Residents press board for transparency over watershed survey and cannabis ordinance process

During the public-input period on June 10, several residents told the Board of Supervisors they are concerned about transparency and board process.

Patrick Ridgill said he and others believe a watershed "official survey" distributed by SCI Consulting may have been misleading to recipients and asked whether the board had approved that survey and how much the county paid. Ridgill said citizens feel "deceived" and asked for frank discussion and a budget audit and efficiency review; he said a community group is assembling to pursue those reviews.

Two separate speakers — Tom Lasik and Margo Kambara — said the Board previously asked Community Development Director Maria Turner to present a summary of Cannabis Ordinance Task Force recommendations to the Board first before sending them to the Agricultural Advisory Committee and the Planning Commission. Kambara and Lasik said the Planning Commission had placed a summary on its June 12 agenda and urged the Board to direct staff or the Planning Commission to postpone the item until the Board has reviewed the summary, saying public concerns have not been adequately addressed.

Turner and supervisors acknowledged the prior discussion in March and took the requests under advisement; Turner earlier in the meeting had told the supervisors that the draft materials were posted for public review and that staff had gathered comments and returned them to the board’s materials for the current week.

Ending: The board did not make an immediate formal directive on the cannabis summary or the watershed survey at the June 10 meeting; members and staff agreed to follow up with community development staff and to ensure public comments and requests for clarification are captured and returned in future staff reports.