Kern supervisors weigh rules to implement SB 707; residents warn limits could curb public comment
Loading...
Summary
County staff outlined changes required by SB 707 to expand remote participation — including a web-based platform and proposed speaker limits — prompting public concern that limits or outside callers could restrict local voices. The board asked staff to return with procedural language for adoption in May.
Kern County staff on Tuesday presented a plan to comply with Senate Bill 707, which requires expanded remote participation and new procedural protections for public meetings, and recommended initial speaker limits to balance in-person and virtual access.
Julie Gregg, the county clerk of the board, told supervisors the county would implement a web-based platform (the county-selected "Public Input" system) to allow two-way audio-visual or telephonic participation and registration for speakers. "Remote participation is by far the largest component of S.B. 707 and requires the county to provide a two-way audio visual or telephonic option that will allow the public to participate virtually in real time," Gregg said, summarizing the staff recommendation.
To manage meeting length while meeting the law's parity requirement, staff proposed limiting public-presentation speakers to 10 in person and 10 remote, and limiting speakers on individual agenda items to five in person and five remote. Gregg said those numbers were based on a 15-month average and can be adjusted by the board: "The department asks for direction on these recommended proposed speaker limits and to be included in our administrative and procedural rules."
Public speakers urged caution. Michael Turnipseed, who identified himself as a representative of the Kern County Taxpayers Association, said limits risk denying people a chance to be heard: "The idea of limiting public comment is not something we can accept," he said, adding that the board should ensure speakers are not shut out on important issues.
Charles Shin, a local retired Marine, asked whether coordinated groups can still speak together under the new system and whether staff can help manage the queue: "Is there going to be a possible way where the coordination... if we're doing 10 folks, I think we can still work with this system," he said, asking for accommodations for organized groups.
Supervisors discussed trade-offs between access and manageability. Several board members said they support expanding access while retaining discretion to extend time for issues of significant public interest. The board did not adopt final rules; staff said procedural updates and more detailed draft language will return to the board in May for formal adoption to meet the July 1 effective date.
The board also acknowledged practical concerns in the new law: staff will prepare options on speaker limits, queue management, and how to treat remote participants from outside Kern County.
What happens next: staff will draft procedural rule language reflecting board direction and public input and present it for adoption at a May meeting so the county meets SB 707’s July 1 implementation deadline.
