Agenda - 09-02-2021; 8-a - Minutes

Browse Search

9 1 Perdita Holtz said it came from State language. 2 Commissioner Hamilton said she agrees with Commissioner Bedford, and does not want 3 to change the notice from 15 to 10 days. She said she wants to signal to residents that they 4 have been heard regarding adequate notice. 5 Commissioner Hamilton referred to section 2.712, which discusses giving notice about 6 special permits within reasonable time. She said this is vague, and needs specification. She 7 said the previous 5 days may not have been enough, but she would like more specificity. 8 9 Commissioner Dorosin rejoined the meeting at 7:51 p.m. 10 11 James Bryan said this is notice of something that is already done, rather than telling the 12 public something will be done. He said residents go to the Board of Adjustment with special use 13 permits, and have already had notices leading up, then the quasi-judicial hearing, then the 14 Board of Adjustment makes a decision of yes or no. He said usually parties are in the room, 15 and within 5 days, staff will mail a letter about what happened at the hearing. He said this is 16 usually unnecessary because of everyone being in the room. He said the Board's action only 17 takes effect when reduced in writing and signed by the chair. He said this normally did not 18 happen within 5 days because a lot can happen at hearings. He said there has to be a finding 19 of fact, which is dependent on testimony and witnesses, and staff often has to wait for minutes 20 before sending the notice. He said that document starts clock for appealing the decision with 21 Superior Court. He said 5 days is a quick turnover and it confuses some people who think 30 22 days starts from vote or notice, but is actually from the date the ordinance is signed by the chair. 23 He said the Board of Adjustment makes Quasi-judicial decisions, and the current chair agrees 24 this is confusing for the public, and wanted to streamline it. 25 Commissioner Hamilton said she can understand that 5 days is not enough time, with all 26 of the steps that need to be taken, but finds the wording "reasonable time" adds more 27 confusion. She said there should be some timeline so people do not argue about defining 28 reasonableness. 29 James Bryan said it is required by statute that the Board of Adjustment has to do it and 30 the Board chair has to sign it. He said some meetings span over several nights or several 31 months, while others are very simple. 32 Commissioner Hamilton clarified that the letter is sent after the decision is made, so it 33 seems there could be a timeframe since everything has been done up to that point. 34 Chair Price said if the issue is the word "reasonable", it is part of general legalese and 35 asked an attorney on the call to comment about that. 36 Commissioner Dorosin said he thinks "reasonable" is ambiguous. He suggested 37 removing the option for a copy of the decision to be provided before it becomes effective. He 38 said if clock only starts running after the decision is effective, then he would go with 10 days 39 instead of 5. 40 Chair Price asked if the term "reasonable" is from the state statute. 41 42 Commissioner Dorosin exited the meeting at 7:59 p.m. 43 44 James Bryan said staff has used this wording to reflect the state statute. He said the 45 state statute requires the decision to be reduced to writing, given to all parties, be noticed in the 46 newspaper. He said Orange County gives notice, which is different from the written order. He 47 said the statute says the Ordinance has to be given to everyone, but does not clarify a 48 timeframe, so he and Planning staff suggested "reasonable". He said since the statute does not 49 have a timeframe, someone would have to go into superior court and file a writ of mandamus. 50 He said this change puts the onus on the County to at least be reasonable. He said he does