The Fish Camp Planning Advisory Council and Mariposa County staff discussed whether the council should remain a board‑appointed advisory body subject to the Ralph M. Brown Act or dissolve and re-form as an independent neighborhood organization with looser meeting rules and social-media flexibility.
Why it matters: remaining a county advisory body keeps an established channel to the board of supervisors, county departments and interagency contacts but brings Brown Act requirements — posted agendas, limits on off-agenda discussions and quorum rules. Dissolving and forming a private organization would free members from many Brown Act limits but change how the body formally interacts with county staff and reduces the council’s status as a board-appointed conduit.
Mariposa County staff explained the differences: under the county’s bylaws template an appointed council must post agendas at least 72 hours before a meeting; meetings require a quorum and, if a quorum is not present within ten minutes of the scheduled start, the meeting must disband. County staff said the county’s template generally prohibits remote participation except under narrow circumstances and that public records (agendas and minutes) must be posted so anyone can see what the council discussed. Staff also said the county administrative officer will present a code‑enforcement proposal to the board within roughly 90 days, and planning‑code updates (subdivision and zoning) were scheduled for Planning Commission consideration in early August.
Several residents and council members said they value being a county advisory body because it provides a direct line to supervisors, county staff and external agencies (Caltrans, Forest Service, National Park Service). Others said the Brown Act restricts everyday conversation and outreach (including via social media) and can discourage broader participation because remote attendance is restricted under the template. County staff suggested the council should hold a dedicated meeting to review the county-approved bylaws template and a sample set of neighborhood‑association bylaws so the community can decide its purpose and whether to keep the county relationship or reconstitute independently.
Practical next steps agreed in the discussion included: county staff will provide the current Fish Camp bylaws and the county template bylaws to the council ahead of the next meeting; the council should define its purpose (for example: community updates, fire‑safety coordination, planning input) and identify what level of county resources it needs to achieve that purpose; and staff said they would circulate contact information for county code‑enforcement staff for neighborhood follow-up.