Citizens Bond Oversight Committee will keep public email but route messages to chair and CBO

The Citizens Bond Oversight Committee voted informally to keep a public-facing email address (cbocseq.org) but to limit how messages are handled so the committee is not drawn into staff-level or non‑bond matters. Chair (speaker 1) said staff would route incoming messages to the chair and the district chief business officer, and that staff replies would be copied (or BCC'd) to committee members so they know when the channel has been used.

Why it matters: legal advice reviewed by the committee said the CBOC's statutory role is to inform the public on bond compliance under the California Education Code and Proposition 39, not to adjudicate non‑bond financial complaints. Chair (speaker 1) summarized that advice, saying the committee's role is "informing the public about compliance" and that it "does not have authority to review non bond funded expenditures." The committee sought to preserve a public avenue for input without creating an expectation that volunteers will take action outside meetings.

How the process will work: the committee agreed the email address will be posted on the website with an explanatory statement saying messages are "shared and read by the entire committee and the CBO" and that the committee cannot take action on non‑agendized items until they are placed on a future agenda. The chair directed staff to (1) add the email and explanatory language to the website, (2) share incoming correspondence and staff responses with the committee, and (3) summarize incoming messages briefly during the next meeting's public comment section when appropriate.

What supporters and skeptics said: several committee members voiced concern about not being informed if a whistleblower or other correspondent contacted the committee; one member (speaker 5) said, "If I'm gonna be on the committee and somebody might put...whistle blow and I can't hear it...I have a problem with not knowing what that's gonna be." Others warned that email exchanges outside meetings could raise Brown Act issues and said the email should function primarily as a method to submit material for formal public meetings.

Next steps: staff will implement website updates and the communication protocol described above, report back to the chair for confirmation, and ensure any substantive matters that fall within the committee's bond oversight remit are agendized for public discussion.