Thurston County commissioners review new climate element for comprehensive plan

Thurston County commissioners on Aug. 27 received a detailed briefing on a new climate element proposed for the county comprehensive plan, a change prompted by state law and local vulnerability studies.

Ashley Rye, director of community planning and development, told the board the climate component will cover two main categories required under state law: greenhouse‑gas mitigation and climate resiliency. "This is a big topic, and it's a new topic for our comprehensive plan," Rye said, and staff provided background materials to help commissioners explain those topics to constituents.

The briefing explained mitigation will focus on transportation and building energy use rather than housing unit counts, while resiliency is framed as an umbrella covering preparedness and adaptation measures for risks such as more frequent wildfires, winter flooding and sea level rise. Derek Jay, community planning manager and former planning commission chair, said the office conducted a vulnerability assessment that highlighted higher wildfire and heat risks in a corridor through Grand Mound and near Rochester, and flood and sea‑level‑rise risks in lowland areas such as the Nisqually Valley.

Staff described a heavy public‑engagement process: multiple community forums, a community assembly, repeated planning commission sessions and one‑on‑one outreach with the Thurston Climate Action Team. Jay said the county built a crosswalk comparing the Thurston Climate Mitigation Plan to the comprehensive plan, documented alignment and identified gaps in a multi‑page matrix that was reviewed in planning commission work sessions.

Rye and Jay said most changes from that engagement are already incorporated into the draft; remaining questions are largely wording and implementation details. The presentation emphasized that the climate chapter will be accompanied by climate‑related policies throughout the full plan and an implementation plan that lists concrete, prioritized actions where county resources can make a difference.

The briefing enumerated existing county efforts that inform the climate element, including the Thurston Climate Adaptation Plan, a recent hazard mitigation plan update, the county vulnerability assessment, the Climate Mitigation Plan and partnerships with the Thurston Conservation District and regional climate collaborative. Staff also noted county incentives for climate‑smart farming practices (streamlined permitting for on‑farm solar and conservation practices) and discussed habitat protection and forestry work, including an ongoing county habitat conservation program.

Jay said the planning commission spent substantial time making the implementation items pragmatic and prioritized for the county’s limited resources. Rye said the county is pursuing grant funds for watershed‑scale adaptive planning, climate‑informed stormwater management, forest management support and expansion of community forest efforts.

Commissioners asked about next steps and access to supporting materials. Staff said the vulnerability assessment and other supporting documents are available on the county website and that the planning commission had a special meeting scheduled the evening of Aug. 27; staff reported the comp plan work was through six of seven scheduled briefings and a final session is scheduled Sept. 17 on housing.

The presentation did not ask the board for final policy adoption on Aug. 27; staff said remaining items are largely wording and implementation choices that will come back to the board for policy decisions.