Kittitas County planning commission forwards 2026 comprehensive plan update after public testimony on infrastructure, wildfire and housing

The Kittitas County Planning Commission voted March 17 to forward its recommended changes to the 2026 periodic comprehensive plan update to the Board of County Commissioners, after a two-hour public hearing that highlighted residents’ concerns about infrastructure, wildfire risk and housing affordability.

Staff introduced the update and its schedule, saying the periodic update is required by the Growth Management Act and is intended to set policy for the next 20 years. "Our deadline for this project is 06/30/2026," a staff presenter said, noting the update is a county policy document and not a zoning/code (regulatory) change.

Residents from Easton and the upper county gave extended testimony. "I have four generations in my family enjoying the property there," Shelley McMaster said in support of the Easton subarea plan and its effort to preserve rural character. Debbie Bowler, a longtime Easton participant in the subarea process, praised the subarea plan but urged the commission to require a fiscal impact analysis before expanding limited areas of more intensive rural development. "The county already faces a $91,000,000 transportation gap over the next 20 years," Bowler said, and she said the proposed changes include no concurrency analysis tying development to water, sewer or fire capability.

Bowler and other speakers pressed staff and commissioners to integrate the county’s hazard mitigation work into the comprehensive plan so that smaller, volunteer fire districts and other rural areas are better reflected in preparedness and grant-seeking. One resident cited repeated utility outages and urged stronger joint planning with utility providers to protect residents who rely on life-sustaining equipment during outages.

Commissioners and staff responded with the procedural options for moving forward. Staff said written comments already in the record would be included in the packet forwarded to the Board, and commissioners discussed whether to adopt the draft as presented, approve it with amendments, or forward additional recommended changes. On the floor, commissioners also raised questions about wastewater and water-service options for rural subareas, including whether water districts could serve as sewer districts and whether innovative or decentralized wastewater systems should be permitted.

The commission ultimately agreed to forward the planning commission’s recommended changes — including a package of edits submitted by a commissioner the week prior — to the Board of County Commissioners for consideration. Commissioners and staff said the Board will hold separate public hearings and that there will be additional opportunities for written and verbal comment when the Board considers the plan.

What’s next: the planning commission’s recommendation and the record of public comments will go to the Board of County Commissioners. Staff and commissioners said they will compile findings that summarize how comments were addressed and will identify any implementation tasks (for example, whether an item requires a capital-facilities or budget request). The Board’s hearings and any subsequent regulatory steps will determine final adoption and whether additional regulatory code changes are necessary.