San Diego County supervisors reopen closed‑session public comment, then recess into closed session

The San Diego County Board of Supervisors on June 4 reconvened a session from June 3 to allow additional public comment on a closed‑session item and then recessed into closed session.

Clerk staff said the board would hear the speakers who had not been called the previous day and allowed three people to speak on closed‑session matters: one in person and two by phone. The board then recessed into closed session to consider matters listed under item 24 from the June 3 general legislative session agenda and item 1 on the In‑Home Supportive Services Public Authority agenda.

Why it matters: public comment on closed‑session items gives members of the public a chance to address topics that the board will consider privately; however, according to the board’s public comment procedures read into the record, the board cannot act on comments made at that time and will refer issues to the chief administrative officer for follow up. The board announced that any reportable actions taken in closed session would be reported during the land use legislative session later that day.

The meeting record includes a set of public‑participation instructions read earlier in the day that describe how members of the public may register to speak at San Diego County Board meetings. The instructions said speakers may register online at publiccomment.sandiegocounty.gov, that the first 10 public commenters at a session are heard at the start of the meeting (five in person and five by phone), and that speakers generally have two minutes (which may be reduced to one minute if many people wish to speak). The instructions also said speakers should submit documents to the deputy clerk at the podium and that a countdown clock at the lectern will indicate remaining time.

During the allowed closed‑session public comment, Audra Ford, identified in the record as a caller, made several allegations about criminal incidents and immigration enforcement, saying in part, “the little girl who was raped by an illegal alien that you guys incentivized to come here.” A separate caller by phone raised a different set of allegations related to a prisoner’s complaint and referenced the Brown Act, stating, “Brown Act question. 54954.2.” Both commenters’ statements were recorded as public comment; the board did not respond to the allegations in open session and proceeded to closed session.

After the comments, a clerk announced the board would return at 2:00 p.m. for the land use legislative session and said that, if time allowed, the board would resume remaining Tuesday agenda items before 2:00 p.m.; otherwise those items would be taken up after the land use session. The clerk also confirmed that any reportable actions from the closed session would be presented during the land use legislative session.

Meeting procedure and limits: the record reiterates that comments on non‑agenda items are permitted but that the board cannot take action on them during the session; such comments are referred to the chief administrative officer. For closed‑session comment specifically, the board noted a one‑minute limit for speakers who had requested to speak on closed‑session matters the prior day.

No formal vote or other public action was recorded in the transcript excerpt provided; the board’s immediate action was the administrative step of recessing into closed session.