Pack Elder, a member of the public, urged the board to abandon the proposal to hire a land-use recreation planner, saying, "I wanna speak against that hiring of a land use recreation planner." The Kittitas County Board of Commissioners moved to advance the job description to human resources and finance for further vetting and to explore potential funding sources.

County Development Services Director Chad Vela brought the job description before the board, saying the position was previously presented April 14 and that staff had since met with Public Works to align responsibilities. "In front of you is the land use recreational planner position," Vela said, and he told commissioners that Public Works Director Josh Frederickson supported the proposal.

The board’s discussion centered on whether the county could identify a stable funding source and on the scope of the position. One commissioner said lodging-tax revenue could be "used from a partial perspective" but cautioned that relying solely on lodging tax could limit the planner’s flexibility. Commissioners discussed directing staff to work with HR and finance to determine budget feasibility and to ensure the job description aligns with any funding restrictions.

Board members described the position as intended to link county departments and outside agencies on planning for recreational lands and public-access projects. A commissioner noted ongoing and upcoming regional planning efforts and large parcels under review, saying the role would help "ensure that we understand fully what's going on, bringing it back, plugging it into our entire organization to understand where we fit in." The commissioners also noted the county’s Public Lands Advisory Committee could coordinate with the new planner.

No formal motion to hire the position was taken at the study session; instead, the board directed staff to refine the job description and to work with human resources and finance on budgeting and potential funding mechanisms, including lodging tax and recreational grants. A public commenter had argued the county could absorb duties within the existing CDS department and questioned an absence of explicit cost figures in the packet.

The board scheduled no vote at the meeting and requested follow-up work by staff; commissioners said they expect to return with budget and job-description details before any hiring decision.