Two speakers during public comment raised separate concerns that the board took under advisement.

Diana Rutkowski asked the board to clarify how the county funds and monitors outside investigative contracts used when citizens file complaints against county employees. She asked for reporting on total spending for outside investigations, timelines for completion, screening safeguards for serial filers, and criteria used to prioritize external investigations. County Executive staff pledged to follow up with non‑sensitive information and to provide what the office could about procedures and timelines.

On item 11, two members of the public questioned the $10,843,148 appropriation for the Nov. 4 statewide special election and flagged a ballot‑envelope design in which punched holes aligned with the vote area potentially made marks visible through the signature window when the ballot was folded. One commenter urged the board to reject the expenditure and to investigate vendors and envelope placement; another said he had discussed the matter with staff and noted the county used three vendors to print, envelope and mail ballots. Supervisors said staff had already looked into the issue, met with the county executive, and would take steps to ensure visibility through envelope holes does not recur (for example by blacking out or cross‑hatching the exposed area on future mailings).