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

Browse Search

65 Perdita Holtz said if the concern is to get rid of the non - speaking public hearing, then the way to do this is to remove the requirement for only having written comments after a public hearing. Commissioner Dorosin asked what the basis was for this rule. Perdita Holtz said she believed that this was set up in the 1980's so that the Board of County Commissioners would be informed about anything that went on after the public hearing. Craig Benedict said the reason for this rule was to insure that their legislative and quasi - judicial procedures were the same. He said the goal was to have some point in time where the testimony coming in could be stopped to allow for a decision based on a finite amount of information. He said the new suggestion is to have a legislative procedure that can be wide open the whole time. He said for the quasi - judicial items, there will probably be some point in time where that testimony has to stop. Commissioner Pelissier said overall there are a lot of good things in the proposed new process, but she is confused about the lack of increase in the frequency of the quarterly public hearings. She said this would not accomplish the goal of speeding the process for applications that are "no brainers." Perdita Holtz said there were concerns expressed by the Board of County Commissioners about the possibility of putting quarterly public hearings on regular agendas. She said the current suggestion is to try this new process prior to taking that next step. Commissioner Pelissier asked if the UDO would have to be changed in order to change the process. Perdita Holtz said yes. Commissioner Pelissier said the recommendation to close the public hearing tonight does not preclude the Board from taking some action based on what has already been heard and discussed; but it is an iterative process, and there would need to be another public hearing in order to make changes other than what has been discussed. Perdita Holtz said one of the more substantive changes that would require a second public hearing was removing the proposed language about having up to 8 public hearings per year. She said if the Commissioners still want to pursue this, then perhaps there would not be a need for a second public hearing. Commissioner Rich asked if an additional meeting is being added after the notifications go out and the Planning Board meeting is held. Perdita Holtz said it is just another opportunity for the public to comment to the Planning Board. Perdita Holtz said one of the items in the 5th box on the flowchart talks about the fact that the Planning Board action could be to make a recommendation or to make a preliminary recommendation and ask the Board of Commissioners to send it back to the Planning Board if anything significant happens. Commissioner Rich said she wonders if that is actually speeding things up, or if it is just adding another repetitive step. Perdita Holtz said it could add a step to more controversial items where it may be sent back to the Planning Board. She said it is really just flipping when the Planning Board meeting occurs. She said, with this proposal there would be no Planning Board meeting after the public hearing for many legislative items. She said for more complicated issues, this would add another opportunity for the public to comment. Commissioner Rich said if this process is adopted, it is important to make these changes clear to the public in order to have as much involvement as possible. Commissioner Gordon said she wanted to add a historical note about the legal advertisement. She there was a case where the Board was sued over a deficient legal