Response says
The Board partly disagrees: six positions link to the Sheriff, whose pay links to the Undersheriff; it disputes opposition to voter intent and cites its 2022 peer-county review.
← Back to this finding in the response audit
Public discussion · Finding F1
Executive salary linkages and voter intent
What should residents consider about Finding F1: Executive salary linkages and voter intent, and the County’s response?
El Dorado County Board of SupervisorsAudit assessment: Addressed
Participate in this discussionAudit context
What the response says and how it was assessed
Audit analysis
The response separates the linkage structure from the contested interpretation of voter intent and explains compaction and executive hierarchy. The dated peer review is a checkable basis, not proof of voter intent or an adjudication of legality.
Finding-response score
Document completeness and usefulness—not factual verification or a legal conclusion.
4/4
Statutory elements
- Stated position
- 2/2
- Applicable disagreement elements
- 2/2
6/6
Public usefulness
- Coverage
- 2/2
- Reason specificity
- 2/2
- Support traceability
- 2/2
The response separates the linkage structure from the contested interpretation of voter intent and explains compaction and executive hierarchy. The dated peer review is a checkable basis, not proof of voter intent or an adjudication of legality.
Scoring confidence: high
Source pages
Review the underlying documents
Public participation
Discuss the finding and response
Use Pol.is to discuss both the Grand Jury finding and the County’s response, see where participants agree, and add a perspective for others to consider. Participant statements do not alter this audit or verify factual claims made by any participant or source document.
Loading the Pol.is conversation...