Supervisor Rosemary Small Chrome, Mariposa County District 1, proposed recommending that the Board of Supervisors dissolve the Fish Camp Planning Advisory Council and work with the community to design a different, non-board-appointed structure.

Supporters and opponents debated whether dissolving the council would reduce county administrative costs and free the community from Brown Act limits — allowing more flexible electronic meetings and informal information-sharing — or whether it would diminish the council’s formal channel to county decisionmakers. After discussion, a motion to dissolve the council with the caveat that the county help develop new bylaws failed on a 3-3 tie.

Rosemary Small Chrome framed the change as a budget and workload decision: “We are about $18,000,000 short, relative to the revenues that we anticipate,” she said, and argued the county must defend how it spends staff time supporting boards and committees. She noted some advisory committees are statutorily required while others are discretionary and that many of the county’s planning advisory committees were established decades ago as part of the county general plan.

Residents and council members said the council provides a rare, structured opportunity for residents, county staff and partner agencies to meet locally. “We have the voice. That’s great,” one council member said, warning that leaving the board-appointed structure could make it harder for Fish Camp concerns to be heard by agencies that require an official county position.

Supporters of a non-board community group said removing Brown Act constraints would allow short-notice conversations, photo-sharing and electronic participation for residents who travel or live out of the area. County staff and the supervisor said they would draft a redline of the current bylaws and circulate proposed bylaws that would permit electronic meetings and outline voting and quorum rules; Supervisor Small Chrome said she would send draft bylaws to the community within about a month.

The motion that failed was introduced and seconded during the meeting; the transcript records the motion’s language as dissolving the council with the caveat that the county work with the community to develop bylaws and a replacement structure. The meeting record shows a 3-3 tie, so the motion did not pass.

County staff also said they would continue to work with Fish Camp residents on alternatives, including the possibility of a renamed community organization or standing group that would not be a board-appointed committee and therefore not subject to Brown Act agenda, posting and minute requirements.

The council and residents asked for clearer timelines and more community outreach before any final board action, and several participants urged keeping the existing council in place while draft bylaws and a proposed alternative structure are developed and circulated for community feedback. The council set the next meeting for July 26; staff said they would prepare the draft bylaws before that meeting so the community could review and comment.