County Council advances plan for local settlement of Nooksack basin water rights
Whatcom County Council members agreed last week to move ahead with discussions to settle long-standing disagreements over water rights in the Nooksack River basin.
“We’ve been getting all positive responses on moving forward with the settlement proposal,” said Gary Stoyka, the county’ s natural resources program manager.
“Everyone we have heard is in favor of proceeding with the settlement proposal,” Stoyka told a County Council committee on Tuesday, Nov. 10.
Stoyka said he’s been having preliminary discussions in response to County Executive Satpal Sidhu’s plan to bring all the interested parties together and start discussions to reach a local settlement.
Otherwise, the state Department of Ecology, the Legislature or the courts might decide the issue under a bureaucratic process called adjudication.
“We believe this is the right approach and we strongly encourage you to support it,” said Henry Bierlink, executive director of the Ag Water Board of Whatcom County.
“You also have a challenge as a county to be more than a facilitator for this process. It’s tied up completely with your floodplain management, your economic development plan, your land-use plan, comprehensive plan. The county has a very strong interest in trying to make this work,” Bierlink said.
What it means
Water rights in the Nooksack River basin have been a topic of discussion for more than a decade, culminating with a 2016 state Supreme Court decision that said county officials weren’t following state Growth Management Act requirements to protect water resources.
That court ruling told county officials to establish a policy for water availability that:
▪ Satisfies the needs of farmers, businesses, developers and homeowners.
▪ Addresses environmental concerns, especially with regard to flood management and salmon protection.
▪ Respects the treaty rights of the Nooksack Tribe and Lummi Nation.
Known legally as Water Resource Inventory Area 1, the Nooksack Basin includes the river and its tributaries, as well as its aquifer or groundwater.
Officials at the state Department of Ecology took the lead role in negotiations last year, and recently recommended the Nooksack Basin for “adjudication,” meaning Ecology wants money from the Legislature to file a lawsuit and let the courts decide.
But Sidhu wants to start parallel discussions to reach a local settlement even if the adjudication process moves forward.
“Let’s start the discussion,” Satpal told the committee on Tuesday.
“As county executive I have not taken a position on one over the other because I think this is something the parties should set on the table and hammer it out, which is the best way forward.
“We’re just seeking a blessing to start this process. This going to be a five-year process. Council will have a lot of opportunity to weigh in on many different pieces of this,” Sidhu said.
Sidhu‘s 2021-2022 budget has $250,000 per year dedicated to hiring a manager or consultant to forge such a deal.
He said the county will also seek state funds to further settlement negotiations.
Bierlink said farmers hope that Sidhu’s settlement plan could replace Ecology’s request for adjudication.
But Sidhu said he thinks both adjudication and settlement talks should move forward for now.
“They would like some legal muscle behind it” to encourage a compromise, Sidhu said.
