Agenda - 02-19-2015 - E1 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

MA concurred with this recommendation since there are different legal requirements for the two types of reviews /approvals. Remarks on Possible Review Processes Legislative The possible process for legislative items illustrated in Attachment 1 has several advantages over the existing process: • Nearby property owners will be notified about proposed map amendments earlier than currently occurs through first class mailed notifications and posted signs for the Planning Board meeting, which would occur prior to the public hearing. • The public could speak at both the Planning Board meeting and the later BOCC public hearing. • A quorum of Planning Board members would no longer be required to hold a BOCC public hearing, but Planning Board members would be encouraged to attend the public hearings. • The public hearing would be closed the night of the hearing and the BOCC could do one of the following: o Defer a decision to a later BOCC meeting date (items would no longer be listed on the public hearing portion of the later BOCC agenda and the public could make oral comments). • Refer an application back to the Planning Board for further review. • Make a decision at the conclusion of the hearing (this would allow the current process to move more quickly for items that are not particularly controversial). • Because the requirement for written comments is removed and the public hearing is closed the night of the hearing, the hearing no longer would need to be continued to a date /certain so the awkward process of having items listed on the public hearing portion of the BOCC agenda but with no additional comments accepted would no longer occur. Quasi - Judicial Quasi - judicial matters differ from legislative items in that only sworn testimony from experts is supposed to be heard at the public hearing for quasi - judicial matters, which means that the opinions of typical residents (unless they are experts in a particular subject matter) is not supposed to be considered in the quasi-judicial decision. The Planning Board believes that it should be involved in making a recommendation to the BOCC on quasi-judicial matters and the flowchart in Attachment 1 reflects this. Some advantages of the possible process over the existing process include: • The Planning Board meeting could be viewed as a "dry run" for the later BOCC public hearing and anyone would be able to address the Planning Board, although non - expert speakers would be informed that their comments could not be a basis for decision at the formal public hearing. o The discussion at the Planning Board meeting could highlight areas for interest for the BOCC to question expert witnesses about at the formal public hearing. • A quorum of Planning Board members would no longer be required to hold a BOCC public hearing, but Planning Board members would be encouraged to attend the public hearings. • The public hearing would be closed the night of the hearing and the BOCC could do one of the following: o Defer a decision to a later BOCC meeting date (would be necessary if additional information was requested by the BOCC at the public hearing).