Clarification to go back to PC5 and PC6
What the county recorded
This item is not from the published agenda
It is a stretch of the recording that this archive identified as a separate matter — a call to order, a recess, or something taken up that the agenda does not list. There is no official title, no staff recommendation and no disposition, because the county never recorded one. Everything below is inferred.
The source document
The county’s agenda for Planning Commission, Aug 18, 2022
The published PDF. Its text could not be extracted — it is an image-only scan — so nothing in it is searchable here, but it reads normally.
The county’s minutes for Planning Commission, Aug 18, 2022
The published PDF, as served by the county. This item is one entry in it.
What was said
Machine transcription of 1m of recording, with speaker names inferred from voice matching. 100% of 7 lines carry a name. It shows what was said, not what was decided, and both the words and the names can be wrong.
Excuse me, Mr. Chair. Just for some clarification, would you like to go back to PC five or would you like to go to the regular agenda?
Uh see BC five, yes, we that that was on consent, but what was the problem with that one?
It was pulled because there's opposition. Oh okay. Same thing with PC six. Okay.
Yeah, let's see. Because we're on to the regular items anyway. So yeah, let's go back to five and six.
Okay.
Five six and eight.
Very good.