Timeline from BOCC Meeting Minutes
January 13, 2025 – No record of any request for True Pearce to review County Code. The P&Z Administrator and two representatives of Title One met with the BOCC. The BOCC directed Brent-Dowell and Title One to proceed with an original parcel project for SW Washington County and report back in four months.
January 21, 2025 – No record of any request for True Pearce to review County Code. This set of meeting minutes includes Harberd raising that the PA had recommended in the last meeting that BOCC members should have County cell phones. However, there is no record in the January 13 meeting of this discussion. All discussions with the PA in that January 13 meeting were held in Executive session, with no record. No PA agenda topic is included in the January 21 meeting minutes.
February 3, 2025 – No record of any request for True Pearce to review County Code. No record of any discussion with the PA in this meeting since it was all in Executive session.
February 10, 2025 – No record of any request for True Pearce to review County Code. The record shows the PA advised the BOCC regarding the original parcel search by Title One, the potential need to compete a contract for this work, and a potential conflict of interest with a P&Z employee related to that project. The BOCC made no decision on this matter at this open meeting. Other PA discussions were in Executive session with no record.
February 18, 2025 – No record of any request for True Pearce to review County Code. The majority of the PA discussions were held in Executive session with no record.
February 24, 2025 – No record of any request for True Pearce to review County Code. The majority of the PA discussions were held in Executive session with no record.
March 3, 2025 – No record of any request for True Pearce to review County Code. The majority of the PA discussions were held in Executive session with no record.
March 10, 2025 – No record of any request for True Pearce to review County Code. The majority of the PA discussions were held in Executive session with no record.
March 17, 2025 – No record of any request for True Pearce to review County Code. The PA discussions were held in Executive session with no record.
March 24, 2025 – No record of any request for True Pearce to review County Code. The PA discussions were held in Executive session with no record.
April 7, 2025 – No record of any request for True Pearce to review County Code or seek any outside review. Even though April 7, 2024 is the date of True’s code analysis memorandum, there is nothing in the record about this PA code analysis. The majority of the PA discussions were held in Executive session.
April 14, 2025 – No record of any request for True Pearce to review County Code or seek any outside legal review. The majority of the PA discussions were held in Executive session with no record. The PA stated in the open meeting was he stated that statutes do not require Planning and Zoniing Agenda’s or Meeting Minutes to be posted on the County website.
April 21, 2025 – No record of any request for True Pearce to review County Code or seek any outside legal review. Weiser Mayor Randy Hibbard addressed the continued saga of the rezone request for the PA Office Building, which went without a BOCC response during this meeting. The majority of the PA discussions were held in Executive session with no record.
April 28, 2025 – No record of any request for True Pearce to review County Code or seek any outside legal review. The majority of the PA discussions were held in Executive session with no record. Mary Beth Schwartz addressed the BOCC regarding the number of minutes in closed meetings so far in 2025. The BOCC spent 926 minutes in Executive Session between January 13, 2025 and April 21, 2025, which is approximately three times the number of minutes spent for the same period in 2024. The disrespect to the public, lack of transparency and erosion of trust was highlighted by Schwartz. The PA Executive Session later in this BOCC meeting added another 138 minutes to the Executive Session tally.
May 5, 2025 – No record of any request for True Pearce to review County Code or seek any outside review. The majority of the PA discussions were held in Executive session with no record. Pearce requested an executive session to discuss pending litigation against the County in the Moye suit. Pearce also read a May 5, 2025 letter from Holland and Hart, which was a review of the April 7, 2025 True Memorandum documenting new interpretations of the County Code. This was the first time this PA review had been discussed in an open meeting. One of the conclusions in the True Memorandum is the following: “Owners of A1 parcels that have 20 acres or more of lot size are entitled to build one single family residence, as well as farm and ranch houses and other structures.” (Page 12 of Memorandum) True’s memorandum analysis entirely neglects and does not address the definition of “Original Parcel” in WCC Section 5.1.2 and ignores the application of Zoning Provisions contained in WCC Section 5.1.2 C.8. This omission in the analysis would appear to be intentional in order to support his conclusion of automatic building rights on anything 20 acres or larger.
May 12, 2025 – The majority of the PA discussions were held in Executive session with no record. The record from this May 12 meeting discusses the recognition by Joe Kulp that the County is not uniformly granting permits to applicants, and he highlights that Tad Mundell was granted a permit, but Kulp’s has been denied. After an executive session with the PA, Harberd informed Kulp he needed to reapply for a building permit. Rourk and Brent Dowell requested that the BOCC resolve the confusion surrounding building permits. Following another executive session, the record shows the following direction: “Nate Marvin moved, seconded by Gordon Wilkerson, to direct Bonnie and the Planning
and Zoning Department to honor the settlements that were negotiated by the current
Prosecuting Attorney and to further direct Bonnie and Planning and Zoning to follow
code as written as per the Memorandum of Opinion from the current County Prosecuting
Attorney, and if P & Z has any legal questions, to contact the County Prosecuting
Attorney.” Through this action, the BOCC relegated their authority to the PA for direction to Planning and Zoning for code interpretation and application. The following statement was made regarding a need to change code: “Wilkerson stated that the Code that is in place, there was liability that needs to be addressed. Wilkerson stated that the Board has not had the opportunity to discuss the matter. Wilkerson said that he felt the three commissioners are in favor of some modifications to the Code, but they had to recognize that if the Board didn’t address what was in Code, the County would be held liable. Wilkerson stated that public input is something that “we all need.”” It should be noted that no code change has been pursued to address the conflicts that Wilkerson, the True Memo and Holland and Hart letter acknowledged The P&Z and the public have repeatedly highlighted these issues to the BOCC.
May 19, 2025 – The majority of the PA discussions were held in Executive session with no record. Royce Schwenfelder, Harry Soulen, Ron Jaeger, and Frank Schwartz addressed the BOCC regarding the confusion in the County over the multiple building code interpretations, and requested a Moratorium be put in place to allow time to properly resolve the issues. These citizens reminded the commissioners of the law requiring a public process prior to implementing changes to the county ordinances, rather than the approach the BOCC has taken. The PA was present but offered no advice during the open meeting. Danny Rourk raised questions regarding building code compliance. No decisions were made by the BOCC on this compliance matter. A couple of the past open meeting violations were cured after the PA’s executive session with Commissioners. Following the executive session, the open meeting record indicates that True instructed the Commissioners to state that no final decisions had been made.
May 27, 2025 – The majority of the PA discussions were held in Executive session with no record. The record shows a continued discussion of the moratorium. Leuthold discussed the responsibilities of the P & Z Commission. Leuthold told the Board to do away with the commission and get more people on there who agree “with me.” Royce Schwenkfelder, Jace Roberts, Ron Jaeger, Tristin Winigar, and Frank Schwartz all provided facts related to the current confusion created by the direction the BOCC has taken implementing the PA memorandum, and requested a pause through the moratorium. The BOCC passed a motion to put a moratorium in place, with only Wilkerson voting against. A discussion was held on needed changes to the County Code. True Pearce stated that the Memorandum that the Board received from his office is attorney/client privilege. Pearce stated the Board can waive that, Pearce cannot. Pearce stated that it is not legal for the Board to replace him as prosecuting attorney, and to go seek legal advice from outside attorneys. Pearce stated it is not lawful for the Board to approve hiring outside counsel without his permission.
June 2, 2025 – The majority of the PA discussions were held in Executive session with no record. The record shows a further discussion in the open meeting and in executive session on the Moratorium. Following an executive session, Nate Marvin motioned to instruct True Pearce to make some additional changes. The motion was made and carried.
June 9, 2025 – The majority of the PA discussions were held in Executive session with no record. An amended Moratorium was read into the record. Note: This amended moratorium was the product of BOCC direction to True, and was not the original moratorium proposed by the citizens in May.
June 16, 2025 – The majority of the PA discussions were held in Executive session with no record. Roark reported that, per Pearce, Roark cannot accept any permit applications on A1 ground. An open meeting violation by Marvin was cured during this BOCC meeting. Pearce recommended the Board review what surrounding counties had adopted regarding Accessory Dwelling Units. He also stated that Planning and Zoning would need to have a hearing regarding the matter. After a 58 minute PA executive session, Harberd reported no final decisions were made. True reported that they discussed the Moye lawsuit.
June 16, 2025 – Washinton County Budget Workshop for elected officials and County Department Heads. The record shows no attendance by True Pearce or anyone from the PA’s Office.
June 23, 2025 – The majority of the PA discussions were held in Executive session with no record. For Road and Bridge, Marvin asked Odoms if he had placed markers on Gentry lane, and Odoms affirmed he had (Note -this action/decision was apparently directed in executive session on June 16, since no written record exists). Meeting minutes reflect Tony Young discussing continued confusion over implementation of True’s moratorium. Debbie Warren provided input to the commissioners on the moratorium and the basis for the P&Z Commission’s vote of “No Confidence” in the leadership of True Pearce. The BOCC made no response to Warren’s statement. Ron Jaeger also addressed the BOCC, discussing the moratorium and the importance of addressing needed changes to the code. Jaeger outlined the P&Z Commission’s plan for addressing needed changes and requested a copy of the April 7 PA Memorandum to assure all needed changes were evaluated. Pearce described the process by which he believed the current Moratorium was put in place. Additionally, even though Pearce did not attend the June 18 Budget Workshop, he used this June 23 BOCC meeting to request increases in the PA Budget (Other Personnel increased to $82,000, a 4% increase to the Prosecutor’s salary, an increase in Training to $6,500, and stated that there should be excess funds in regular salaries and asked a question if the BOCC had considered a cost of living increase). Marvin stated there have been no decisions, but other Departments have requested 3%. Pearce stated that he was requested by the Board to give a legal opinion on the code due to pending lawsuits and questions, and noted the memo had attorney-client privilege They then went into executive session for another 61 minutes. After returning to an open meeting, Pearce stated that the Moye lawsuit was discussed as well as purchasing property in executive session.
July 7, 2025 – The majority of the PA discussions were held in Executive session with no record. Nate Marvin read a prepared letter addressing the planning and zoning matter. Gordon Wilkerson also read a prepared letter supporting the actions of True Pearce. The BOCC continued a discussion of the history of the moratorium, and True again provided his version of that history. The BOCC unanimously passed a motion to release the April 7 True memorandum, in support of the P&Z Commission code evaluation process. Wilkerson read another prepared letter to the record, this one addressing the P&Z request for outside counsel. Wilkerson then had a long podcast played from a Bonner County podcaster who opposed a local moratorium. Later in the BOCC meeting, Calvin and Mary Carroll addressed the board on the impact of the moratorium on a pending sale of property. Gwen Greenfield also addressed the commissioners regarding this moratorium. Lonnie Chambers was a third party addressing the impact of the moratorium to a building permit he was attempting to pursue. Following another executive session, Marvin stated “I would like to have a Special Meeting on Thursday at 9:00 a.m. to discuss the Moratorium, Planning and Zoning Board Discussion, and to have some time with True Pearce, Prosecuting Attorney.” Gordon Wilkerson added, “In Executive Session.” Gordon Wilkerson provided a second. True Pearce, Prosecuting Attorney, requested to add “Discussion of hiring law firms.”
July 9, 2025 – The April 7,2025 True Memorandum, as well as the Holland and Hart letter, were released by the BOCC and provided to the P&Z Commission.
July 10, 2025 – As the very first item of the meeting, Pearce requested an executive session. Immediately following this executive session, Marvin and Wilkerson motioned and voted to repeal the moratorium effective that day. The next discussion was the hiring of attorneys to defend four current county employees (Harberd, Marvin, Roark, Brent) named in a Federal lawsuit. The BOCC agreed to allow attorney rates up to $500/hr. Pearce was unable to defend these four employees due to his prior involvement in the matter. Following this discussion topic, Marvin stated ““My staff and I have put together some talking points. These are just my opinions; I would like to go through them.” Marvin proceeded to read a very long statement from a prepared set of notes, which vacated the P&Z Commission and proposed reducing the Commission from nine to five members. Marvin concluded by saying “This proposed change is about restructuring and improving efficiency, not about individuals. We encourage all current members to reapply and remain involved in county service.” Marvin next addressed the WCC P&Z application says an applicant must be a resident of the County for five years, and incorrectly stated that Idaho code says two years. This was Marvin’s introduction to a prepared revision to WCC 1-7-2, which he then presented at this meeting. They then went into Executive session for 64 minutes. Based on all of the prepared statements and the prepared revision to WCC 1-7-2, it would appear this entire presentation and discussion by Marvin and Wilkerson was preplanned and the outcome was previously decided.
July 14, 2025 – PA discussions were held in Executive session with no record. The BOCC set an August 7, 2025 hearing date for Nate’s proposed change to WCC 1-7-2. Tristin Winegar of the Washington County Farm Bureau presented several ideas on agricultural land zoning, and stated that Farm Bureau had discussed the P&Z membership at their meeting and supported a five-member board. Winegar also suggested the elimination of the “original parcel split” stating it restricted growth. A special use permit was approved for Robert and Deanna McConnell, within the City of Cambridge impact area. (It must be noted that Tristin’s proposal was very aligned with the agenda being pushed by Pearce, Chandler, Wilkerson, and Marvin, but is not supported by the vast majority of Washington County Farm Bureau members. Tristin had no authority to speak on behalf of Farm Bureau members). Jaeger spoke in support of Tristin Winegar’s statement regarding the difficulties the commissioners face and support of aspects of Winegar’s proposed change. Jaeger then addressed some of the proposed WCC 1-7-2 change, providing a few facts which countered elements of Nate’s July 10 statement (e.g., cost of P&Z, reaching consensus, member backgrounds/diversity).
July 21, 2025 – Approval of the July 7 and July 10 meeting minutes were both tabled for another meeting. Road and Bridge discussion included a reference to HDR being the surveyor currently doing Gentry Lane. Roark noted that P&Z has issued six permits but only two had been picked up. An extensive discussion was held on the City of Cambridge area of impact. Pearce stated that they could be looking at a couple hundred percent growth, which the City of Cambridge could not handle if that actually happened. PA agenda discussions included the Dickerson and Moye lawsuits. Marvin mentioned another lawsuit and provided a copy to Pearce.
July 24, 2025 – Commissioners motioned and approved attorneys and rates for Canyon County (including a $20K cap) to defend Washington County, and rates and retainers for attorneys for Roark ($300/hr), Brent-Dowell ($355/hr), and Harberd ($300/hr).
July 28, 2025 – BOCC approved the rate and retainer for an attorney for Marvin ($400/hr and $400 retainer). Roark noted that applications have been coming in to P&Z that he cannot sign. The majority of the PA discussions were held in Executive session with no record.
August 4, 2025 – A long discussion was had again on the City of Cambridge Area of Impact, and the fact that the County BOCC would still be required to approve actions outside the city limits but within the area of impact. The entire PA agenda item was held in Executive session with no record. During the Budget hearing, Marvin lobbied for a pay raise and budget increase for True and suggested it could be taken out of the Sheriff’s budget. Pearce continued to request budget increases that he had not previously requested during the June budget development cycle. Nate and Gordon pushed throughout the meeting for wage increases for True. A long, contentious budget discussion was held. Throughout the day’s discussion, it appears from the record that True, Nate and Gordon did not understand the budget process and had not properly prepared for this meeting.
August 11, 2025 –The BOCC approved meeting minutes from July 7 (as amended), July 14 (as amended), and August 4, 2026. No discussion was provided on the scope or basis for amendments made. Roark discussed the upcoming City hearing on the Panike Rezone, rescheduled for September 8, 2025. (The property is within the City of Weiser Area of Impact.) The PA agenda item was entirely in Executive session, with no information on topics/reason before or after the 45 minute session, and no record.
August 12, 2025 –The BOCC held a special meeting entirely in executive session to conduct P&Z Administrator interviews. No other information or record.
August 18, 2025 –Roark stated that two permits had been issued last week. A set of plans had been dropped off, and a discussion occurred on the need for the plans to go before the Planning and Zoning Commission. The PA agenda item was primarily in Executive session, with no information on topics/reason before or after the 31 minute session, and no record. The BOCC held another Executive session to conduct P&Z Administrator interviews.
August 21 , 2025 –Hearing on Nate’s proposed change to WCC 1-7-2. The overwhelming majority of testimony at this hearing favored making no change to the WCC. Citizens wish to leave it at a nine member Commission and a county residency requirement of five years. Chandler and Bennatts both stated the code needs to comply with the state law and only require two year residency. This incorrect statement of the requirement of Idaho code 67-6504 is also what Marvin and Pearce have been citing. IC 67-6504 says “at least two years, so the 5 years in WCC meets this requirement.
August 25, 2025 –The record states that Nate Marvin reported that he and Gordon Wilkerson attended a budget training in Canyon County last Friday. Marvin stated he didn’t believe it was an Open Meeting Law violation since there was an attorney present. Roark reported that one building permit was issued. The PA agenda item was all in Executive session (62 minutes) with no record. Another Executive session was also held for Planning and Zoning administrator interviews. Another County Budget hearing was held, Marvin went on record saying he had requested True’s code analysis and Holland and Hart review, claiming it was authorized and independent. However, the public record does not support the statements by Marvin. Wilkerson and Marvin again spent time in this hearing pushing for salary and budget increases for True.
September 2, 2025 –The BOCC included an agenda item for the Pumpkin Patch, which happens to be within the City of Weiser Area of Impact. Neither Pearce nor the Commissioners recognized that this action was subject to the City planning and zoning processes. Pearce told the Board that they have all the same powers as Planning and Zoning. (Note – this Pearce statement is contrary to IC 67-6504, since Washington County established a P&Z with governing ordinances. A change to this structure requires a change to the ordinances before implementation.) Pearce stated they needed to discuss the legal implications of code that would be more appropriate in executive session. Following the Executive Session, Harberd announced that legal advice resulted in a conclusion that the Pumpkin Patch would require a Special Use permit. The Budget hearing was then continued from August 25, with the minutes reflecting continued confusion by the commissioners.
September 8, 2025 –The BOCC met in Executive session with the Canyon County Deputy Prosecutor (supporting the Dickerson lawsuit). Following the executive session, Wilkerson said they advised the BOCC to follow their guidance. Wilkerson stated he felt the BOCC should move forward with signing the settlement agreement and release. Marvin and Wilkerson motioned and approved the Settlement of $20K to the Plaintiff. There was discussion regarding the Special Use Application for the Pumpkin Patch. Pearce stated this is an administrative matter that the Board could discuss with Charlie Downey, Planning and Zoning Administrative Assistant. (NOTE: Pearce and the BOCC don’t appear to realize this permitting action was the City’s, not the County’s). The BOCC continued with their Executive session P&Z Administrator interview discussions. Wilkerson and Marvin motioned and passed to make an offer to hire Meredith Fisher at $74,000 per year.
September 22, 2025 –The one lot subdivision located on Pearl Lane north of Weiser. Striker stated the subject property was re-zoned A2, and the subdivision will be 1.47 acres. Striker further stated that the surrounding properties are zoned A1. Access is through Pearl Lane. The nearest cross street is Highway 95 which is approximately 1800 feet to the west of the subject property. Stricker stated the remaining acreage of approximately 54 acres is not intended for future subsequent development and will remain in active agricultural production. Striker continued and stated that the tract of land is currently used for agricultural purposes as a lay down yard and contains an 80 by 40-foot agricultural shop building. Striker stated the land has been leveled with a gravel, all weather surface. The subdivision access will be through Pearl Lane which provide access to Highway 95. Striker stated that from the easterly boundary of US Highway 95 to the east side of Monroe Creek is covered by a Road and Maintenance Use Agreement. There is a proposed 30-foot ingress/egress from the center line of Monroe Creek to the southeast corner of the subdivision tract. The easement is centered on an existing gravel. all weather surface road with an approximate width of 16 feet. Striker stated the easements will be private and no dedication of public right-of-way for easements are proposed by the subdivision. Domestic water will be provided by an individual well sewage disposal will be by septic system that has been approved by Southwest District Health. Striker stated that the purpose of this is to just get a building right. There are no remaining building rights available. The property is located in the City of Weiser Impact Area. Nate Marvin moved, seconded by Gordon Wilkerson, to approve the Preliminary and Final Plat of a 1.47 acre subdivision on Pearl Lane. Motion carried. This is the Panike property that True later purchased.
October 6, 2025 –The BOCC was again informed that the actions they have been taking that are covered by the County P&Z ordinances are not legal without the BOCC first changing the ordinances. The BOCC was requested to either reinstate the P&Z Commission or begin the ordinance change process that could then make the BOCC’s actions legal. The BOCC was also reminded of the open meeting laws and informed again of some situations where it appears this law is not being followed. Roark provided a status of permits and inspections and requested the BOCC provide clarifications he specifically identified in the meeting. The BOCC signed the final plat for the Pearl Lane subdivision. Lawrence Wasden met with the Commission to request reconsideration of the $185/hr rate he was offered. He presented a substantial amount of information to the BOCC. Following an Executive session, the BOCC voted to offer a job to Bridget Felmley as the P&Z Administrator. At 1:05 pm, the BOCC was scheduled to hold a public hearing on the Pumkin Patch special use permit, however the BOCC had failed to properly notice the required parties in advance of the hearing. (NOTE: Pearce and the BOCC did not appear to realize this permitting action is the City’s, not the County’s. And the BOCC continues to attempt to perform functions of the P&Z Commission without changing the County Ordinances (where is the legal advice?)). The BOCC identified the need to make decisions regarding P&Z Commission ordinance and to start accepting applications. Marvin stated that he would “like to get clarification from our legal on, do we have to wait til April of 2026 to fill them positions? So, I would like to have that discussion maybe next week.”
October 14, 2025 –The BOCC continued their refusal to pay Wasden’s requested Attorney fee rate, even though the rate is what they authorized for the egal counsel for four county employees. Marvin and Wilkerson again voted to leave the rate at $185. Next, Marvin discussed his approach to the Planning and zoning matter. Marvin stated cause for the dismissal of the prior P&Z, which contradicted what he stated on July 10. Gordon declared that the outside counsel hired by a private citizen to help draft a moratorium was usurpation. The BOCC then voted to keep the P&Z Commission membership to nine members. The BOCC later voted to keep the residency requirement to 5 years. Marvin, “And as far as the two-year or five-year residency requirement, I think it was
pointed out that Idaho Code says two years. I’d like to ask our legal counsel, can we be
more strict and make that five years as it is now?” Pearce, “Um, I think you probably can get away with that, if that’s what you wish to do.” (Note- neither Pearce nor the Commissioners cited the actual language from the law to clarify that the 5 years currently in the WCC was fully compliant). The BOCC also requested True to look into the ordinance regarding if P&Z Commissioners appointments can be made before March/April in the current ordinance. Roark identified a request received for a nonconforming lot size. Wilkerson directed him to have it reviewed by True.
October 20, 2025 –Commissioners Wilkerson and Marvin refused to allow an agenda item from Jeri Soulier to proceed even though it was scheduled for this meeting at 10:15 am. When Harberd questioned the removal, the response from Marvin, “Yep, I checked with the prosecutor.” Marvin also didn’t like that a resignation letter was read into the record. Marvin stated, “I don’t think we need to be doing our dirty laundry in open meeting. It should have probably been done in executive session. Wasden again requested the BOCC to reconsider their refusal to allow a rate higher than $185/hr. The BOCC chose to hold their ground, which will ensure another litigation expense and settlement for the county. PA topics included noting that the Ordinance Change for appointment dates could not be discussed because it was not put on the agenda, nor was the discussion with Wasden. A PA executive session was held, with no identification of topics before or after the session. Bridget Felmley will accept the P&Z Administrator position and her work hours were set for 8:30 am to 5 pm.
October 27, 2025 –The BOCC heard from Jeri Soulier on Open Meeting concerns (covering the item Marvin and Wilkerson removed from the October 20 agenda based on advice to them from True). Jeri provided a thorough discussion of some of specific instances of what appear to be violations. Wilkerson and Marvin provided some rebuttal about how they aren’t in violation of the law as long as they aren’t making a decision, and they provided examples of where they gather together (such as IAC) that they don’t believe is a problem. Wasden was again on the agenda requesting the BOCC to reconsider their refusal to allow a rate higher than $185/hr. Wilkerson and Marvin again attempted to justify the low rate, and postponed a decision until after they speak with True. This likely result in another litigation expense and settlement for the county. Pearce provided a revision of the WCC 1-7-2 allowing year around P&Z appointments. The BOCC then held another Pumpkin Patch Hearing for a county special use permit, even though this should be a city action (NOTE: After almost two months, the record appears to reflect that Pearce and the BOCC did not realize this permitting action is the City’s, not the County’s. And the BOCC continued to attempt to perform functions of the P&Z Commission without changing the County Ordinances (where is the legal advice?)) The BOCC approved the special use permit at this hearing, even though it was not within their authority.(NOTE: City later properly addressed the request).
November 24, 2025 – Immediately prior to the start of a November 24, 2025 hearing, the BOCC was advised (off the record) to limit public testimony to two minutes, even though the published hearing notice stated speakers would be limited to three minutes. The BOCC was also advised to only allow speakers to state whether they were in favor of the change, opposed to the change, or neutral. Nothing in the hearing notice put any constraints on the content of speaker input. Pearce’s advice in fact intentionally stifled the ability of citizens to “redress grievances” as allowed under the Constitution. At least five speakers were not allowed to provide their full input (were cut off) due to the advice Pearce had provided. And Pearce violated the hearing protocol himself by speaking when he was not signed up to speak, which was a requirement for the hearing. Pearce then selectively provided an incomplete and incorrect citation of law (IC 67-6504) that supported his agenda but was contrary to other public testimony and the law. The citizen was not allowed to rebut Pearce’s inaccurate statement. The record indicates that advice to the BOCC on these matters reflects either a lack of knowledge and proper research of the law and the constitution or intentionally providing incorrect advice. The lack of county government transparency and integrity was apparent at this hearing.