A new, powerful Citizen Portal experience is ready. Switch now

Board approves EIR consultant extension for Texas Hill rezone, directs staff to pause further work and return with options

July 28, 2026 | El Dorado County, California


This article was created by AI summarizing key points discussed. AI makes mistakes, so for full details and context, please refer to the video of the full meeting. Please report any errors so we can fix them. Report an error »

Board approves EIR consultant extension for Texas Hill rezone, directs staff to pause further work and return with options
The El Dorado County Board of Supervisors voted to approve Amendment 1 to the environmental-planning agreement with ICF Environmental Incorporated to extend the consultant contract term for the Texas Hill Reservoir tank-line rezone and general plan amendment, while directing staff to pause substantive work and return with a fuller presentation of options.

Roger Trout, who said he served as the county’s planning director in the past, urged the board to treat the matter as a separate policy question and hold a public hearing, calling it “a bad project for many reasons” and warning of scope creep from an original targeted fix for about 10 parcels. Supervisor Parlin pressed staff on why the project expanded beyond the initial parcels and why the county — rather than Eldorado Irrigation District (EID) — would share costs.

County Counsel offered a procedural option: "approve the amendment as presented to you, but perhaps give staff some direction to...pause the work pending some further discussion with the board," noting the contract otherwise would expire before the next scheduled meeting. Staff and consultants said the extension is primarily to allow completion of CEQA-required tribal consultations and to finalize environmental review documents. A staff report cited 2020 figures that identified 51 privately owned parcels and 67 EID parcels in the project area.

Supervisor Parlin’s motion to approve the amendment while directing staff to pause further work and return with options was seconded and passed by voice vote, recorded as 4–0 with one supervisor absent. The board also instructed staff to provide a follow-up presentation to clarify history, parcel counts and funding alternatives before the board proceeds with substantive project decisions.

The action extended the planning contract timeline but did not approve any rezoning or land-use changes; those would require separate public hearings and formal decisions.

View the Full Meeting & All Its Details

This article offers just a summary. Unlock complete video, transcripts, and insights as a Founder Member.

Watch full, unedited meeting videos
Search every word spoken in unlimited transcripts
AI summaries & real-time alerts (all government levels)
Permanent access to expanding government content
Access Full Meeting

30-day money-back guarantee