementation of measures designed to address water 452 quantity and quality issues pertaining to the Growth Management Hearings Board Final 453 Decision and Order (Hirst et al., v. Whatcom County, (Case No. 12-2-0013 Final 454 Decision and Order June 7, 2013) and related litigation. 455



Work products: 1) Written Report of findings, conclusions, and recommendations 458 on local policies, plans, programs, projects and ordinances, including those issue areas 459 called out in Whatcom County Council Water Action Plan. 460

461

[Deleted] 462

463

Task 5.3. Review other WRIA 1 activities as needed 464



Work products: 1) Written Report on findings, conclusions, and recommendations 467

468 [Return to Table of Contents] 469

470

Objective 6: Governance, Funding, Administration 471

472

Task 6.0. Determine Prioritization and Sequencing of the other Tasks within this 473 Work Plan 474


14

Status: Planning Unit engaged in preliminary task prioritization and sequencing 475 exercise in mid-2014. Further iterations may be needed. 476

Timeline: ongoing, as needed. 477

Budget: no additional funds requested. 478

479

Task 6.1. Determine Planning Unit annual budget for facilitation and caucus support 480

Status: 481

Planning Unit’s WAP Memo to council, Item 10.0. Planning Unit Caucus re-482 development and member education and communication funding 483

Budget: one-time lump sum amount of $100,000 484

County Admin response: included $10,000 in Planning Unit budget for 485 “caucus outreach.” 486

487

Task 6.2. Review Planning Unit Annual Work Plan and Annual Budget 488

In August of each year the Planning Unit should review the Annual Work Plan and 489 make necessary adjustments to the proposed budget and schedule for the following 490 year. This allows the funding agencies to include the Planning Unit funding requests 491 to be included in the fall budgeting process. 492

Work product(s): (1) An outline of Planning Unit meetings, agenda items to 493 be discussed at each meeting, and a detailed budget for the following year. 494

Timeline: next iteration, August 2015 495

Budget: no additional funds requested as this time. 496

497

Task 6.3. Review Relationships with Other Entities 498

The Planning Unit should clarify the current status of the WRIA 1 Watershed 499 Management Project now that it has an adopted WMP, and clarify the Planning 500 Unit’s relationship with and define how it intends to interact with other agencies 501 and groups such as the Whatcom County Council, the Joint Board, the Salmon 502 Recovery Board and the Department of Ecology. 503

Work product(s): (1) A defined list of other entities and a written plan of how the 504 Planning Unit intends to relate to these other entities. 505


15

Task 6.4. Develop an Ongoing Funding Plan for the Implementation of the WRIA 1 506 Watershed Plan 507

What should the WRIA Watershed Management Plan long-term funding 508 mechanism be? The Planning Unit should address this issue. 509

Timeline: TBD 510

Budget: TBD 511

Work product(s): (1) A five year budget to support the implementation of the 512 WIRA 1 Watershed Plan, with clearly identified funding sources for each budget line 513 item. 514

Task 6.5. Adaptively manage each task within each objective by frequent periodic 515 review of goals, actions to measure accountability, effectiveness and results. 516



519

[Tasks removed from other objectives, recommended at 141001 meeting to be 520 included in Objective 6:] 521

522

Review Planning Unit Membership 523

Task 6.6 Rationale: inextricably linked with Task 6.3, Planning Unit 524 Relationship with other entities 525

Timeline: TBD 526

Budget: TBD 527

Task 6.7 Review the 2010 Lower Nooksack Strategy (2010 LNS) governance 528 issues. 529

Rationale: inextricably linked with Task 6.3, Planning Unit Relationship with 530 other entities 531

Timeline: TBD 532

Budget: TBD 533

Task 6.8 Review other WRIA 1 policies undertaken since June 2009, including 534 the Whatcom Integration Team and the designation of the WRIA 1 Joint Board and 535 Salmon Recovery Board as the Puget Sound Partnership Local Implementing 536 Organization. 537


16

Rationale: inextricably linked with Task 6.3, Planning Unit Relationship with 538 other entities 539

Timeline: TBD 540

Budget: TBD[Return to Table of 541 Contents] 542

13 The reconstituted Planning Unit’s initial task has been...

Documents

Transcript of 13 The reconstituted Planning Unit’s initial task has been...