Taxpayers Association of El Dorado County

06/04/2026

On Tuesday, June 9th at 9am, agenda item 26-1003 will be heard. This is in reference to the experimental public comment period. We encourage everyone to write-in a comment or show up to the BoS meeting referencing the above agenda item. Since this item appears to not be an item that allows for interactive comment during the hearing, I suspect public comment on the item will be held at 9am. For reference...

SUBJECT: Request to Rescind the January 2026 Public Comment Procedure and Reconstruct Item-by-Item Public Testimony

Executive Summary

On January 6, 2026, this Board implemented a revised public comment procedure with the stated intent of increasing operational efficiency, maintaining transparency, and optimizing meeting lengths. The core of this procedural shift required the public to consolidate all testimony for multiple, distinct agenda items into single, bundled comment blocks at the beginning of meetings.

At the time of adoption, the Board committed to a six-month trial period to evaluate the real-world performance of this structural change. Six months of empirical data has now been collected and compiled by staff. The data is clear: the experiment has failed to achieve its objectives.

The revised format has failed to save time, failed to shorten meetings, and has artificially suppressed meaningful public engagement with the taxpaying community. On behalf of the Taxpayers Association of El Dorado County, I urge this Board to follow the data, acknowledge the results of this trial, and revert to the historical protocol of taking public comment dynamically as individual agenda items are called.

Data Analysis: Evaluating the "Efficiency" Narrative

The primary justification for restricting when and how the public can speak was to streamline meetings. However, the data presented by staff directly refutes the idea that any efficiencies were achieved.

1. Meetings Are Longer, Not Shorter

A direct comparison of 12 regular meetings before the implementation against 12 regular meetings under the new procedure reveals that meeting lengths actually increased:

Average Meeting Duration (2025 - Before Change): 6 hours, 43 minutes.

Average Meeting Duration (2026 - After Change): 6 hours, 53 minutes.

Restricting the public's right to speak on an item-by-item basis resulted in a 2.5% increase in total meeting time (+10 minutes per meeting). Clumping public testimony together did not save a single second of administrative time.

2. The Meeting Schedule Reduction is an Artificial Metric

The data highlights a 15% reduction in the average number of meetings per month (dropping from 2.75 to 2.33). However, staff explicitly notes the actual cause: "The Board reduced its meeting schedule from 33 meetings in 2025 to 28 meetings in 2026."

Fewer meetings on the calendar is an artificial, top-down scheduling choice made by the Board itself, it is not an organic efficiency yield generated by the new public comment model.

3. The Taxpaying Public Was Never the Source of Meeting Bloat

The data demonstrates that El Dorado County residents are overwhelmingly respectful and concise with the Board's time:
The average public comment length across all periods is just 2 minutes and 6 seconds.

Only 22% of speakers commenting on Consent or Closed Session items utilized their full 3-minute limit.
Only 29% of speakers commenting on Non-Hearing items utilized their full 3-minute limit.

The vast majority of your constituents stand up, briefly state their piece in roughly two minutes, and sit down. The public was never the source of meeting delays, yet they are the ones being penalized by this policy.

The Civic Cost: Reduced Interaction and Poor Governance

While the procedural change failed to deliver any mathematical time savings, it succeeded in severely damaging the relationship between the Board and the public.

Forcing a resident who wants to comment on multiple agenda items to bundle all of their thoughts into a single 3-minute window at the open of the morning session is a logistical and democratic failure. It forces disjointed, confusing testimony and completely divorces public feedback from the specific window of time when the Board actually discusses, debates, and votes on that specific issue.

As an association representing the taxpayers who fund this local government, we believe good governance requires that public input be integrated into the decision-making process organically, not treated as an administrative nuisance to be cleared out of the way before the real meeting begins.

Conclusion & Action Required

When this trial was initiated, it was framed as an effort to enhance the governance structure of El Dorado County. Now that the six-month mark has arrived, we must look at the facts objectively:

It did not shorten meetings (it lengthened them).
It did not create organic monthly efficiencies (the calendar was simply cut).
It reduced the quality of interaction between the taxpayers and their elected representatives.

It is not a sign of weakness to admit that a policy experiment did not work; it is a sign of strong leadership. The Taxpayers Association of El Dorado County formally requests that the Board of Supervisors abandon the bundled public comment framework and restore the traditional, item-by-item public testimony protocol to bring true transparency back to our local government.

Lee Tannenbaum
President, Taxpayers Association of El Dorado County

05/31/2026

𝐅𝐢𝐫𝐞 𝐂𝐡𝐢𝐞𝐟 𝐌𝐢𝐤𝐞 𝐋𝐢𝐥𝐢𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐥 𝐃𝐢𝐬𝐜𝐮𝐬𝐬𝐞𝐬 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐌𝐚𝐫𝐬𝐡𝐚𝐥𝐥 𝐁𝐚𝐥𝐥𝐨𝐭 𝐈𝐧𝐢𝐭𝐢𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐯𝐞 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐈𝐭𝐬 𝐈𝐦𝐩𝐚𝐜𝐭 𝐨𝐧 𝐄𝐦𝐞𝐫𝐠𝐞𝐧𝐜𝐲 𝐒𝐞𝐫𝐯𝐢𝐜𝐞𝐬

At the May 11, 2026 meeting of the Taxpayers Association of El Dorado County, members welcomed El Dorado Hills Fire Chief Mike Lilienthal for a detailed presentation on the proposed Marshall Ballot Initiative and its potential implications for fire protection, emergency medical services, wildfire prevention, and healthcare access throughout El Dorado County.

Chief Lilienthal, a lifelong county resident and veteran firefighter who has served as Fire Chief of El Dorado Hills Fire Department since 2020, provided a fire service perspective on the citizen-sponsored initiative. He explained how the proposed 3/8-cent sales tax measure would generate funding dedicated to wildfire prevention, emergency response, fire suppression, vegetation management, evacuation planning, emergency alert systems, and maintaining local healthcare infrastructure.

The presentation also explored the financial challenges facing local fire agencies, including rising operational costs, equipment replacement, training requirements, insurance expenses, and longstanding limitations on traditional revenue sources. Chief Lilienthal discussed how fire agencies throughout the county increasingly operate as a regional system, sharing resources and personnel during major emergencies and wildfires. He also addressed the relationship between hospital availability, ambulance transport times, and overall emergency response capacity.

Throughout the discussion, Chief Lilienthal stressed the importance of maintaining operational readiness and ensuring that fire and emergency medical services remain sustainable as El Dorado County continues to face increasing wildfire risk and growing service demands.

[𝘞𝘢𝘵𝘤𝘩 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘧𝘶𝘭𝘭 𝘱𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘩𝘦𝘳𝘦.]

05/28/2026

A Citizen’s Guide to the El Dorado County 2026-27 Budget: Where Your Tax Dollars Are Going (and the Risks Ahead). First Glance.

Every year, El Dorado County releases a massive, multi-hundred-page budget document.

05/10/2026

Open Letter to All El Dorado County District 4 Supervisor Candidates. Gina Posey for EDC Supervisor - District 4 Greg Clark for Board of Supervisors 2026 Robert Deitz for Supervisor Senator Ted Gaines

This letter is being sent publicly to all candidates running for El Dorado County District 4 Supervisor. The purpose is not to create a debate, conduct attacks, or encourage political theater. All comments NOT from candidates will be deleted. These questions are for the candidates to answer and provide information for the voters in District 4. The purpose is simple: provide the voters with direct, written answers to serious questions facing El Dorado County.

Your responses will be posted publicly and unedited so voters can review them for themselves. Because the public deserves clarity, We ask that each candidate answer specifically and avoid broad political generalities, talking points, or non-answers. If you support something, explain exactly how you would accomplish it. If you oppose something, explain what alternative you propose instead.

El Dorado County residents are increasingly frustrated with the direction of the County, the cost of government, and the inability to get projects, homes, businesses, and basic services approved in a timely and affordable manner. These issues affect taxpayers, employees, business owners, property owners, and families throughout the County.

The following questions are intended to help voters understand where each candidate actually stands.

1. The Building and Planning Department is widely viewed as dysfunctional. Simple permits can take hours, while building a home, opening a business, or developing property can take months to years and cost hundreds of thousands of dollars. Many believe this is due to outdated systems, lack of automation, inconsistent application of policy, and in some cases projects being intentionally slow-walked because staff oppose them. CEQA is also viewed by many as having been weaponized beyond its intended purpose. As an example, the City and County of San Francisco has implemented highly automated permitting systems that allow many permits to be processed within weeks rather than years. What specifically would you do to modernize El Dorado County’s permitting process, reduce delays, increase accountability, and ensure staff cannot arbitrarily obstruct projects?

2. El Dorado County is currently facing an approximate $20 million structural budget deficit, with projections showing the deficit potentially growing substantially in coming years. What is your detailed plan to move the County from structural deficits to long-term fiscal stability and eventually a budget surplus? Please identify what areas you believe should be cut, restructured, audited, expanded, or prioritized.

3. Please explain your position on County Charter Sections 504, and 602. Many residents believe the voters originally intended Section 504 compensation protections to apply to approximately 84 front-line EDSO positions, yet today more than 200 employees reportedly receive compensation benefits tied to those provisions through various attachments and expansions over time. Do you believe the current implementation reflects voter intent? If not, what specific corrective actions would you support?

4. Multiple current and former County employees have described the County work environment as toxic, politically driven, and based on fear of retaliation or job loss for speaking openly. What specific steps would you take to improve transparency, morale, accountability, and trust within County government while still maintaining effective management and oversight?

5. El Dorado County has faced an extraordinary amount of land use litigation over the past decade, resulting in substantial legal expenses and settlements reportedly exceeding $100 million. Many business owners, developers, and property owners now openly state they would avoid doing business in El Dorado County because the process is viewed as unpredictable, adversarial, expensive, and legally risky. Some residents also question whether County Counsel has provided consistently sound legal guidance behind closed session discussions. What specifically would you do to reduce litigation exposure, restore confidence in County governance, and create a more predictable and legally defensible land use process?

6. El Dorado County voters approved cannabis legalization years ago, yet the legal industry within the County remains extremely limited. Meanwhile, illegal cultivation remains widespread. Many operators argue that legal compliance costs, permitting timelines, and County restrictions make legal operation economically impossible, with startup costs often reaching hundreds of thousands of dollars and requiring years before operations can begin. At the same time, the County may be losing millions in potential annual tax revenue. How would you reform the County’s cannabis ordinance to create a workable legal framework, reduce illegal cultivation, protect neighborhoods and the environment, respect lawful property rights, and generate meaningful tax revenue for the County?

7. Agrotourism represents a potentially significant opportunity for El Dorado County to increase tourism, support family farms and wineries, preserve agricultural land, and generate additional tax revenue. However, many operators believe the current regulatory environment discourages innovation and expansion. What specific policies would you support to encourage responsible agrotourism growth while balancing neighborhood and environmental concerns?

8. Employee healthcare benefits and provider selection have been the subject of ongoing concern among some County employees and taxpayers. Questions have also been raised regarding the County’s continued use of certain healthcare providers despite claims that lower-cost alternatives may exist. Some residents have expressed concern about the appearance of conflicts involving employees who advocated for certain providers and later accepted employment connected to those same organizations. What steps would you take to independently review County healthcare contracts, ensure transparency, eliminate potential conflicts of interest, and reduce long-term employee healthcare costs?

9. Supervisors necessarily rely on staff expertise when making decisions, yet many residents believe staff sometimes present selective or incomplete information that pushes the Board toward predetermined outcomes. How would you ensure that supervisors receive balanced, complete, and financially accurate information that is free of outside influence, before making major policy decisions? Would you support any reforms related to independent analysis, outside review, or transparency in staff recommendations?

10. What is your philosophy regarding accessibility and constituent engagement? Will your office maintain an open-door policy for all residents, or do you believe access should primarily occur through organized groups, political relationships, and established stakeholders? How specifically will ordinary residents be able to communicate concerns directly to you?

11. El Dorado County’s General Plan was intended to establish long-term expectations regarding growth, development, infrastructure, and preservation of the County’s character. However, many residents believe the General Plan is continually amended or reinterpreted to accommodate projects that would not otherwise align with its original intent. How would you balance property rights, economic growth, environmental concerns, and adherence to the General Plan moving forward?

The residents of El Dorado County deserve direct answers, not campaign slogans. I look forward to reviewing and publicly posting each candidate’s responses in full so voters can make informed decisions based on substance and specifics.

Respectfully,

Lee S. Tannenbaum
President, Taxpayers Association of El Dorado County

05/04/2026

𝐃𝐢𝐬𝐭𝐫𝐢𝐜𝐭 𝟒 𝐒𝐮𝐩𝐞𝐫𝐯𝐢𝐬𝐨𝐫 𝐂𝐚𝐧𝐝𝐢𝐝𝐚𝐭𝐞 𝐅𝐨𝐫𝐮𝐦 𝐃𝐫𝐚𝐰𝐬 𝐒𝐡𝐚𝐫𝐩 𝐃𝐢𝐬𝐜𝐮𝐬𝐬𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐨𝐧 𝐂𝐨𝐮𝐧𝐭𝐲 𝐏𝐫𝐢𝐨𝐫𝐢𝐭𝐢𝐞𝐬

At the May 4, 2026 meeting of the Taxpayers Association of El Dorado County, members hosted the District 4 Supervisor Candidate Forum featuring candidates Robert Dietz, Greg Clark, and Gina Posey. The forum provided voters with an opportunity to hear directly from the candidates ahead of the June 2 primary election. Candidate Ted Gaines was also invited to participate, but declined the invitation.

Following opening statements, candidates answered a series of questions focused on some of the most pressing issues facing El Dorado County, including fiscal stability, the potential incorporation of El Dorado Hills, County Charter Section 504, road maintenance, and frustrations surrounding the County’s planning and permitting processes.

The discussion highlighted differing perspectives on how to strengthen the County’s economy, improve customer service within local government, maintain public safety, and manage a budget exceeding $1 billion. Candidates also shared their backgrounds, governing philosophies, and priorities should they be elected.

Audience questions further expanded the conversation into topics ranging from tourism and economic development to housing, water resources, and transparency in County operations. Throughout the forum, attendees were able to compare the candidates side-by-side in an open and respectful exchange on the future direction of District 4 and El Dorado County as a whole.

For voters seeking a deeper understanding of the candidates and the issues shaping this election, this forum provides an invaluable opportunity to hear directly from those seeking to serve.

[𝘞𝘢𝘵𝘤𝘩 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘧𝘶𝘭𝘭 𝘤𝘢𝘯𝘥𝘪𝘥𝘢𝘵𝘦 𝘧𝘰𝘳𝘶𝘮 𝘩𝘦𝘳𝘦.]

04/27/2026

𝐓𝐫𝐞𝐚𝐬𝐮𝐫𝐞𝐫-𝐓𝐚𝐱 𝐂𝐨𝐥𝐥𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐨𝐫 𝐂𝐚𝐧𝐝𝐢𝐝𝐚𝐭𝐞 𝐅𝐨𝐫𝐮𝐦: 𝐂𝐨𝐩𝐩𝐨𝐥𝐚 𝐯𝐬. 𝐋𝐞𝐢𝐤𝐚𝐮𝐟

At the April 27, 2026 meeting of the Taxpayers Association of El Dorado County, members hosted a candidate forum for the upcoming Treasurer-Tax Collector election, featuring incumbent Sean Coppola and challenger Corey Leikauf.

The forum provided voters with a direct opportunity to hear from both candidates as they delivered opening and closing statements and responded to a structured set of policy questions. Topics included the core functions of the Treasurer-Tax Collector’s Office, proposed improvements, strategies to maximize returns on public investment funds, and approaches to transparency and independence in financial decision-making.

Candidates also addressed how they would handle political pressure, collaborate with other officials, and ensure responsible stewardship of taxpayer dollars. The discussion was followed by audience Q&A, where attendees posed additional questions on priorities, experience, and vision for the office.

With the June 2 primary election approaching, this forum offers voters a valuable, side-by-side comparison of the candidates’ qualifications, perspectives, and plans for managing over a billion dollars in public funds and safeguarding the County’s financial integrity.

𝘞𝘢𝘵𝘤𝘩 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘧𝘶𝘭𝘭 𝘳𝘦𝘤𝘰𝘳𝘥𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘵𝘰 𝘩𝘦𝘢𝘳 𝘥𝘪𝘳𝘦𝘤𝘵𝘭𝘺 𝘧𝘳𝘰𝘮 𝘣𝘰𝘵𝘩 𝘤𝘢𝘯𝘥𝘪𝘥𝘢𝘵𝘦𝘴 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘮𝘢𝘬𝘦 𝘢𝘯 𝘪𝘯𝘧𝘰𝘳𝘮𝘦𝘥 𝘥𝘦𝘤𝘪𝘴𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘢𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘣𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘰𝘵 𝘣𝘰𝘹.

04/23/2026

𝐑𝐨𝐝 𝐖𝐨𝐨𝐝 𝐃𝐢𝐬𝐜𝐮𝐬𝐬𝐞𝐬 𝐄𝐥 𝐃𝐨𝐫𝐚𝐝𝐨 𝐇𝐢𝐥𝐥𝐬 𝐂𝐢𝐭𝐲𝐡𝐨𝐨𝐝 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐈𝐭𝐬 𝐏𝐨𝐭𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐢𝐚𝐥 𝐈𝐦𝐩𝐚𝐜𝐭

At the April 20, 2026 meeting of the Taxpayers Association of El Dorado County, members heard from Rod Wood, a veteran city manager with over 50 years of experience in local government, on the topic of potential cityhood for El Dorado Hills (EDH).

Drawing on a career that includes serving as City Manager and CEO in multiple California cities and leading large-scale development projects, Rod provided a comprehensive overview of what incorporation would entail and how similar efforts have succeeded, or failed, in the past.

He explained that a financial sustainability analysis is currently underway, and if it demonstrates sufficient revenue to support municipal services, a cityhood measure could appear on the ballot as early as 2027. While prior efforts to incorporate EDH have failed, Rod noted that current conditions, particularly growth, governance concerns, and revenue dynamics, have renewed momentum behind the effort.

A key focus of the discussion was the significant share of property tax revenue generated by EDH, and how incorporation could reshape fiscal relationships between the community and El Dorado County. Rod outlined both the potential benefits — such as greater local control over land use, services, and planning — and the challenges, including startup costs and long-term financial obligations.

The presentation concluded with an engaging Q&A session, where attendees explored implications for county governance, service delivery, and the broader regional economy.

Rod’s insights provided valuable context on one of the most consequential governance questions facing El Dorado County today.

[𝘞𝘢𝘵𝘤𝘩 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘧𝘶𝘭𝘭 𝘱𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘩𝘦𝘳𝘦.]