Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Health topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents urge Plumas County to examine COVID vaccine safety at public comment; board accepts materials but takes no action
Summary
Multiple callers urged the board to place public health and alleged vaccine harms on a future agenda, offering videos and external resources; the board acknowledged comments, asked for written materials and invited the public health department to give a departmental update at a future meeting.
Several members of the public used the meeting’s public-comment period to urge the Plumas County Board of Supervisors to examine COVID vaccine safety and to request a public-health presentation at a future meeting. Callers offered a broadcast interview and a list of external resources and contended the county and state public-health agencies are not reporting vaccine injuries accurately.
Ronald Evans Jr., who identified himself as a former California Department of Public Health employee, said he would provide a nine-minute video and claimed that databases such as VAERS undercount adverse events. “I will send you that video, the whole 9 minute video,” Evans said, and asked the board to place a related agenda item in the future.
Another caller, Julie Threep, called from Butte County and urged the board to honor a commitment to host a public-health presentation and suggested the county use Zoom to convene external doctors and scientists for a public forum. She provided multiple external websites and asked the board to “report the truth to your county.”
During the meeting, board members said they would invite the Plumas County Public Health Department to provide a department‑head update at a future meeting to clarify the county’s role in vaccination distribution; county staff told the board that Plumas County Public Health had reported giving zero COVID vaccines this year and only a handful last year. The board noted California law prevents action on non-agendized items and encouraged callers to submit written materials for the record.
A later caller delivered a lengthy off-agenda statement alleging that mRNA injections are 'bioweapons' and advanced broader conspiracy claims. The board allowed the caller to speak after confirming a technical issue and advised submission of written comments for the record. No board action was taken on any of the public-comment items during the meeting.
