Ellensburg council substitutes DEI commission's draft B for Chapter 9 after lengthy public hearing

ELLENSBURG, Wash. — The Ellensburg City Council voted Dec. 1 to substitute the Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI) Commission's Draft B for Chapter 9 of the city's comprehensive plan after an extended public hearing that drew dozens of speakers on both sides of the issue.

The council's action follows months of outreach, a series of community workshops and a planning commission hearing. The substitution was moved, seconded and approved after a roll-call vote late in the meeting. Council then moved forward with first reading of Ordinance 4977, the package that records the year's comprehensive plan amendments as modified at the meeting.

DEI commissioners told the council Draft B preserves the original chapter's intent while reducing potential legal exposure. Amber Hofer, a DEI commissioner who presented the commission's letter and the draft, said staff had asked the city attorney to review the commission's text. "The city attorney shared that there's no legal violations that exist in this chapter that he could find," Hofer said, urging the council to consider Draft B as a compromise that keeps measurable commitments while avoiding language the commission and staff worried might be flagged in federal guidance.

Lou Campbell O'Brien, who spoke for the DEI Commission during the presentation, said Draft A "removes nearly all references to diversity, equity and inclusion," and that those deletions were not replaced, explained or justified. "This was a huge concern that communicates cultural erasure rather than thoughtful revision," the commissioner said.

Opponents urged caution or removal of the chapter, citing legal letters and the risk of jeopardizing federal funding. Public commenter Beryl Kelly read from a federal letter and asserted, "The DEI Commission has been accused of specific and ongoing civil rights violations," a claim that several DEI members and supporters disputed during the hearing.

Supporters of retaining DEI language, including many who addressed the council, said the chapter is aspirational and necessary to keep marginalized residents safe and to help the city retain students, workers and businesses. Michelle Adams, who said she was speaking in part to remember the late DEI commissioner Tylene Carnell, told council, "She worked for everyone in this community," and urged adoption of the DEI commission's draft.

City staff and the planning commission provided procedural context: the city's Planning Manager, Stacy Henderson, reminded the council that the adoption process is a Type 5 review with SEPA and a 60-day Commerce review, and that docketed items must be adopted by Dec. 31 or moved to the subsequent year. Staff told the council that if it chose to do nothing, the existing chapter would remain and a rewrite would proceed through the 2026 periodic update.

Several council members described the choice as a risk-management decision: adopting a revised text now would reduce the city's exposure to federal scrutiny, while postponing would leave the current language in place until a slower periodic update in 2026. After debate over whether to adopt draft A, draft B, or defer action, the council adopted Draft B as the substitute Chapter 9.

The council's vote does not end the process. Ordinance 4977, which contains the comp plan amendments (including the CIP corrections and the substituted Chapter 9 text), received first reading at the meeting and will return for a second reading and final action according to the city's ordinance schedule. The city manager also proposed a January study session to review code chapter 1.88 and provide direction on the DEI commission's work plan and ordinance language.

What's next: Ordinance 4977 will be prepared for second reading with the amendments made by council. The Planning Manager noted SEPA and state review requirements remain in effect and that further refinements can be made during the 2026 periodic update process if council directs additional work.