Lake County supervisors decline to send draft letters to U.S. Board on Geographic Names and California advisory committee

The Lake County Board of Supervisors on Jan. 28 considered draft letters to the U.S. Board on Geographic Names (BGN) and the California advisory committee on geographic names (KAGAN) recommending changes to BGN principles, policies and practices but took no action after the motion to approve the letters failed for lack of a second.

The letters were framed by supervisors as a response to a Jan. 20, 2025, presidential executive order directing a review of geographic-name policies; Supervisor Paiske said the past year had been “really difficult for everyone regarding this name change” and that the board should share where existing BGN procedures “fell short,” especially for populated places.

Supporters and opponents of a proposed Kelseyville name change filled the hearing room and several speakers urged opposing outcomes. Rachel White of Kelseyville told the board the draft letter and the process “do not care about Kelseyville” and said the county had “a disgrace” of leadership. Mark Borgesani, a Kelseyville business owner, said he believed the BGN application lacked adequate local outreach and argued the application “should just die at the BGN level because of lack of clarity.” Caller Fred Briones said of the name-change effort, “I don’t have 5 dollars to spend on white supremacy.” Helen Fletcher of Citizens for Healing defended outreach to tribal sources and said she will submit documentation to KAGAN explaining consultation steps taken.

County counsel Lloyd gave a legal briefing on the board’s procedural options and constraints. Lloyd and other counsel advised that Rule 9 of the Board’s rules of procedure set a deadline for motions to reconsider the board’s Dec. 10 action: “the deadline to bring up such an item to reconsider a prior board action was the next regularly scheduled meeting, after the action,” and that, under the board’s process, a member of the majority would have needed to move reconsideration within that window. Counsel also said an alternative statutory route exists under the Ralph M. Brown Act and related Government Code provisions, and noted that a motion to reconsider would require a four-fifths vote of the current board at the next meeting in order to proceed.

Several supervisors said the county’s own process and the federal committees’ handling of public engagement both fell short. Supervisor Sabatier urged the board to review its internal process before advising others and asked that staff not be diverted from other county priorities. Vice Chair Rasmussen said more local public engagement was needed before sending any letter and questioned federal involvement in changing names of populated places. Supervisor Allen reminded colleagues that the name issue was previously placed on the ballot at the board’s request and that the election results were one form of public input.

After public comment and debate, Supervisor Jerry moved to approve the two draft letters — to the BGN domestic names committee and to KAGAN — and to authorize the chair to sign. There was no second and the motion died. The board made no formal direction to staff; individual supervisors retain the option to send personal letters on their own letterhead, as counsel noted.

The item originated from the board’s interest in sharing local experience about a contested application to change Kelseyville’s name and to recommend procedural changes if federal committees are reconstituted. Supervisors and members of the public repeatedly distinguished between (1) discussion of the draft letters and federal policy and (2) the underlying local controversy over a proposed name change for the populated place Kelseyville; the board took no formal action on either issue at the meeting.

No future meeting date was set by the board during the discussion for reconsideration or further action specific to these draft letters. County counsel advised that members of the public and individual supervisors may submit comments directly to BGN or KAGAN; retention and handling of those submissions would be governed by the federal committees’ own procedures.