Lake County Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Committee Meeting - October 27, 2026

The Lake County Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Committee met at 1 p.m. on October 27, 2026, in person and via Zoom, with the meeting recorded through Zoom. The committee established a quorum, handled routine approvals, and received an update on the county's belonging and inclusion assessment, followed by discussion of psychological safety, benchmarking, and next steps for the 2027 work plan. The meeting adjourned with the next meeting date listed as TBD.

Consent Calendar

• Roll call showed Chair Campos, Member Dan Ford (also transcribed as 'Dan Forth'/'Dan Force'), Member Ewing, and Vice Chair Hewitt present; Member Kyle was absent. A physical quorum was established. Later in the transcript, the chair is also referred to as 'Chair Hart,' an apparent transcription inconsistency.
• A motion by Member Dan Ford, seconded by Member Ewing, to approve the item referenced as 'April 1' was approved by voice vote with all in favor. No addenda were added to the agenda. (No agenda or minutes were available in the source materials to confirm the exact item.)

Public Comments & Testimony

• No public comment was offered.

Discussion Items

Belonging and Inclusion Assessment Update

• Lacey Simpson, Assistant County Administrator, presented the update on behalf of County Administration, Communications, and Human Resources, in partnership with Dr. Carter of the Carter Development Group. She credited Ruth Ann Hall and the communications and HR teams for their work.
• The assessment examined workplace belonging and inclusion by reviewing communication and employment policies and gathering employee feedback through surveys, focus groups, and interviews. Dr. Carter rated psychological safety as a significant area of risk.
• Survey findings presented by Ms. Simpson included: nearly three-quarters of respondents reported a sense of belonging; about 84% said county communications use inclusive language; about 42% said they could voice their opinions without fear, about 35% disagreed, and 22% were neutral; only 56% agreed that leadership follows up on employee input; and only about half felt policies were applied fairly and that leadership follows up on their input.
• The presentation highlighted recommendations to make information easier to find and use, improve representation in communications, ensure assistance is available when online options do not work, and update diversity and inclusion policy 1.6 with clearer employee protections, annual harassment prevention training, ways to raise concerns outside a supervisor, and explicit protection against retaliation.
• Ms. Simpson noted that the county is finalizing the assessment report and developing a multi-year plan, with 2027 work plan priorities focused on updating policies, improving communication and access, and addressing employee concerns about workload, recognition, and leadership follow-through.
• She also recalled that in April, Dr. Mary Ross Cunningham encouraged department heads and board members to take psychological leadership training, and the county hopes to offer similar training again.

Committee Discussion

• The chair asked about the anonymous reporting line and about how psychological safety compares to benchmarks or specific demographic groups. Ms. Simpson confirmed an anonymous reporting line exists, is managed by HR, and that HR recently reminded staff of available resources in the county connection newsletter.
• Member Ewing supported testing real systems from a customer or user perspective, noted that employee resource groups are not currently active and expressed interest in restarting them, asked whether survey data was broken down by department, and suggested using standardized surveys such as Gallup to benchmark results over time and across organizations. Ms. Simpson said results were not broken down by department to avoid identifying small teams, but the final report includes demographic data such as male, female, and race.
• Member Danforth asked about demographic breakdowns by age and gender and suggested validating Dr. Carter's findings through other indicators such as anonymous tips, turnover, exit interviews, and grievances. Ms. Simpson said that validation has not been done to date.
• Member Hewitt cautioned that changes in the number of employees can change percentages, supported a standardized rubric or survey for year-over-year comparisons, and suggested tracking anonymous complaints on a regular basis to validate survey results.
• Several members supported benchmarking against other organizations and using consistent measurement to assess whether the county is improving.

Key Outcomes

• The committee received the assessment update and thanked staff; no formal vote was taken on the assessment itself.
• The county will continue finalizing the assessment report and developing a multi-year implementation plan, including priorities for the 2027 work plan.
• Member Danforth suggested giving staff direction to validate the assessment findings using other workplace indicators, but no formal committee action is recorded in the transcript.
• No county administrator's report, executive session, or member remarks were presented.
• The next meeting date was announced as TBD.