The board of the Sierra county commission met on January 6 for the first time in 2023. Most of the meeting was spent addressing annual housekeeping duties required by the state.
One of those duties is to select which of the commissioners will serve as chair and vice-chair of the board. Commissioners Day and Paxon traded seats at the table this year. For the past four years Paxon has served as chair and Day as vice chair. “Its like company and fish left out too long, it gets to smelling” said Paxon for his reason to nominate Day to the position of chair.
Most resolutions approved by the commission involve normal day-to-day running of county business. However, of particular value to the citizens of Sierra county is resolution 110-138 “Public Participation at Sierra County Commission Meetings” which outlines the rules and procedures for anyone who wishes to speak before the commission.
As Sierra County Citizen contributor Kathleen Sloan said so well in a comment regarding city government, which goes equally for county government, “the most transparent and democratic way to petition the local government is to speak at the mic during the public comment portion of city commission meetings. The city commission has a rule that it cannot reply to such petitions. But the petition/issue goes out over the local radio waves and it gives me, a citizen reporter, the chance to report on it. This is how citizen action and mutual information sharing and discussion are fostered. On the other hand, one-on-one communications with … individual city commissioners incites hidden favoritism and cronyism, which is one of the city’s big problems.”
The resolution in its entirety is included at the end of this posting. For those who prefer, a ‘Cliff Notes’ version of the resolution is as follows: Anyone can speak to the commission on any topic for 3 minutes. When you enter the commission chambers, sign in at the sheet to indicate your desire to speak. During the public comments section of the meeting, your name will be called to approach the podium and speak into the microphone. It is not a time for debate, comments from neither commissioners nor audience are allowed in response to anything you say.
Another resolution considered, but denied, by the commission was to allow a property tax rebate to low income residents of the county. This resolution was described in a preview to the meeting. There was no input during a public hearing on the resolution that preceded the regular commission meeting. Due to a lack of public interest and potential cost to the county, attorney Dave Pato recommended the commission deny the ordinance. Day agreed saying that he estimated it could cost the county around $200,000 to implement the ordinance.
Sheriff Joshua Baker requested increasing the salary rate for an undersheriff by 5% to 95% of the salary of sheriff. That is needed “to attract a capable person” to serve as undersheriff, said Baker. The undersheriff would need to have the experience to run the department during any absence of the sheriff. The cost to the department would be an additional $3,541.30 and is available in the department’s budget according to Baker. The sheriff department’s web page lists the current undersheriff as former sheriff Glenn Hamilton.
