Thurston County’s Board of Health adopted an updated on‑site sewage (septic) management plan on Dec. 9, 2025, after a public hearing that drew residents, builders, septic professionals and tribal water managers.
The plan, presented by the county’s environmental division director, lays out six recommendation categories — septic‑to‑sewer planning, designation of sensitive and marine recovery areas, database and dashboard development, climate‑change planning, quality assurance, and county‑led septic programs — and is intended as a phased framework rather than an immediate set of new fees or regulations.
Staff said the draft has been open for public comment since mid‑September. Season Long, the environmental division director, told the board the county had emailed 134 certified septic professionals, posted repeatedly on social media and had 3,483 Facebook views and 181 OSS‑plan website views; staff had received 28 public comments as of 11:14 a.m. and nine additional comments submitted that day.
Public commenters voiced two consistent themes: concerns that new requirements would raise costs for homeowners, and requests for stronger protections for water resources. ‘‘I hope the OSS program will be able to find a way to use ADU expansions as an opportunity to perform inspections of current systems and provide support for residents who need to maintain or upgrade their septic systems,’’ said Betsy Norton, a Thurston County resident who spoke about the plan’s environmental implications.
Builders and realtors asked the county to assess economic impacts before expanding marine recovery areas, to adopt a predictable septic‑to‑sewer conversion schedule where appropriate, and to include builders and system professionals in oversight. Jesse Simmons of the Olympia Master Builders said added costs on new construction ‘‘price out’’ potential buyers and urged a balance between environmental protections and housing goals.
Staff emphasized that this adoption represents Phase 1: a framework and set of recommendations. Jean Frost, septic operations and maintenance program supervisor, described how the county’s Henderson Inlet watershed program reduced failure rates there through mandatory maintenance and outreach, and she said some elements of that model inform the countywide plan. Frost also noted the county’s self‑inspection classes for owners of simpler gravity systems and a small grant program that can provide up to $2,000 to offset minor repairs or pumping when eligibility criteria are met.
Multiple board members pressed staff to make implementation inclusive and to explore funding options before any program expansions. Season Long and other staff repeatedly told the board that the plan at adoption does not include new county‑wide fees: implementation priorities and funding mechanisms are to be addressed in Phase 2.
A motion to adopt the 2025 OSS management plan, moved and seconded on the record under the cited state authority, carried at the meeting; the clerk noted the board recorded one abstention. Staff said adoption will direct work on subsequent phases, including prioritizing recommendations and pursuing funding to implement them.
The board also committed to additional outreach and said it would consider convening a work session with stakeholders to further refine implementation steps. The plan will be reviewed on a five‑year cycle, per county practice.