Thurston County Planning Commission on April 16 heard more than a dozen public comments urging the county to replace vague, “study” and “encourage” wording in the comprehensive plan’s climate implementation crosswalk with concrete, enforceable actions.

Speakers representing neighborhood and environmental groups, including the Thurston Climate Action Team and the South Sound Sierra Club, told commissioners the crosswalk between the county’s adopted Thurston County Mitigation Plan (TCMP, 2021) and the Thurston 2045 comprehensive plan update still leaves significant gaps. Several speakers said the draft often cites “encourage” where the TCMP uses stronger verbs such as “require.” Paris McCluskey of the Thurston Climate Action Team said 42 of the TCMP’s 72 actions are partially or fully represented in the draft but many are ambiguous and could be read as optional.

County staff defended the crosswalk as a tool showing where TCMP actions align with current comprehensive-plan language and said the public-hearing draft intentionally highlights related policy text that can be strengthened. Ethan (county staff) told the commission he used only the formally adopted TCMP actions for the crosswalk and marked related comprehensive-plan policies as starting points for staff and commissioners to edit.

Commission discussion focused on two recurring themes raised by the public: (1) converting implementation entries from passive language ("study," "encourage") into action-oriented items where feasible, and (2) identifying near-term, cost-effective projects — the “low-hanging fruit” — that reduce greenhouse-gas emissions quickly. Commissioners asked staff to draft revised language that (a) prioritizes high-impact, low-cost measures for early implementation and (b) clarifies where Thurston County will lead, pilot or model regional coordination efforts rather than wait for full regional agreement.

Public commenters gave specific examples they want reflected in the implementation plan: mandatory water meters or a county bulk-install program for permit-exempt wells (a recommendation to limit new exempt-well use to about 350 gallons per household per day), stronger language requiring energy audits or energy performance disclosures for commercial buildings, and faster deployment of LED lighting and other retrofits. Several speakers noted perceived delays on prior TCMP commitments — for example, county-led LED retrofits remain “in progress” five years after the TCMP’s adoption — and urged the commission to adopt TCMP wording directly where appropriate so the comprehensive plan creates clear accountability.

Commissioners and several speakers also raised process concerns: some crosswalk entries point to regional implementation without saying whether Thurston County intends to pilot actions locally or lead regional work. Commissioners directed staff to revise crosswalk entries to make county intent explicit (lead/pilot/model/implement as appropriate) and to identify opportunities to use alternative project delivery (performance contracting, public–private financing) to speed implementation while managing budget impacts.

Formal business at the start of the meeting included approval of the March 19, 2025 minutes; the motion to approve was seconded and the commission voted in favor. The minutes vote was recorded as passed in the meeting audio and minutes packet; the transcript does not list an itemized roll-call tally.

The commission asked staff to return to a future meeting with (1) draft, action-oriented wording that tightens crosswalk language to reflect TCMP commitments where feasible; (2) an inventory of near-term, high-impact measures the county can implement or pilot without waiting for broader regional agreements; and (3) suggested procurement or funding approaches (for example, performance contracting) to accelerate implementation. Staff said the public-hearing draft will remain subject to further edits after the April 24 public hearing and that the commission will have additional opportunities to review specific wording before final recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners.

Votes at a glance: Move to approve March 19, 2025 meeting minutes — motion seconded; outcome: approved (vote tally not specified in transcript).