Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Access And Governance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
County shifts to webinar format; residents and officials debate public comment access and conduct
Summary
Clallam County’s new webinar format prompted technical complaints and a wider discussion about public-comment purpose and decorum; several residents criticized perceived restrictions and a recent hallway altercation involving a commissioner’s spouse drew public concern.
County officials defended a new webinar meeting format on March 18 while residents criticized reduced on-screen participant functionality and raised concerns about decorum and accountability.
"This is our first regular meeting with our new webinar format," the county chair said when opening public-comment periods. Several callers said they could not see other virtual attendees and that the webinar removed prior interactive features. "I cannot see other people that are online here on Zoom," said Pepe Whipple, who asked whether the county would restore attendee visibility.
County staff and Commissioner Ozias explained the change was intended to reduce disruptions and maintain focus on the dais. "We're providing this virtual meeting as our goal, I think, is to be accessible," Ozias said, adding the county was open to feedback and would consider accessibility concerns. The county described the webinar as a response to instances of disruptive content and ‘‘Zoom bombing’’ observed during prior meetings.
Public commenters also raised concerns about decorum and a hallway confrontation following the previous meeting involving a commissioner’s spouse. Jeff Tozer described the incident and said it "exposed something deeper, a culture of hostility, favoritism, and contempt for public accountability." John Worthington and other commenters described being followed into hallways and criticized the county’s response.
Why it matters: Public comment procedures and meeting formats shape residents’ ability to observe and participate in local government. Changes to virtual access and unresolved questions about conduct and accountability prompted requests for clearer procedures and greater transparency.
Clarifying details: County staff said the webinar format intentionally shows the dais to virtual attendees and may limit audience-to-audience interactions; staff noted the public comment period remains an opportunity to address decision makers. Commenters noted the Open Public Meetings Act and differing interpretations of remote participation rights and obligations.
Ending: Commissioners asked staff to accept feedback about accessibility and to consider changes as needed. No formal policy change was adopted at the March 18 meeting.
