Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the County Governance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents urge Deschutes County commissioners to reinstate DEI advisory committee
Summary
During citizen input at the April 2 Deschutes County Board of Commissioners meeting, two Bend residents urged the commission to reinstate a Diversity, Equity and Inclusion advisory committee and asked for clarity about the committee’s purpose, budget and membership.
Get email alerts on the County Governance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Two residents told the Deschutes County Board of Commissioners on April 2 they want the county to reinstate a formerly active Diversity, Equity and Inclusion advisory committee and to provide clearer public information about the committee’s role and funding.
At the start of the meeting, resident Rambozel said he and others who spoke at an earlier meeting felt the committee’s elimination was undemocratic and urged the commission to bring it back next year. “I promise that this commission or the next commission is gonna reinstate that committee,” he said. He asked commissioners to clarify whether committee members had been paid and whether the group had had a budget so citizens could form informed opinions.
Carl Shoemaker, who identified himself as a Bend resident, spoke in similar terms. He called the county’s diversity “one of the things that makes Deschutes County great” and asked commissioners to reconsider the recent decision to eliminate the DEI advisory group.
Commissioners did not take formal action during the citizen-input period. Chair DeBohm thanked the speakers and moved on to the consent agenda.
Why it matters: advisory committees signal county priorities and provide a public channel for resident input. Citizens who testified expressed concern both about the process by which the committee was ended and about a lack of accessible information describing the committee’s responsibilities and resources.
What’s next: The comments were entered into the public record during the citizen-input portion of the April 2 meeting. Commissioners did not schedule a specific follow-up during that session; residents requested answers about the committee’s scope, whether members were paid and whether the group had held a budget. Commission staff did not provide those clarifications on the record during the meeting.

