2021-02-17 Planning Commission PacketCommissioners City Staff
Lawson Bronson, Chair Tim O’Neil, Vice-Chair Brian Davis, CD Director
Wayne Carlson Hope Elder E. Tina Piety, Administrative Assistant
Diana Noble-Gulliford Tom Medhurst 253-835-2601
Dale Couture Eric Olsen, Alternate www.cityoffederalway.com
Jae So, Alternate Anna Patrick, Alternate
K:\PLN Planning Commission\2021\Agenda\Agenda 02-17-21.doc
City of Federal Way
PLANNING COMMISSION
February 17, 2021, 6:30 p.m. City Hall, Zoom Meeting
AGENDA
Notice: Pursuant to Governor Inslee’s Proclamation 20-28, all in-person meetings are prohibited until further
notice. The Mayor and City Council are providing opportunities for public comment by submitting written comment
or calling into the meeting to provide oral testimony. To access these options please use the following:
DOWNLOAD THE DOCUMENT TO ACCESS THE LINKS.
Click here for a form to sign-up to give citizen comment during the meeting (via telephone, number
below) / you will be given access during the public testimony portion (we request you sign up at least 2
hours before the meeting starts).
Click Here to submit written comments to the Planning Commission (we request you submit them at least
two hours before the meeting starts); please reference Planning Commission Meeting – February 17th
Please click the link below to join the webinar:
https://cityoffederalway.zoom.us/j/92039948345?pwd=b3RBOGdQeUw5ZEFQSi8rblhlZ0hRQT09
Listen to the live meeting: (888) 788-0099 or 253-215-8782, Meeting ID: 920 3994 8345
Watch from the Zoom mobile app with meeting: 920 3994 8345 and password: 431768
1. CALL TO ORDER
2. ROLL CALL
3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
a. Planning Commission Meeting of January 20, 2021
4. PUBLIC COMMENT
5. COMMISSION BUSINESS
a. Discussion – Housing Action Plan; Summary to Date
b. Discussion – Commissioner’s Orientation
6. STAFF BUSINESS
a. Director’s Report
7. NEXT MEETING
a. March 3, 2021, 6:30 p.m.
8. ADJOURNMENT
Planning Commission Minutes Page 1 January 20, 2021
CITY OF FEDERAL WAY
PLANNING COMMISSION
January 20, 2021 City Hall
6:30 p.m. Zoom
MEETING MINUTES
Commissioners present: Lawson Bronson, Tom Medhurst, Wayne Carlson, Diana Noble-Gulliford, Tim
O’Neil, Hope Elder, Dale Couture, and Eric Olsen. Commissioners absent: none. City Staff present:
Principal Planner Robert “Doc” Hansen, Associate Planner Chaney Skadsen, City Attorney Eric Rhoades,
and Administrative Assistant II Tina Piety.
CALL TO ORDER
Chair Bronson called the meeting to order at 6:30 P.M.
MINUTES
The December 16, 2020, minutes were approved as presented.
PUBLIC COMMENT
None
COMMISSION BUSINESS
Elections – Lawson Bronson was nominated as Chair. The vote was held and Lawson Bronson was voted
in as Chair. Tim O’Neil was nominated as Vice-Chair. The vote was held and Tim O’Neil was voted in as
Vice-Chair.
Discussion, Gaps in Our Regulations Potentially Inhibiting Housing Development – Planner Hansen
delivered a summary of the code audit done to support the Housing Action Plan (HAP). He stated that the
overall goal of the HAP is to provide attainable housing for all people. Discussion was held regarding
providing a more “flexible” code. It was noted that the city’s Protentional Annexation Area is not
included in the HAP. Discussion was held on lot size standards, Homeowners Associations, and parking
in the city center. Discussion was held on the effects of Covid. Commissioner Noble-Gulliford expressed
concern that subsidized housing may be skewing the results.
Discussion, Further Discussion/Questions on Housing Needs Assessment Provided in December – No
further discussion.
Planning Commission Minutes Page 2 January 20, 2021
STAFF BUSINESS
a. Staff Report –Planner Hansen introduced Planner Rogers. Chair Bronson expressed concern that
major projects are being planned in the Northeast Tacoma and Tideflats area. Many people who live
in this area must go through Federal Way to get anywhere else; therefore, development in this area
has a direct effect on Federal Way. Chair Bronson is concerned that city staff is not aware of this
proposed development. Director Davis stated staff will seek more information on these proposed
developments.
NEXT MEETING
February 3, 2021, 6:30 p.m., Zoom Meeting
ADJOURN
The meeting adjourned at 7:55 P.M.
Page 1 of 2
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 33325 8th Avenue South Federal Way, WA 98003-6325
253-835-7000
www.cityoffederalway.com
Jim Ferrell, Mayor
MEMORANDUM
Date: February 17, 2021
To: Federal Way Planning Commission
From: Brian Davis, Director
Stacey Welsh, Planning Manager
Chaney Skadsen, Associate Planner
Re: Housing Action Plan: Summary to Date
Meeting Objective
Summarize the Federal Way Housing Action Plan (HAP) work to date in preparation for the discussion of
housing strategies at the March 3, 2021, meeting, and demonstrate the plan’s compliance with state law.
Housing Background
Throughout the subsequent decades, land use regulations were adopted and amended. Today, there are
comprehensive plan and zoning designations classified by density and use devoted to single-family
residential, multifamily residential, and mixed use. As a result, development in the city largely consists of
single-family neighborhoods and high-density apartments; rather than a mix of housing types and choice.
Federal Way is an attractive place to live in a booming region, consequently it’s getting more expensive.
Rents and home prices have gone up more than two times faster than incomes. Over the past decade,
Federal Way has seen just one new home developed for every two new households, less than any other
city in South King County. The combination of slow housing production and unmet demand has made
finding decent housing at a reasonable price increasingly difficult. Nearly 40 percent of all households are
spending over 30 percent of their income on housing related costs. As a result, displacement is already
occurring and disproportionately affects low income and BIPOC communities.
Subregional Framework
South King Housing and Homelessness Partnership (SKHHP) cities completed a subregional framework.
Federal Way, Auburn, Burien, Kent, Renton, and Tukwila each contributed $17,000 of their $100,000
HAP grant funds. Key deliverables from this analysis include:
1) Fact Packets for the subregion and each city summarizes how each city performs in
critical topic areas, such as housing trends, affordability, housing need forecast, and an
employment profile.
2) A Housing Context Assessment that identifies the methodology of data collection,
expands on existing policy tools, and evaluates their impact against intended outcomes.
3) A Housing Policy Assessment that summarizes current housing policies, tools, and
incentives in each jurisdiction, and evaluates their effectiveness to deliver intended results.
This framework serves to inform the development of the Federal Way Housing Action Plan.
HAP Expectation
The objective of the city’s HAP document is to lay out comprehensive housing policy direction from
which regulatory changes can be implemented. The intent of this plan is that regulatory changes occurring
after adoption be towards the goal of increasing residential building capacity in the city.
Page 2 of 2
HAP Progress
The HAP process must meet criteria in state law and be adopted by June 2021. Requirements for a HAP
are in the Revised Code of Washington (RCW) 36.70A.600(2) and are listed in the chart below with an
update on the city’s progress.
Ongoing Work
The Visual Preference Survey includes images of several housing types and design examples that could
be allowed and encouraged. The survey closed February 9, 2021. The survey results will be analyzed and
will serve to inform potential housing strategies.
The Advisory Group is comprised of community members, representatives of local organizations, and
housing stakeholders. The advisory group provides guidance on the draft plan’s process and analysis, and
provide linkages between the greater community and the HAP.
Next Meeting
March 3, 2021 – Housing Action Plan Strategies Briefing
HAP Criteria Federal Way HAP Progress
(a) Quantify existing and projected housing needs for all
income levels, including extremely low-income
households, with documentation of housing and household
characteristics, and cost-burdened households;
Complete
The Housing Needs Assessment (HNA) contains this
information. The HNA was presented to the Planning
Commission on December 16, 2020.
(b) Develop strategies to increase the supply of housing,
and variety of housing types, needed to serve the housing
needs identified in (a) of this subsection;
In Progress
The findings from the Code Audit (presented January
20, 2021) will serve to inform some of the strategies.
On March 3, 2021, the Planning Commission will
review proposed housing objectives and strategies.
(c) Analyze population and employment trends, with
documentation of projections;
Complete
Included in the Housing Needs Assessment.
(d) Consider strategies to minimize displacement of low-
income residents resulting from redevelopment;
In Progress
On March 3, 2021, the Planning Commission will
review proposed anti-displacement strategies.
(e) Review and evaluate the current housing element
adopted pursuant to RCW 36.70A.070, including an
evaluation of success in attaining planned housing types
and units, achievement of goals and policies, and
implementation of the schedule of programs and actions;
In Progress
This content will be reviewed as part of the draft
HAP. On April 7, 2021, the Planning Com8mission
will review the draft HAP.
(f) Provide for participation and input from community
members, community groups, local builders, local realtors,
nonprofit housing advocates, and local religious groups;
and
In Progress
Efforts include the HAP website, interested party’s
newsletter, on-going Advisory Group, online Visual
Preference Survey, interviews with the Council and
stakeholders, upcoming Open House, and public
meetings such as the Planning Commission.
(g) Include a schedule of programs and actions to
implement the recommendations of the HAP.
Not Started
This content will be developed following the selected
priorities and strategies and be included in the HAP.
Page 1 of 1
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 33325 8th Avenue South Federal Way, WA 98003-6325
253-835-7000
www.cityoffederalway.com
Jim Ferrell, Mayor
MEMORANDUM
Date: February 10, 2021
To: Federal Way Planning Commission
From: Brian Davis, Director
Re: Planning Commissioner Orientation
A couple of years have passed since the Commission last received an orientation on its purpose and
scope of responsibility, rules of procedure, and laws on open public meetings. Staff will provide a brief
orientation to new and returning Commission members on these issues.
Between now and the February 17 meeting, Commission members are encouraged to view the attached
document that summaries frequently asked questions about planning commissions in Washington state.
Commission members may also find it helpful to review the Short Course on Local Planning provided by
the Department of Commerce. This used to be available only in-person at a regional site. It is now
available by video at the following link (after clicking, scroll down to “Watch the Videos”):
https://www.commerce.wa.gov/serving-communities/growth-management/short-course/
New to the Planning Commission? FAQ’s
Serving on the planning commission is one of the most rewarding ways you can serve your
community. As a commissioner, you will help set the long-term direction or vision for your
community’s future. Although the planning commission is an advisory body which rarely makes
final decisions, it is one of the most important groups in local government. In recent years,
growth management and environmental legislation have emphasized the importance of land
use issues.
You will be advising your community on these issues through adoption or amendment of the
comprehensive plan, and will help implement its subdivision, zoning, and shoreline regulations.
You may review applications for individual projects ranging from mobile home parks to
shopping centers. New planning commissioners must get up to speed quickly on the structure
of local government and the laws and procedures that govern their actions.
Following are the answers to 10 questions that are commonly asked; we suggest you read
them before conducting your first public meeting. Chapter references refer to the Resource
Manual, available on the web page for the Short Course on Local Planning
www.commerce.wa.gov/serving-communities/growth-management/short-course/
1. Who are the key actors in the planning process
and what do they do?
Four groups have key roles:
1) City council or board of county commissioners
Both are elected bodies which appoint planning commission members (or the
board of adjustment, discussed below). The city council or board of county
commissioners has ultimate decision-making authority for all land use planning
issues.
2) Planning commission
The planning commission makes recommendations to the city council or board of
county commissioners for changes and updates in the comprehensive plan and the
zoning code. In most jurisdictions, the planning commission also reviews individual
applications for variances, conditional use permits, site plans, subdivisions, shoreline
permits, and rezones.
3) Board of adjustment
This body hears appeals on land use decisions. In some communities, the planning
commission acts as the board of adjustment. In others, the city council or board of
county commissioners assumes this role.
NEW TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION? FAQ
PAGE 2
4) Hearings examiner
The decision to have a hearings examiner is a local option. When a community does
have one, this hired professional replaces the board of adjustment. The hearings
examiner takes the place of the planning commission in hearing applications for land
use permit applications, such as variances and conditional use permits. Having a
hearings examiner frees up the planning commission to deal with policy issues and
long-term concerns of the community.
2. Can you tell me more about the planning commission?
In Washington state, a planning commission is an advisory body appointed by the city council
or board of county commissioners to provide advice and recommendations on land use issues
at the local level.
Although the key word here is advisory and planning commissions don’t normally make the
final decision, it is probably one of the most important bodies in local government.
You’ll spend lots of evenings in meetings. (Don’t be fooled if those who invited you to serve on
the planning commission gave you a sales pitch that sounded something like “You only meet
twice a month for a couple of hours.”) In a survey done for the City of Renton, it was found that
the planning commission met more often than all other advisory boards combined, and more
often than the city council itself. We’re stating this up front so that you’ll understand the
amount of serious work that is expected of most planning commissions. Being a planning
commissioner means making a serious time commitment for the required preparation and for
the commission meetings.
3. What if our elected officials (city council/county commissioners)
ignore a recommendation of the planning commission, but we all
know it’s a good one?
When it happens–and sooner or later it will–you have several choices:
First, you can swallow hard, accept the political decision, and continue to do your best to
provide thorough and thoughtful recommendations. It’s important to keep in mind that
both the planning commission and the elected body which appointed you are working
from the same set of policies and regulations. If there are differences in interpretation,
then these differences need to be clarified. One strategy for keeping communication clear
is presented below.
Second, you can resign in protest. Although this sometimes seems like the only ethical
option, we encourage you to think very carefully before you exercise it. If you quit, it
NEW TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION? FAQ
PAGE 3
deprives the commission of your experience and expertise, and it always takes time for a
new person to get up to speed once appointed.
Third, most effective planning commissioners have decided that they can increase the
number of times their recommendations are accepted with minimal or no modification by
actively working to maintain good communications with the city council or board of county
commissioners.
There are a number of strategies that have been used successfully around the state over the
years, and we encourage you to use one of them (or invent one of your own).
One of our favorites approaches is to have the planning commission and city council sit
down together twice each year to discuss issues and concerns. Each session is followed by a
bus tour of the city, so everyone can see first-hand the sites and locations which are the
focus of local land use issues.
Another good option is to send out a newsletter, like the one distributed by the Thurston
Regional Planning Council. In this concise and well-written newsletter, anyone who’s interested
can find out exactly where the county and all of its cities are in progress on key growth
management planning elements.
4. If you were to identify the one factor which can spell success or
failure for a planning commission, what would it be?
There are really two answers to this question.
First, the initial appointments made to the planning commission are crucial. Elected
officials must appoint quality, committed individuals, who represent the community’s diverse
social and political interests, as well as its geographic diversity.
Second, the planning commission needs a strong chairperson. Regardless of whose “turn” it
is to serve as Chair, if you pick a nice but unassertive person who can’t control controversial
meetings, and who isn’t willing to put in the time necessary to get the agenda together and
make reminder phone calls, then the commission as a whole will suffer. Your Chair needs to be
a dedicated, no-nonsense, reasonably high-energy person-someone who can run a tight
meeting with a sense of fairness.
5. When is an “executive session” appropriate? Under the “Open
Public Meetings Act,” does all business of the planning commission
have to be conducted in public?
NEW TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION? FAQ
PAGE 4
Our planning commission Chair called for an “executive session” during a meeting a few
weeks ago, so we could discuss the qualifications of candidates who had applied for our City
Planner position. Someone in the audience stood up and said what we were doing was illegal,
because of the “Open Public Meetings Act,” and that all business of the planning
commission had to be conducted in public.
Your Chair was perfectly justified in calling an executive session, because you were evaluating
qualifications of applicants for public office.
It should be stressed, however, that there are very few times when your planning
commission will need to hold an executive session. (See Chapter 2 for more information on
the Open Public Meetings Act.)
Had you been talking about the salary, wages, or general conditions of employment for the
planner position, the discussion should have been public. But personnel matters, including
performance reviews, can be conducted in executive session; as can discussions of litigation or
potential litigation with your attorney, and real estate negotiations where publicity is likely to
cause an increase in the price your city, town, or county will have to pay.
If you plan to hold an executive session, the planning commission Chair must take specific
procedural steps (see Chapter 2).
Regular Meetings
The basic intention of the Open Public Meetings Act is that the public’s business be
conducted in public; and that the planning commission must establish a time for its
regular meetings.
Special Meetings
If you need to hold a special meeting, either your chairperson or a majority of the members
can call for it. But you will need to notify all members of the planning commission, as well
as media representatives who are on record as having requested notification (i.e.,
newspapers, local radio, and television stations). Your notice must be in writing, at least 24
hours prior to the special meeting, and state the place and nature of the business to be
transacted. You will be limited in making final decisions to those announced business items
at the special meeting.
6. I’ve been on the planning commission for a while now, and I’m still
not clear on the difference between our “legislative” and “quasi-
judicial” activities.
Everything you do as a planning commissioner will fall into one of these two categories.
NEW TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION? FAQ
PAGE 5
It’s important to be clear on the difference, because when you’re operating in a quasi-
judicial mode, you’re subject to the Appearance of Fairness Act.
Some basic definitions:
First, a legislative action is one which will affect the entire community, not just an individual
property owner or single piece of land. Examples include updating or revising your
community’s comprehensive plan and adopting zoning code text amendment ordinances.
When you change the community’s comprehensive plan or zoning code, the rules change for
everyone. No one is seeking or being granted special consideration.
A quasi-judicial action is one in which you’re sitting “like a judge,” evaluating a specific case
or proposal submitted to you by individual parties. Examples include applications for
variances, special use permits, and subdivisions. In each case, you are being asked to make a
decision that affects an individual (or family, partnership, or corporation), but not the entire
community. You are acting like a judge, weighing the merits of an individual case before the
court. Guilty or not guilty? Grant the variance or deny it?
When you’re dealing with these individual applications and project proposals, you are held to
very high levels of scrutiny. These are contained in the Appearance of Fairness Doctrine (see
Chapter 2 for a detailed discussion). Basically, all of your actions when you are in your quasi-
judicial role must not only be fair in fact, but must appear fair to the average person.
The question you must ask yourself is: Would a disinterested person, apprised of the totality
of your personal interest or involvement in the matter which the planning commission is
considering, be reasonably justified in thinking that your involvement might affect your
judgment in reaching a decision?
The place where most planning commissioners get into trouble on this one is a direct result
of their well- intentioned attempts to be open and accessible to their friends and neighbors.
Its really difficult to cut someone off when they call you up at home, or approach you on the
street or at the coffee shop and start to tell you what they think about a particular proposal
which you’re considering, or are about to consider, at the planning commission.
But when you listen to their thoughts outside a regular meeting of the planning commission,
regardless of whether they are for or against the proposed project, you are engaging in what
the law calls an “ex parte” communication. Ex parte communications are forbidden, because
they violate the intent of the Appearance of Fairness Doctrine: Regardless of whether any
single “off the record” conversation influenced your final vote on a proposed project or
application, it just doesn’t look right. The law says your actions must appear fair as well as be
fair in fact.
So what do you do if you get a letter at home, and read it through before you realize it’s an
attempt to lobby you to approve a new 80-home subdivision? Or what if a friend grabs your
NEW TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION? FAQ
PAGE 6
arm at the post office and blurts out his deeply held thoughts that the thus-and-so project, if
approved, is going to change forever the rural character of your town? (He knows this
because he worked for years as a real estate appraiser in a very similar community in
California, and he can tell you as a real estate professional exactly what a proposal like this
one did to that town and its tax base.)
When a situation like one of these occurs, you need to take immediate action at the next
planning commission meeting. You’ll need to announce and place on the record at the
beginning of the discussion of that item the substance of any written or oral ex parte
communication which you’ve received. If you feel that, regardless of this contact, you’ll still
be able to render a fair decision, you need to state that for the record as well.
At this point in the meeting, you’ve opened yourself up for a challenge from anyone who feels
that you’ve been tainted by the ex parte communication. If you’re challenged, and don’t step
down for the duration of the discussion and decision on the proposal under consideration,
you’ve left yourself and the commission wide open for a legal challenge after you’ve rendered
your recommendation.
Our advice if you’re challenged? Consult with your city attorney or county prosecutor, if
that person is available: You may be able to stay and participate. But in the absence of
legal advice to the contrary, step down and leave the room. Don’t take a seat in the
audience, from where you can later be accused of sending “baseball signals” to the
remaining members of the commission to influence their votes on the proposal. Instead,
go home and take a well-deserved evening off.
After the Doctrine of Appearance of Fairness was first enacted, it didn’t take long for clever
applicants to figure out that if they could just taint those members of the commission who
would probably oppose their application, they could then challenge them on the grounds of
having received an ex parte communication. These planning commissioners would then be
forced to step down and--bingo! an approved application.
The problem with this sneaky strategy is that if enough members are disqualified, the
planning commission lacks a quorum, and can’t do business. A clever legal solution called the
Doctrine of Necessity was enacted to counter this lack of a quorum. Basically, if enough
members of the planning commission are challenged to make it impossible to obtain either a
quorum or a majority vote, then those challenged members can return to their seats and
participate fully in the debate and the decision. All they have to do is disclose publicly the
reason for their disqualification before they render their decision.
A simple three step ounce-of-prevention strategy is definitely worth a pound of cure on
this one. We recommend that the Chair inquire at the beginning of the discussion of each
agenda item if any member of the planning commission has any ex parte oral or written
contacts to report for the record. The Chair should then ask if any member of the planning
NEW TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION? FAQ
PAGE 7
commission is aware of any appearance of fairness violations which would prevent his or
her participation on the quasi-judicial matter before the commission. Once these have
been reported, the Chair should solicit from members of the audience any challenges they
wish to pose to individual commissioners based on what the commissioners have just said.
These three steps should take place before testimony on the project or proposal begins.
It’s worth noting at this point that if no one in the audience raises any challenges right here,
then they’ve waived their right to challenge the participation of any member of the
commission later on. This is their one opportunity. If they’re silent, they’re agreeing to let
all unchallenged members of the commission hear the testimony and render a decision.
Short Form of Procedures For Quasi-judicial Public Hearings
1. Chairman declares the public hearing is open.
2. Chairman states that everyone present will be given an opportunity to be heard;
however, the commission or council does have a policy of closing meetings at 10:00
p.m. (or your own closing time). State that the hearing is being recorded and that prior
to speaking, individuals should state their names and addresses.
3. Appearance of Fairness.
a. Chairman requests anyone who objects to the Chairman’s participation, or
any other commission or council member’s participation, to please state so
now and give the reasons for the objection.
b. Chairman asks the commission or council members if any have an interest in
the property or issue. Chairman asks commission or council members if they
can hear and consider this matter in a fair and objective manner.
c. Chairman requests any member of the commission or council to place on record
the substance of any communication each has had outside of the hearing with
opponents or proponents on the issue to be heard. After the communication is
placed on the record, the Chairman should request whether any interested parties
wish to rebut the substance of the communication.
4. Chairman requests staff to make its presentation.
5. Applicant invited to comment.
6. Chairman invites comments from citizens in favor of the proposal.
7. Chairman invites comments from citizens against the proposal.
8. Chairman invites applicant to rebut the opposition.
NEW TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION? FAQ
PAGE 8
9. Additional comments from those against and those for the proposal should be recognized,
if needed.
10. Chairman requests whether the commission or council members have questions of
the applicant, citizens, or staff.
11. Chairman declares the public hearing closed.
12. Commission or council deliberates on the record, discussing Findings of Fact and
Conclusions.
7. What should we be doing, as far as record keeping goes?
At our planning commission meetings, we do a pretty good job taking minutes of
the major issues and decisions. But one of our members heard recently that having
hand-written minutes may not be good enough. (Our secretary does type them up
later so they’re nice and neat.)
You really need to tape record all of your hearings. If one of your decisions is appealed, you
must produce a word-for-word (“verbatim”) transcript of the hearing for the reviewing court.
If you can’t provide this verbatim transcript, the court may order you to re-hear the issue.
It has been suggested–not entirely in jest--that every new planning commissioner should have
to transcribe at least one hearing tape onto paper. Why? Because it proves how difficult it is to
make sense of a poorly done meeting tape. All you need is a podium microphone which isn’t
working well, a couple of commissioners conversing privately in front of a desk-top
microphone, somebody else coughing or rustling a stack of papers, and you’ve got a real
auditory mess. Add to this a series of exhibits (informally identified as “that big map,” “the
other map,” and “the second site plan you showed us,”) and you’ll have a hearing tape which is
nearly impossible to transcribe.
To produce accurate, word-for-word meeting tape transcripts that will stand up on appeal:
Have speakers identify themselves each time they speak.
The Chair must control the testimony and discussion: Allow only one speaker at a time.
Assign each exhibit a letter or number designation. Be sure speakers reference those
designations in their testimony.
If the meeting is packed with a large group organized to support or oppose an application, the
Chair should limit redundant testimony to save time. Members of the group should be instructed
to state that they agree with the previous speakers’ testimony. You can further limit each
participant’s testimony to a 5-to-10-minute summary. (Planning commission meetings
shouldn’t run until 1:00 or 2:00 a.m. Adopt a reasonable cut-off time, such as 10:00 p.m.,
publicize it in your rules of procedure, and stick to it. If you need to continue after the cut-off
NEW TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION? FAQ
PAGE 9
time, do so another night.)
If any members of the public become unruly or obnoxious, the planning commission can
expel them. If the meeting still cannot be controlled, it can be adjourned to a different place
and time and can exclude the public, except the media.
Before closing a hearing to further testimony, be sure both sides of the issue have adequate
time and opportunity to present their cases and arguments. Regardless of public sentiment in
your community, the applicant is always entitled to a fair hearing.
8. After our commission has heard all the testimony and it’s time to
make a decision, our Chairperson likes to go around the group,
kind of informally, and see what each of us thinks, before we
actually vote. How do you feel about this as a procedure?
It’s not a procedure we recommend. Although the Chair may ask if anyone has further
questions or needs additional information, a planning commission meeting is not the place for
informal “straw votes.” Once testimony has ended, the Chair should call for a motion, facilitate
a full and complete discussion, and call for a formal vote on the issue before the commission.
Always cite the conditions in your local ordinance or code which pertain to the
application at hand.
The Chair should cite the relevant ordinance or code, and conditions to be satisfied. In the City
of Brewster, for example, variance applications must satisfy three conditions. The Chair should
restate them for the record. (See Appendices 1 and 2 of Chapter 5. Although it’s intended
primarily for city councils, the material is relevant for planning commissioners.)
Always cite the evidence presented which, in your judgment, supports granting or
denying the application.
Each member should cite the convincing evidence in his/her vote to approve or deny the
application. After citing the evidence, the person should state how he or she voted. The
combined results, tallied in the vote, will provide the basis for formal collective findings
and conclusions. (See Chapter 2.)
9. As a planning commissioner, can I be sued for the actions of our
planning commission?
Yes. You owe it to yourself to check with your city or county to make sure the municipality
you serve has errors and omissions insurance, or a self-insurance program which specifically
NEW TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION? FAQ
PAGE 10
covers you as a planning commissioner.
As a member of an advisory committee, your actions are normally not the cause of any
decision which would result in damages. A different result could arise if a proponent (or
opponent) of a project before the planning commission was able to demonstrate a hidden
financial interest on your part or an intent on your part to hinder the project, independent of
the applicable rules and regulations.
In those rare cases where liability is found, it normally runs to the municipality. The key to
peace of mind is to assure yourself that an adequate insurance program is in place. An
insurance program provides a defense whether or not there is liability and coverage for any
damages found.
The only exception to this general rule is a violation of the Open Public Meetings Act, for
which you can personally be assessed a penalty of $500 for the first knowing violation, and
$1,000 for subsequent ones. (Please see Chapter 2 for a detailed discussion.)
10. It seems to me that our planning commission wastes a lot of time
at meetings. We’re always waiting for a couple of commissioners
to wade through their information packets before we can get on
with the evening’s business. Any suggestions?
In most communities, planning commissioners have a lot of reading to do. There are staff
reports, draft planning documents, applications, zoning text amendments, training materials,
and a host of other documents.
You really owe it to yourself--not to mention your fellow commissioners--to set aside the time
necessary to read through all this stuff before the start of the meeting. You also need to attend
the meetings. If you don’t, there may not be a quorum, and no business can be transacted.
A good chairperson can help motivate people. But it’s really a matter of taking your personal
obligation seriously. Many people, including the elected body which appointed you, are
counting on your good work. And that means staying current on your reading. Please spend
the time necessary to come to meetings prepared.
It’s fair to say that your service on the planning commission will go through phases. There will
probably come a time when you know in your heart of hearts that it’s time for you to do
something else. Perhaps you’ve accomplished everything you set out to do when you agreed
to serve. Perhaps personal, family, or business obligations are demanding more time than
they used to. Perhaps community service of another sort has caught your interest. You will
leave a generous legacy to the commission and to your community if you recognize these
symptoms, and step aside in a timely way so that someone else can serve in your place. This is
perhaps the ultimate act of dedication.