Board keeps bundled public‑comment system after six‑month review, adopts teleconference policy

The El Dorado County Board of Supervisors voted Tuesday to continue the county’s revised public‑comment procedure through the end of 2026, following a six‑month review that drew sustained public and staff testimony.

The board’s format — introduced in January — consolidated public comments on most agenda items into two bundled three‑minute periods (one for consent/closed session, one for non‑hearing items) rather than taking public comment after each agenda item. Grant Weber, a principal analyst in the county CEO’s office, told the board staff had analyzed 12 meetings and found the average public comment length of roughly two minutes and modest changes to meeting length since the policy began.

“Departments appreciated the efficiency,” Weber said, citing reduced staff waiting time. He also presented data showing 374 public comments over 12 meetings and noted that about 29% of consolidated commenters used the full three minutes.

But the format proved contentious with many residents. Scores of speakers urged the board to restore the previous practice of taking public comment after each item so callers could respond to presentations and late information. Linda Campbell, an El Dorado Hills resident, said the consolidated format forced residents to “speak in the dark” and reduces meaningful exchange with supervisors.

Supervisor Ferrero spoke for several colleagues when she said she preferred the older format but acknowledged the policy had some demonstrable staff‑side benefits. “I actually prefer the old format,” she said, “but I recognize the public and staff concerns and I think we can strike a compromise.”

After discussion, the board voted to: (1) continue the current bundled public‑comment format through the remainder of 2026; (2) direct staff to add clarifying language to a new board policy (H4) required under SB707 that governs remote‑access disruptions; and (3) return revisions to Policies H1 and H2 to align with the chosen procedure. The motion passed 4–0 with one supervisor absent.

What it means: The decision preserves the consolidated method while requiring staff to revise written policies and to maintain outreach explaining the rules to residents. Several supervisors said they would remain open to future changes after more time with the pilot and asked staff to consider compromises such as shorter comments (two minutes) for some agendas and clearer instructions in the morning and afternoon.

Next steps: Staff will revise board policies H1, H2 and H4 and return those policy edits to the board for final approval. The board also asked staff to make the H4 teleconference‑disruption language explicit that public comment for any close‑session topics be preserved before any close session occurs.

Speakers quoted (first reference):
• Grant Weber, principal management analyst, CEO’s office: “Staff collected data from 12 meetings… the average meeting length was 6 hours 53 minutes.”
• Supervisor Ferrero: “I actually prefer the old format… but I do think the current format is more efficient with staff time.”
• Linda Campbell, El Dorado Hills resident: “We are being asked to speak in the dark… it deprives you of meaningful input.”

Authorities mentioned: SB707 (teleconference disruption policy requirement), SB77 (remote‑participation rules referenced by staff), Brown Act (open‑meeting law context).