Hundreds testify after Deschutes County commissioners dissolve DEIA working group; public urges reinstatement

Hundreds of residents packed the Deschutes County commissioners’ hearing room March 19 to press the board to reinstate the county’s Diversity, Equity, Inclusion and Accessibility (DEIA) working group and to protest its February vote to dissolve it.

Speakers described the committee as a practical tool for improving county services and a forum for community input. “We need accountability, transparency, policies, and active DEIA committees,” said Diane Murray, a Bend resident, adding that “when white people are scared, we get really, really scary.” Several other speakers framed the group’s work as pragmatic and focused on access — citing bilingual outreach, ramps and other accommodations — rather than personnel decisions.

Why it matters: Testimony showed the issue has become a policy and political flash point in Deschutes County. Residents described concrete programs and services that they say depend on the committee’s work, and others argued the committee duplicated HR or created unnecessary expense. Commissioners heard sustained public testimony on both sides but did not reverse the earlier board action during the meeting.

What residents said

- Supporters: Multiple speakers urged reinstatement and described specific, practical outcomes they associate with DEIA work: bilingual public-health communications, language-access audits, wage-and-retention reviews, defensible processes for employees and outreach that connects veterans and rural residents to services. Amanda Merriman said the work produced “tangible outcomes that improve lives,” citing examples such as prenatal care access for non–English-speaking mothers and trauma‑informed support for veterans.

- Opponents: Other residents argued the committee was unnecessary or ideological. Penny Palmater, a Bend resident, told commissioners that DEI “has nothing to do with performance in the workplace or in education” and urged eliminating what she described as a taxpayer-funded program.

Tone and scale: County staff said the comment period produced an unusually large number of on‑site speakers and remote commentators; meeting moderators allowed roughly three minutes per speaker. Witnesses included local nonprofit leaders, educators, business owners and current and former county employees. Several speakers — including health professionals and long‑time residents — described DEIA activities as public‑health or access work rather than hiring directives.

Board response and next steps

The board listened for an extended period but did not reverse its February decision during the March 19 meeting. Commissioners indicated they would review the public testimony and consider options for continuing some of the committee’s functions in other forms (for example, through HR or existing county programs). Several board members said they would revisit the language and the work rather than simply restoring the prior structure without changes.

Ending note: The dispute reflects national and statewide policy debates about DEI programs, but many speakers grounded their remarks in local examples: accessibility for residents with disabilities, language access for immigrant workers, and county workforce retention and training. The commissioners signaled they would take testimony into account and consider next steps, but left final policy choices to future meetings.