Why can't why can't they
trust the other people?
>> So we have only two.
>> Yeah. But do we have enough to remove?
>> Yeah.
» Okay. All right.
>> Okay.
Are we ready?
Okay. Uh, good evening everyone. We're
going to call the meeting of the
planning and zoning commission of the
village of Corales meeting of July 15,
2026 to order. And uh
we are going to call the role
um and then we'll look at the agenda.
So, please uh call the role.
>> Thank you, Mr. Chair. Jerry Sturmer
>> here.
>> Mary Chappelle
>> here.
>> Jodie Harrington
>> here.
>> Edgar BS
>> here.
>> Mike Source
>> here.
>> Salame Ward
>> here.
>> We have a quorum.
>> So, we have a quorum. And we would uh
like to look at the draft agenda
and ask for approval of the agenda by
motion. I motion to approve the agenda.
>> We have a a motion to approve.
>> I'll second
>> and seconded. Uh so a a motion to
approve by Commissioner Harrington and
second by Commissioner uh Source and
please call the RO.
>> Okay, for the vote. Salame
[clears throat] Ward
>> I. Mike Source
>> here. I
>> Edgar BS
>> I. Jody Harrington.
>> Hi.
>> Mary Chappelle.
>> Hi.
>> And Jerry Sturmer.
>> Hi. So, we have our agenda and the next
item is to approve the minutes of the
meeting of June 17th
and uh we have the draft uh minutes
before us. Do we have a motion to
approve or is there
any concern about the minutes?
I have no concerns.
>> Okay. Do we have a motion to approve?
>> Move to approve the minutes.
» And do we have a second?
>> I'll second that motion.
>> Okay. The uh we have a motion and second
to approve the meeting mo minutes of
June 17th.
Uh and please call the RO.
>> Okay. And we have a unique situation for
the minutes. Only the folks that were
here present in June can vote. So Mary
Chappelle
>> I.
>> Jerry Sturmer
>> I.
>> And Jody Harrington
>> abstain.
>> So because uh
Commissioner Harrington was not here and
no one else besides the two of us are
here. We have a unanimous vote of the
two of us. And according to councel,
this is uh sufficient be uh because what
did you call it?
>> An implied quorum. In this case, the
only other option would be to just not
vote at all. And in that case, it's
implied approval.
>> So it's better our our council said it's
better to have some council or some
commissioners who were present to
actually vote even though it's not a
full quorum. Thank you. So, um
those minutes are now approved and in
the record. Uh as everybody can see from
the draft agenda, we're going to move to
the Coralaneous public forum and we have
no public hearing items today. But
happily we do have a opportunity for uh
thorough training um with uh Brennan
Williams and we'll get to that in a
minute. Uh let's begin with the
coralenous public forum. We do have one
comment um in written form here but I
would hope that we could also hear from
the commenter.
Would would you like to come forward,
please? So So tell us your name and
address.
My name is Pat McClennon. Uh 2968
Carellis Road. Uh I submitted a letter
and I don't I I don't think I need to
repeat that information. I I basically
uh was looking for a revision to our
minutes and and our recordings.
I think uh particularly tonight uh in
this training session that this re the
recording the video recording of this
meeting should be retained uh long term
for review. Uh it's a it's a complicated
job and there's things that I think uh
Mr. Williams will be telling us tonight
that perhaps we want to look at again.
So I would urge that we keep that uh as
a as a record video copy of this
meeting. Uh this the other items I think
I suggested was just a premeating and
even perhaps Mr. Williams had a comment
since it it started actually in the city
of Albuquerque which he's very familiar
with. Uh I just thought that this would
be beneficial to uh create a better
informed decision. Uh uh those were my
two comments and uh I hope you'll
consider them. Thank you.
>> Thank you.
>> Okay. Uh
>> um I I will say that tonight's meeting
because there are no uh items requiring
swearing in, the audio will be saved and
I believe that the administrator is
going to put it online because it's
different than a usual quasi judicial
meeting. So it will be saved.
>> Great. And posted.
>> Okay. Okay. Um,
anything else? Otherwise, we have the
opportunity. We'll move on to the next
item. Uh, I uh before we do that, I want
to welcome all the new commissioners.
And I hope those present uh are familiar
with uh the names of people who have
been approved. And I wanted to make sure
that we had uh the names of the current
commissioners available for the public.
And um I've asked that uh the
administrator
uh put this in all subsequent packets so
that it it's available to everybody and
it's clear who are members of the
commission. um just for the public
members and and I want to welcome the
new members are volunteers from the
community who have agreed to uh
participate in the decision making that
comes before the planning and zoning uh
commission uh at our monthly meetings.
And now uh I get to introduce uh Brennan
Williams who is going to walk us through
um some very important points. Uh both
Commissioner Harrington and I had an
opportunity to hear you. Uh I think it
wasn't more than 20 months ago or
>> it was September last year.
>> September last year. So it's very clear
in my mind. Of course. Um Mr. Williams
is a retired planning and zoning
professional with more than 25 years of
hands-on experience in the Albuquerque
metro area. Uh having served uh in
various administrative roles both for
the city of Albuquerque and the Bernalo
County Planning Department. and he
retired in 2021
and today helps many communities
establish uh their procedures and make
sound legally defensible land use
decisions with complete confidence and
clarity. Thank you. Uh please join me in
welcoming Mr. Williams.
» Thank you commission and members of the
public. Thank you. It's quite the setup.
I appreciate that. Um, I am happy to be
here. I appreciate the invitation. Uh,
it's good to see folks that I've I've
seen before. I apologize the corny jokes
uh will remain. So, you'll have to laugh
all over again at those if you would
please. Uh, but I am I'm pleased to be
here. Uh, I am particularly happy on a
personal level because uh July, in my
opinion, has always been Commissioner
Appreciation Month.
Uh 30 years ago, uh in July of 1996,
I attended my very first planning
commission meeting at the city of
Albuquerque.
Um, I was a brand new uh zoning
inspector with the city of Albuquerque
and the supervisor that I was uh
training with uh grabbed myself and
three of the other new hires and said
one morning, "Come on, we're going to go
to the planning commission meeting." And
um I was disgusted
because uh I watched two members of the
public, an applicant and a member from a
neighborhood association
act like little kids. They had no common
courtesy was out the window. And so, uh,
one of the one of the applicants was a
developer that had had to make some
changes to, uh, their fire lanes, the
location of the fire lanes on their
shopping center site development plan
that they were trying to get through the
process. They had been before the
commission a couple times. The fire
marshall's office was insistent that
wherever the current location of those
fire lanes were, it needed to be
adjusted because they weren't able to
turn around their their large fire
trucks. Uh they didn't want to be
backing out. Uh so they had asked the
commission to uh request that the
developer make changes and he had done
so, but he was not happy about it. And
so he stood before the commission and
shook his finger at them and said, "Uh,
I've wasted time and money on this. It's
cost me um if I don't get approval
today, I'm going to sue every single one
of you. Uh the other uh individual I
remember was someone from a neighborhood
president of a neighborhood association
who told the commission uh and I quote,
"Don't be stupid. Everybody knows we
don't need another gas station on the
west side of town. Uh listen to what
constituents are telling you, what the
members of the public are telling you.
Don't approve this. I turned to one of
my uh my new hires, one of my brand new
buddies, and said, "I I just can't
believe that people would act like this
in a public forum."
And he said, "Well, this is no different
than the way they treat us at the permit
counter or out in the fields when we're
doing our jobs." And I said, "Well,
that's true, but we get paid.
We we collect a salary. We get a
paycheck every two weeks. We've got
health benefits. We've got dental plans
that we can rely on." uh the planning
commission are volunteers that come in
uh to do this. Why should they be
subjected to uh that type of behavior
was my point? Um I can tell you over the
past 30 years working with various uh
commissions at both the city of
Albuquerque as well as Berno County as
well as other jurisdictions across the
state. Uh unfortunately, it's not
uncommon for people uh that are in the
process to behave that way. So, let me
say as I begin, uh, thank you for what
you do as volunteers for your community.
I have found without fail that members
of the climate commission care deeply
about, uh, how their community is
developed, how how decisions are made,
and that sort of thing. So, uh, I
appreciate your your, uh, invitation to
be here tonight, as well as that from
the members of the public uh, who
obviously again care about planning and
zoning issues. So, let's get started.
What's it all about? uh as I mentioned
as an appointed official uh of the
village uh you serve a vital important
role in your community. The decisions
that you make today will live on for
generations, hundreds hundreds of years.
And I am going to take this point and
I'm going to beat it over the head today
because again your role is is very
important and and doing it conducting
your business the right way is
critically important to success. Uh as I
mentioned there how you conduct your
business meetings. Uh all of that
affects how you are perceived in the
community. Your level of of success and
influence is judged by that.
The goals for tonight are basically to
discuss and consider uh some common uh
planning and zoning uh terminology, some
topics. Uh we'll talk about how to deal
with various uh planning and zoning
issues. I'm going to outline the roles
and the responsibilities
of various uh individuals uh and groups
uh in the in the planning and zoning
process. And then finally, we'll touch
on how to avoid uh unnecessary pitfalls
or obstructions that might lead to some
sort of liability uh to you personally
or to the village uh as a whole.
Um before we get officially started,
questions are appreciated. I know this
is I'm standing at a at a podium and
this looks rather formal and stiff. I
don't want it to be that way. Uh please
if you have questions uh ask that they
are encouraged. Um I have found over the
years that uh if you've got a a question
about a particular issue or I need to
explain further uh there's somebody else
in the room that has the same or similar
question. So again, please don't don't
hesitate to ask. I mean this truly there
is no such thing as a stupid question. I
formally declaring that the Vegas rule
is in effect. Meaning, uh, the things we
talk about here, uh, I want you to feel
free, uh, to be able to do that because
again, that's how I find that a majority
of of the issues can be resolved.
And then lastly, keep in mind while
there are certain legal requirements
that I'm going to talk about uh and
impress upon you that those are legal
requirements, there is not a right way
to to zone or or to regulate land use in
your community. The way they do it in
Corales uh might be similar to but it's
probably different than the way they do
it in Carl'sb. Does it mean that one
community is right or better than
another? I like to tell communities that
if you find somebody else that does it a
little bit better than you do or you
like a certain aspect of how they do
things, uh, it's a lot like pop music.
Take that idea, repackage it as your
own, and then and then use it. That's a
there's no such thing as plagiarism when
we're talking about zoning.
Um and last bullet point there,
municipalities can create their own
ordinances, their own codes, their own
plans depending upon the unique
characteristics and goal of of your
community. Uh what you can't do is make
up rules on the fly. Uh so if something
is not working uh and you want to change
those rules, you have to engage in the
formal process to do that. But there's
nothing that says that you can't change
what you've got if you as a commission
feel like it's not not working
correctly.
So, what is zoning? Uh, if you're old
school like me, you go over to the
bookshelf and you wipe the dust off the
dictionary and you go to Z and you look
up zoning and you might find something
like this. Zoning is local government
law that controls the use of land within
the specified jurisdiction.
Clear as
uh if you are young and hip and you
Google it or Type it into chat GPT. You
might find something that says zoning is
a systemized method of land use
regulation designating the activities
which may occur thereon.
Again, not too educational. It doesn't
explain. The land's version is this.
Zoning is the government's ability to
tell you what you can or you cannot do
on your own property.
Uh, I don't know about you, but
sometimes hearing that after saying it
for years and years and years still
makes the hair on the back of my neck
stand up because your home is your
castle, right? You think of your
property as yours. That's that's very
personal uh to you. I can assure you uh
as a young zoning inspector in
Albuquerque,
uh you weren't fully vetted. you had not
paid your dues until you had been called
a communist, a terrorist or a fascist in
the performance of your duties. Uh while
that may be a common uh complaint about
zoning, when done correctly, that that's
not what zoning is. Okay, let's talk
about what what zoning is. The truth is
that land use standards have been in
effect for as long as mankind has has
walked the earth.
If you're a hunter, a fisherman,
outdoorsman, you know, whatever, uh,
think about setting up a campsite. In a
nutshell, that is zoning. You figure out
the location for your tent, which is
going to be your residential, maybe your
house for the weekend. Uh, you place the
cooler at a specific sp on the
campground. You don't want it too close
to the tent, but you also don't want it
so far away that it's inconvenient to go
grab something out of out of your food
source, out of the cooler. you set up a
campfire, you don't again want that so
close to the tent that it damages the
tent, nor do you want it damaging the
food source. And then of course, if
you've ever been camping with little
kids, the question is, "Daddy, where do
we go to the bathroom?" Right? You you
that's done somewhere else far away from
the campfire in the tens.
That's that's planning. That's community
planning in a nutshell. There are really
three significant events that happened
about 100 years ago uh that that kind of
established the foundation of what we
consider what we talk about zoning uh
today. The first uh was construction of
the equitable building in Manhattan in
New York City that occurred over about a
2-year period 1915 1916.
Uh this was the home of built
specifically for the equitable insurance
company. Uh when completed this was a
36story dual tower office building uh
was over 550 or was 5
ft tall, provided over 1.2 million
square feet of gross floor area. And uh
the big issue, the big rub was that when
the building was completed, uh it cast a
7 acre shadow. Uh so that there were
properties literally across the street
from this building that have not seen
the sun, direct sunlight since 1915 or
1916 uh because of the the monstrosity
of the equitable building. And so uh it
was certainly not the first large
building in New York City nor the last.
Uh but the people of New York had had
enough. They petitioned their elected
officials and they said, "These massive
buildings without any control, without
any regulation, make us feel crowded. It
chokes out the sunlight. It it feels
oppressive. We're walking down these
canyons of buildings and we don't want
that anymore." And so what New York City
came up with uh were uh requirements for
step back architecture. So if you go a
certain number of feet high and continue
to want to build up, you have to step
your building back. Um there was a shift
to separating office developments from
one another. They weren't all in one
area. There was they intentionally
separated those types of activities. Uh
there were adoption of daylight and air
requirements again so that people uh
didn't always feel like they were being
uh oppressed by these big buildings. And
there were also protections for
residential development uh to protect it
from from commercial or industrial uses.
So that was issue uh event number one.
Number two occurred a few years later
1922. The department of commerce
publishes the standard state zoning
enabling act. Uh this becomes the
blueprint uh for cities particularly
along the east coast uh to come up with
framework on how to regulate land use
within their communities. There were
nine sections of the document. They
outlined how to uh divide a local
jurisdiction uh up, how to adopt
enforcement mechanisms to ensure those
standards are met. Uh included things
like formal notice and public hearings
for for certain uh planning and zoning
matters. Uh created uh height limits and
story limits for buildings, yard
requirements. We commonly refer to those
as setbacks. Uh and there were some
density limits that were placed there.
That was number two. Issue number three
was a uh United States Supreme Court
case decided in 1926.
Uh it's the Village of Uklid, Ohio
versus the Amler Reality Company. And
this is a lawsuit that centered on
whether or not the village of Uklid,
which is still there in Ohio, uh their
suburb of Cleveland, whether or not they
could establish uh land use restrictions
uh and adopt a zoning code for the
properties that were in their their
village limits.
The background is that in 1922, the
village adopted an ordinance through a
public hearing process. That ordinance
came up with six six different zones uh
and They applied those new six different
zones uh to all the properties that were
within the jurisdiction. One of the
property owners was the Amler Reality
Company. They owned 68 acres of land and
they argued that uh the village by
imposing limitations and restrictions on
their 68 acres. They had reduced the
value of the land. Their argument was
that we have always intended on
developing these 68 acres for heavy
industrial uses and by you imposing you
the village imposing these restrictions
you're taking away you know land value
here and you're not compensating us for it and consequently
you know because of that you're being
unconstitutional in your in your
governmental action. So parties begin
suing each other and it works its way up
through the United States Supreme Court
and again in 1926 the courts the United
States Supreme Court decided the
following that despite the argument the
ordinance was not an unreasonable use of
the villages police power or their
inherent ability to control and regulate
what occurs within village limits.
Secondly, that the ordinance was not
discriminatory as had been argued
because the court found a rational basis
for standards to separate residential,
commercial and industrial uses. And
finally, uh the ordinance was not
unconstitutional or in other words, it
was deemed to be constitutional in
nature because the process that was used
by the village to establish the
standards
uh was uh was adhered to was was
recognized by the courts as being
correct. The court recognized that the
presumption of favor of local
governments to create zoning regulations
unless they are clearly arbitrary,
unreasonable, have no substantial
relation to public health, safety,
morals or general welfare is the is the
standard which needs to be met and the
court determined that Uclid the village
of Uclid had done that. So those are the
three events equitable building standard
state zoning enabling act and then this
United States Supreme Court case. Here
in New Mexico, uh, something very
similar happened in 1965. The
legislature adopted the municipal zoning
act 3211.
This is legislation that provides for
the purpose of promoting health, safety,
morals, and general welfare. A county or
a municipality is a zoning authority and
as such they may regulate and restrict
within the jurisdiction the following.
Height, number of stories and size of
buildings and other structures, the
percentage of a yard that can be
occupied. The size of yards, courts and
other open space, the density of the
population and the location and use of
building structures and land for trade,
industry, recreation or any other
purpose. with anything that occurs, you
can use properly zoning to control and
regulate the use of land within the
jurisdiction.
The act goes on to require that the
zoning authority has to adopt a
comprehensive plan upon which the zoning
should be based. The comp plan is your
policy document that talks about uh in
generalities uh characteristics of the
community that wish to be protected. Uh
or uh we appreciate the rural So, we're
going to require large lots and large
setback distances to preserve that
feeling of openness, things of that
nature. The zoning code then gives you
specifics or the details on how to meet
those policy goals.
The act says that the comp plan should
be designed to lessen congestion in the
streets and the public ways to secure
safety from fire, flood waters, panic,
and other damages. Promote health and
general welfare. We've heard that
before. Provide adequate light and Heard
that one before. Prevent the
overcrowding of land. Avoid undue
congest, excuse me, undue concentration
of the population, facilitate adequate
provisions for transportation, water,
sewage, schools, parks, and other public
requirements. And control the uh control
and debate the unsightly use of
buildings or land.
also goes on to say that the zoning
authority must provide by ordinance the
process by which zoning decisions or
zoning determinations are made, the
standards that are to be enforced and
the procedures that are used to change,
to modify, to supplement or to repeal or
adopt uh land use requirements.
The act also mandates that uh a properly
noticed public hearing must occur when a
hearing body is engaged in those
activities. The notice must indicate the
time and the place where the hearing is
to take place. It's got to be provided
at least 15 days in advance of the
hearing. And depending upon uh the the
size of the request or or the property
that will be affected by the request,
you either have to send out certified
mail return requested or first class
mail. And again, that's all under state
statute.
As we drilled around a little bit
further, uh I hope I'm not surprising
anyone here. Uh but the village of Kalis
has section in your uh in your zoning
ordinance that talks specifically about
the planning and zoning commission. Um
talks about the number of members,
seven. You're appointed uh by the mayor
with consent of the governing body. Uh
you're charged to serve staggered terms
of two years. You have to reside within
the village.
Uh talks about makeup. You've got to
have a chair, a vice chair, and a
secretary. Uh those positions serve for
one calendar year or until the planning
commission elects somebody else. Um
you've got duties that are outlined
there. I won't read all of those. Uh but
you are to hold hearings, public
hearings on planning and zoning matters
that come before you, offer
recommendations to the governing body,
uh and work with them on uh any
necessary public improvements as well as
if you've got ideas on how to finance
those. Those all fall under your
responsibilities as commissioners.
Uh you've got to hold at least uh one
regular meeting a month unless there is
no business before the commission.
You've got to adopt rules of procedure.
Uh and you've got to keep minutes and
make sure those are turned over to the
village clerk for recordkeeping
purposes.
So in a nutshell uh as I mentioned at
the beginning your authority to regulate
uh is is guaranteed is protected is
outlined at the federal the state and
the local level. Um
I've always liked this quote with great
power comes great responsibility. I was
taught that it was some some version of
a speech given by Winston Churchill. Uh
my teenage daughter informed me, "No,
Dad, that's from Spider-Man 3." Uh so
whether it's Church Hill or Spider-Man
3, I do think it's applicable to the to
the role that you're doing uh as as
planning commissioners, uh you've got a
lot of responsibility. Uh but with that
uh comes comes the cost of making sure
you're doing your job correctly every
single time or as close to every single
time as possible.
Let me stop right there. Questions?
» Yes, sir. Go ahead. Go ahead.
>> Just to clarify, Brennan, that um
the municipality
has the primary responsibility and
authority to govern all those things
you've listed as opposed to the state or
the federal government. Right.
>> Correct. Yes, sir. Yes. At the local
level, uh your local ordinance is going
to dictate uh how you do things. Uh but
there are protections
uh and and allowances and authority
given at the at the federal and the
state level.
>> Yeah. As long as we were staying within
the enabling legislation to both of
those.
>> Yes. Correct. Good point.
Um
there was a in your slide you talked
about um
the
Uklid versus Amber.
>> Yes sir. They argued
that is the uh Amber Realy
that something was taken away from them.
They had already purchased this 68 acres
and so they lost something that they
thought they had.
>> Look, I I would agree with that. But the
>> but the court said
for the good of the community these
rules need to go forward.
>> Correct. And the and the court also said
having not been on the court but I I'll
summize what what the court said in the
decision was that the process that that
the village used to create the
ordinance. It was it was a public
process.
Um that that allowed all property owners
as well as Amber or including Amler to argue to petition to raise points as
to why they should or shouldn't be
subject to the code. Uh and because that
process was public, it was open, it was
transparent, it met all the notification
requirements, that the law, the zoning
law was allowed, that it went through
the right process and that it wasn't
unconstitutional
uh at its at its base in its nature.
There was a question here in the
community
um
in the most recent comprehensive plan
where um the village was encouraged to
consider
um
smaller uh use of a of a lot, a smaller
percentage. that seemed to have been in
the minds of the state legislators at
one point. That's a a power that the the
village would have to have smaller or
larger percentage. Um some uh
owners of lots came and testified before
this commission that you can't take away
what we already own.
We own the ability to build this big and
now you're saying that if we that you
might change that to smaller. We
purchased in order to build big and now
you're considering taking away our
ability to have a big lot or a big
house. You see what I'm trying to say?
>> Uh yes. I mean
>> like the Supreme Court said but if if
done properly the could change the
percentage and that homeowner who only
purchased a lot not an already existing
building
might not win in court. Sure. And and I
am painting not to be difficult. I am
painting with a pretty broad brush, but
um something of this nature can be
argued in several ways where the village
uh may be told be careful if you adopt
this particular regulation or if you
make this change to the code, it could
have a ripple effect. Uh it could lead
to uh properties or or buildings that
are nonconforming. In other words, they
don't meet the current standard. Uh that sometimes is difficult to regulate.
Uh But you also may be getting into
depending on the on the particulars on
the details, you may also be getting
into territory where you might be uh
improperly restricting or taking care of
somebody's property rights. It's really
issue specific. Um but it's it's not
uncommon to hear folks say if you're
looking to change the code, we don't
want to change because we always wanted
to or we've anticipated or we dreamed
about doing
>> X Y or Z.
You know, again, broad brush brush here,
but that doesn't always meet the legal
standard for prohibiting a community
from changing, adopting, tweaking,
updating their regulations.
>> So, we're only going to get I mean,
those people he's talking about then
threatened to sue us if it was adopted
so they couldn't build the house they
had planned. Um, but it seems to me the
only answer we're going to get is if
it's changed and they sue us, we'll go
to court. The court will have to
And [clears throat] and we'll talk about
this in detail a little bit more, but
the court is going to be looking at
should it go to court, the court is
going to be looking at the record that
was created. And one of the points I'm
going to express to you is make sure you
create a a good clean record. Doesn't
guarantee, you know, anybody can sue
anybody for anything. Doesn't mean that
uh given the circumstances that the
court would necessarily overturn a
decision that was made by the
commission. Uh but it it helps if if the
record is clean and the process uh is
followed to a tea. It just protects you
and it protects the village in those
decisions that you make that some people
feel might
>> and it's actually the village council
that would make that change.
>> Right.
>> We don't have that.
>> Correct. Yes. I mean you're again I'm
assuming in this scenario that you're
relying on staff, you're relying on uh
the village attorney or or the firm uh
to to advise you and then you testimony
and you look at the evidence and you
make the best decision possible and
we'll talk about what those benchmarks
are. But yes, you you are not
you're not stuck out on a limb somewhere
uh with the fear that somebody's behind
you, you know, with a handsaw trying to cut your legs out from
underneath.
Okay. Anybody else?
Okay.
So major point here, if you leave with
nothing else in mind, as a hearing body,
you have to adhere, you must, you shall
adhere to the established rules and
those procedures when conducting your
business. Let's talk about what those
are. Uh it was mentioned, Commissioner
BS mentioned that, uh the the
distinction between a a federal and and
state standard. Uh I'm not here you uh
but it's not uncommon uh during our
legislative session sessions uh for
bills to be proposed to both the House
and the Senate that seek to preempt or
take away a local community's uh ability
to make decisions on planning and zoning
matters. Um really it's one of those
situations where uh if if approved or if
adopted uh certain bills would would
take away your authority uh to to decide
certain matters. Um those are just a
couple that have come up in the past
couple legislative sessions. Uh there
are more uh that are out there and I can
tell you uh there will be more in the
future. And again, one of the common
complaints uh that
House members or senators will uh will
use is that they're hearing complaints
from their constituents that the that
the process is broken, that people are
not treated fairly and equally, that one
decision on a particular matter is made
one month and then the next month a very
similar request comes forward and the
commission makes a completely different
decision.
any any level of predictability in the
process is gone. And so some of these
proposals are meant to uh take away that authority at the local level uh and
make it a statewide requirement. So
again, adhering to the process is
important. It really comes down to
ethical decision making and that is
crucial to keeping the local community
out of uh legal, procedural, and and
public problems. Uh you want to make as
a commission that uh you're you're
respected, that the work that you do uh
is respected. People may not like the
answer or the decision that you give
them. Uh but if you're engaged in a a
fair open process, uh that gives people
an ability to to get involved and and
try to have their side of the of the
story told.
High standards of integrity and
proficiency are required so that again
public respect for the process is
maintained.
Committing to doing things as written,
following the established process and
being open and transparent is the key.
The public has a right to be informed.
It is a public process. So, they have a
right to be informed uh and participate
in that process.
Some key points here. Planning and
zoning commission shapes the future of
the community. I've talked about that a
couple times before, right? Don't forget
that. Uh often you are responsible for
helping or sometimes hindering uh
dollars, development dollars, could be
in the tens of thousands, could be in
the millions. Uh but you have the
authority to make a decision that could
affect uh a really big project, a really
good project, a really bad project.
That's why adhering to uh the standards
and the criteria is important.
There should be an emphasis on gaining
and holding community trust. Always
acting with fairness and integrity uh
helps create that favorable rapport with
the public. And having a clean slate
approach for matters that come before
you uh is is necessary, is required by
the law. We'll talk about this a little
bit more in just a little bit, but you
uh as planning and zoning commissioners
sit as judges very similar to what a
judge in a courtroom would do when you
hear planning and zoning matters that come before you and you should act
accordingly. Not saying that you don't,
but it's important to remember that
that's that's the level that's where
we're going to raise the bar uh to make
sure that that we act and behave in that
capacity.
Uh due process is required. We'll about
that more at length here in a little
bit. But it just ensures fairness and it
gives participants an opportunity to be
heard. Guarantees that they've got an
opportunity to be heard. Transparency
provides openness and accountability. Uh
we are public servants in whether we
work directly for the planning and
zoning department uh or you serves serve
as representatives of the planning and
zoning commission. Uh but we are public
servants in that aspect. Uh perception
is extremely important. Participants
need to that they were heard, that the
hearing was fair, and that they were
treated with respect.
Very quickly, let me give you a
practical example. This is completely
made up. Um I I take no credit. The
names have not been changed to protect
the innocent because there were no names
to begin with. But um in my practical
example, [snorts] uh the San Gabriel
Treatment Center LLC proposes to build a
new building uh to house a methodone
treatment center. And the code
fictitious code uh that we're talking
about requires them to go through a
public hearing process in order to get
approval before they can turn in their
plans and start building their building.
Okay.
The zoning code classifies the methodone
clinic, the methodone treatment center
as a clinic. And it also defines a
pharmacy, an urgent care center, a legal
aid uh operation, a dental clinic, and
count mental health or counseling
services also fall under this umbrella
of a clinic. Okay.
A couple months ago, uh, for what it's
worth, the planning and zoning
commission, uh, approved a veterinary
clinic, uh, in the same zone, but on the
opposite side of town. So, it's not
apples to apples necessarily, but but
they're similar projects, classified
similarly, uh, and within the same
zoning designation.
Uh, a large neighborhood opposition uh,
comes to the public hearing and they are
opposed, vehemently opposed to the
methodone treatment center. They say
things like it's too close to the
daycare center that's just down the
street. Traffic is already a problem in
this area. Uh you know, clientele of
methanone treatment centers, um there
are going to be problems and there are
going to be problems in this
neighborhood if if the planning
commission approves this. We don't want
those type of people in our
neighborhood. Uh and somebody else
argues that the building style doesn't
reflect the design characteristics of
the neighborhood. They're proposing just
a square metal building, black and white
colors. there's no character, there's no
architectural feel to that. So, we're
opposed uh to that as well.
So, members of this hearing body after
hearing from from the public and their
concerns, one says, you know what, we
should implement a moratorum and we
should during that moratorum period, we
should change the definition of clinic
to remove methanote centers.
Somebody else says, you know what,
traffic is a problem with that
intersection. I think it would be a good
idea that we require the developer to
come up with a traffic stud.
Somebody else suggested the applicant
meet with the police department to come
up with a public safety plan because,
you know, there's going to be problems
based on this land use and we want to
make sure the police are working with
the operator so that we know how we're
going to deal with with these people
when they start causing problems.
And finally, somebody says, um, I
understand the architectural concerns
and I think we should have the developer
hold three or four different public uh
sharets meetings where the members can
come in and we can ask the director to
change it to make it fit with the
neighborhood.
Anybody see problems with with any of
that?
>> All of it.
Please explain.
Well, if each of those areas of concern
isn't specifically addressed in the
zoning code, then there's no authority
to require any of that to happen.
That's Thank you. That that was exactly
what is that you want to be careful.
We're we're engaged in a public hearing.
We're listening to and it's not always
opposition, but we're listening to to
feedback from the public. It has to be
feedback that's pertinent to the
established standards. If the code
doesn't require a traffic study,
theoretically, I guess you could ask the
developer to to put together a traffic
study, but you wouldn't use that as a as
basis to deny the request. We asked them
to put together a traffic study and they
didn't do it. Well, the code doesn't
require it. So, you've got to play by
the existing rules. Okay.
Questions about that?
uh as as decision makers, these are
questions I think you need to be asking
yourself consistently. What are the
standards? What are the rules for
review? What you know what are our
parameters? What are the bumpers set up?
How far can we go? What can we ask for?
What can we not ask for? What are the
necessary steps uh as established? And
are we following those steps in the
process? Don't skip a step. Uh you have
to follow those steps. If they're
established, you have to follow those
steps. And as a decision maker, have I
been open, honest, and in my involvement
in that matter. Again, it comes back to personal ethics. You want to make
sure that you're above board uh as
you're making these decisions and
determinations.
Very quickly, some legal considerations
uh for for you as commissioners. Uh
these don't uh these affect you. You're
not necessarily responsible for them per
se, but I do want to make sure you're
aware of these. Uh the Open Meetings
Act, it's a it's a state actuh that
requires public and openness during
decisions and and planning and zoning
deliberations. So if you've got a
request that comes before you, you have
to adhere to the standards of OM.
The inspection public records act also
affects you. Um that act indicates that
while you conduct your business, the
notes that you make, uh the
conversations that you have, uh the
emails that you send all become part of
the record and the public has a right uh
to look at those should they choose to
want copies of those or listen to the
recordings or whatever. Uh and and the
village has to has to provide those for
folks that that make those requests.
The United Civil Rights Act uh it's very
similar to uh protections that we'll
talk about in just a second at the
federal level. Uh but it makes sure that
people again are treated fairly. they
are not discriminated against as they
engage uh in public planning and zoning
hearings and processes. Uh it does allow
should a court find that a commission uh
has violated the uh New Mexico Civil
Rights Act. It does allow for municipal
officials, which include planning
commissioners uh to be held uh to to be
sued to be held accountable. So again,
not that anybody that I'm aware of would
intentionally do something like that, uh
but you want to make sure Everybody's
getting a fair shake, everybody's being
treated the same.
Finally, uh the human rights act uh
again also just ensures that people are
not discriminated against and that
they're treated fairly throughout the
process. The subdivision act, the state
subdivision act may affect your
decisions. Uh the state engineering
water law may affect some of that. Uh
cultural properties act uh may have some
bearing on what you're doing. Again,
you're going to be relying on on staff
or the attorney uh should a request come
before you that would be affected by
that. But again, it's important to
remember that you're not making the
decision in a silo, you've got other
standards that you have to make sure are
to
the federal level. Uh we'll talk about
this more in just a second, but due
process under the 14th and the fifth
amendments. Uh again, it just protects
people's rights as individuals and
property owners through the process,
requires fairness uh of all concerning
how the resulting decision is made, and
it avoids depriving the property of all
economically viable uses.
uh may include such things as the Fair
Housing Act, uh the Americans with
Disability Act, or the Religious Land
Use Institutionalized Persons Act or UPA
may may affect certain decisions. But
again, you would rely on on staff uh to
help you understand should one of those
should a request come up that's affected
by one of these federal protections.
Uh in being ethical, it's important to
remember the following. These are kind
of things that have always worked for me
in my career. Don't forget zoning
standards apply to all properties within
the municipal limits. Um, we've got a
few empty seats here tonight. Uh, it
does not mean that because those seats
are empty, people don't care. Uh,
there's an expectation that you as a
commission will conduct your business
whether I'm in the room or not, members
of the community are in the room or not.
And so, it's important to remember that
uh just because you got a packed house
uh doesn't mean that you run the meeting
any differently. We just got one or two
that are sitting in the audience. There
should be some consistency and some
predictability to your process.
Uh familiarity with relevant state local
laws, development codes, and planning
ordinances is required. You don't have
to be a subject matter expert, but
having a working knowledge of your code
or your subdivision ordinance. Uh you
know, make sure you've got that. Make
sure you're reading that and your
understanding. If you got questions,
you're asking for clarification.
um the result of the decision that's
made may not be popular uh but decision
makers have to play by the rules. I like
to say sometimes that uh the decisions
that you make, it's not a popularity
contest. I've got more people voting for
me for homecoming king than somebody
else. Uh that that's not a planning and
zoning. Again, we'll get into it in more
detail, but you're acting as judges and
you have to listen, be unbiased, and
listen to the evidence that's presented
in order to make a decision.
If you adhere to the criteria, more than
likely you and your community are going
to stay out of trouble. And we'll talk
about avoiding conf excuse me, conflicts
of interest uh and disclosing. When is
it necessary to disclose
uh any personal or financial interests
which may create a conflict?
Questions?
» Okay. Yes, sir. Go ahead. about the uh
I'll just call it a feedback loop
between this commission and the
governing body.
>> Yes.
>> So when it seems that proposals are
coming before us and they are let's
[clears throat] say um they are not
specifically aspects of them are not
specifically
uh prohibited in our zoning code. then
um and we end up approving projects that
displease let's say a large number of
people in the public. Um
can you just comment I don't want you to
go deep on this but say something about
if and when it's appropriate for this
commission to communicate to the
governing body that such and such issue
seems inadequately addressed in the
code.
Excellent question and I would just very
briefly say that um I I think the idea
or the the concept is to have a an
appointed body and a governing body that
are working together. They're on the
same page, things of that nature. But uh
it's not uncommon sometimes for there to
be a disconnect or uh my words maybe a
lack of appreciation at the governing
body level. uh the planning and zoning
commission spent four hours talking
about uh you know building height or or
you know solar protection or whatever it
might be and it seems uh that once it
got to the governing body that that was
an afterthought or that wasn't
appreciated as much. Uh that happens.
Um, I would advise or my suggestion
would be that if if a commission feels
like a governing body is not listening
or vice versa, the governing body is
concerned about what goes on at the
planning and zoning commission level.
Um, one of the great ways to do that is
when you render a decision, you're
outlining in writing uh why you made the
decision, what aspects or what
characteristics uh were considered. Uh
what were considered is also
appropriate. Just again explaining how
you went from point A to point decision
is is advising and I get it. You know
groups can be very dynamic and some
groups get along better than others. Uh
but it doesn't mean that you don't put
in the effort and the time to come up
with a good decision, you know, good
notice of decision that explains uh what
you were what the commission was moved
by and maybe what didn't hold quite as
much.
Thank you.
>> There was a question.
>> Yes, sir. Yes.
Question comes to my mind about a
concern that an applicant for a change
in the use of their property. Um there
may be a history of of actions that
cause neighbors of that applicant to
have misgivings or reservations. And
they are to one commissioner. They know
that commissioner, they're old friends.
They talked before and they feel that
they know something that would have a
bearing or might have a bearing on that
situation.
Um the preferred method of course is for
that person to show up in due process
and present their findings in open form.
But um but does it mean that when
there's
outach
from the neighborhood to a commissioner.
They are supposed to say no, I will not
hear that comment. You must give your
comment through the formal process. That
is the structure of the due process. The
short answer would be yes. And I'll talk
about that a little bit more. I'll give
some specifics on that. But yes,
theoretically,
uh, all all discovery, all discussion,
uh the presenting of evidence, the
reviewing of documents and materials and
site plans and elevations, you know,
whatever. But the the culmination of all
of that should occur in public at a
public hearing. Uh there's a legal issue
that's created if you got individuals
that are communicating with the decision
makers outside the public hearing. And
I'll I'll cover that in just a little
bit. Could could I just throw something
up?
>> Um, what about texting during a public
meeting or emails?
Say a person is emailing a counselor or
a planning and zoning commission
and trying to influence them at the
meeting. Now, is that legal?
>> Uh, or does that come down to exparte
communication?
>> Correct. Yes. it would fall under
expporte which we'll talk about that's
legal issues that I I was mentioning and
again just being quite candid uh from my
experience it's also rude if you're a
decision maker and you keep checking
your phone and whether it's you know
you're surfing eBay or you're trying to
arrange your
>> yes
>> Jamaican vacation or you're uh getting
communication and and influence or
information rather from not in the room
or even if they are in the room, they're
not standing at the at the podium and
speaking into the microphone.
>> Correct.
>> It it creates a legal issue, but it's just not we're not treating people
fairly in that scenario.
>> Right. So, how do you handle something
like that?
>> You walk up behind the offending
commissioner and
I mean, you you do it professionally. I
mean, I you know, I'm just using you all
as an example here, but uh if
Commissioner BS, who has always been
problematic,
>> uh if he continues to to send emails or
answer emails and get information from
folks that that aren't at the meeting on
his laptop, then I would approach the
chairman and I would say, can we have a
conversation with him uh and and remind
him that, you know, if he could be
focused on on the speaker or the
presentation or whatever the the issue
is that he's kind neglecting. Uh maybe
the the city attorney, the village
attorney might be able to help in that
scenario. But you want to again
encourage and reward good behavior and call out and as much as as quickly
as possible do away with with bad or
behavior
would be my suggestion.
Kind of an in between situation.
If I'm a commissioner and there's
someone that's interested in what we're
discussing at the moment and that
individual texts me because they're
unavailable,
would it be fair to me as commissioner
just to say to the whole group, I
received this communication from so and
so here's the input, etc. Or should I
just ignore it?
is someone that wants to be there but
can't be there but has some input.
>> Sure. Um
>> or should they just do it ahead of time
and not do it?
>> Right. And that would be my advice. I
mean I get it that the world is an
unpredictable place. Uh but if I can't
be here in person or I can't participate
via Zoom or or call in or do something
of that nature, I mean I guess
technically you could receive that
correspondence and then read it into the
record or make it part of the
discussion. To me, it's just it feels a
little wonky and you're almost violating
kind of the intent of that. Um, but it
does,
again, my words, if it's important
enough for me to want my opinion to be
considered as as part of the entire
process, then I need to make sure that
I'm I'm in the room or that I've
provided written comment during the
comment period or that I hire somebody
to come in and speak on my behalf.
It just again it kind of looks and
smells a little bit wonky and so I would
just try to stay away from that as much
as possible.
>> Actually I recently looked at a Scaffa
meeting and what they required were all
cell phones to be shut off
>> prior to the meeting.
>> Sure. Sure. And as a commission, I'm
just throwing this out there, but if you
felt that uh that standard was
warranted, you could certainly adopt
that as part of your rules of procedure
and
looking at cell phones, laptops,
>> things of that nature.
>> Yes, sir. Following up on Commissioner
Boltz,
there's been occasion when we have heard
from the community a problem
um that
um
can only be handled by an alteration of a village ordinance.
>> Okay. So, what we've tried to do is
both put it in listen the member of the
community at the Coraleno forum. So it
might not have been associated with an
application. It was coral forum but
something that the village uh admin uh
council needs to deal with. And so uh
sometimes we've taken a vote and said
we'd like you to consider this or
consider that. A lot of times we staff
to to look into it further and to engage
with the administration.
>> So, there's all a variety of ways of
doing this, but but I think what I heard
from the commissioner is, you know, when we hear an application
that the ordinances are not clear about,
shouldn't we, you know, take it upon
ourselves to alert the council the
village uh administration.
>> Um yes, I mean just as a matter of of uh
government efficiency, I I think that's
important and that can be accomplished
in any number of ways. Whether it's it's
a written decision uh where that's you write that out and you clearly
somebody writes it out on your behalf,
but the decision that's made the
concerns that are raised at the at the
planning and zoning commission uh are clearly outlined within the notice
of decision. You can rely on staff uh to
do that. Um, you know, again, I don't
want to get too far in the weeds, but
depending on what the issue is, it might
be appropriate for members of the
commission uh to to reach out directly
to to their uh to the elected officials.
If it's legislative in nature, if it's
something if it's an ordinance change
that needs to take place, not specific
to a case or particular piece of
property, but if it's something uh the
village wants to adopt um um short-term
rental regulations that, you know,
community members have expressed
concerns about that or they're in
support of that and there's nothing on
the books that would allow for that.
Certainly, it would be appropriate for
the commission uh to to reach out to the
elected officials and say, "Hey, um you
know, we've heard complaints or we have
ideas or we've got uh issues on this.
Can we create an ordinance or can we
perform a study that would work on
something of that nature?" That that's
good government.
>> Yes, ma'am. So my concern with part of
what you said in the beginning there and
some comments I've heard earlier
>> is
my um
understanding was that
>> if we came across something that we
thought the council should address that
it would be the commission as a whole
that would send that to the council, not
each individual
>> um commission member saying I have issue
that I want you to address because I'm
on the planning and zoning commission.
It doesn't seem to me to be appropriate
for individual
people to be doing that.
>> Understood. And I I apologize for any
confusion. Yes, I would agree that if
[clears throat] the commission, the
membership of the commission has a an issue
that you know a letter signed by the
chair or signed by all the commissioners
or how whatever form uh that
communication takes place is most
appropriate. However, there is some and
again I apologize because I feel like
I'm getting too far down into details on
this, but there is some allowance uh
without any sort of impropriy where if
you bump into uh the mayor uh at the
coffee shop uh and you want to make sure
he got the email or the letter about the
short-term rental ordinance uh that that
doesn't violate the law and again
it's it's specific
>> [clears throat]
>> uh but in that scenario there there's
nothing wrong with a commissioner or a
couple commissioners saying hey Mr. Veer
I just want to make sure you're aware of
this. Uh or attending the governing body
hearing uh as a member of the community
and just expressing uh you know in my
role as as a member of the planning and
zoning commission uh we've heard that
there are issues with this and want to
make sure that uh that the governing
body is aware of that.
>> See I get concerned because then if you
say well they're individually going to
the council say you know and if they're
supposedly representing
opinion of all of us. We should know
what that is.
>> Absolutely.
>> And and I don't think I mean there are
questions about if being on the
commission takes away some of your
individual rights, but I think they
would need to make it clear that they're
there as a member of the community and
not from the commission unless we have
all said we want you to go represent us.
>> Yes, ma'am. I am in complete agreement
with you. The distinction or the
difference that I'm making is
>> from a legal standpoint
There may be a possibility that if you
informally uh bump into the mayor and want to talk about that that it
doesn't violate any legal standard.
However, from an operational
perspective, I think it's much cleaner
and easier and keep guarantees that you
stay out of any sort of possible problem
if you act as as a unified body uh when
it comes to a situation like that. So
>> because my practical concerned about oh
hey mayor did you get our email is
generally conversations don't end there
they don't the mayor doesn't say oh yes
I mean he may say oh no what did it say
I guess I missed that then you lead into
a whole
>> and you're getting dangerously close to
me
>> I think it's better not to do that
>> and I would agree and I apologize the
only distinction I was trying to make
that that from a legal standpoint it
might be uh that it doesn't create a
problem but from an operational you
know, how are we going to do this in
practice? I would just again if if the
need comes or or the issue is such that
it requires some sort of formal
notification or some sort of formal
communication with the governing body
that that's done as as you know a
unified front rather than one
commissioner goes and another
commissioner goes and that that gets
messy and it also creates a perception
problem sometimes too. may be completely
legal, but it may look to the public
like something's going, you know, deals
are being made, backroom deals are being
made or things are being discussed that,
you know, I'm suspicious of,
>> right?
>> It's the appearance.
>> The appearance. Yes, ma'am. Very
important.
>> Okay.
if you would please. I think my clicker
>> I
» So good all good questions. Thank you
for those. Uh just some tips uh some
make sure we talk about uh avoiding or
navigating rather ethical dilemmas. So
some pretty obvious examples here. Uh
everybody knows that accepting gifts or
favors in order to vote a certain way is
not something uh a planning commissioner
should engage in. Uh voting on matters
that will provide individual financial
gain or benefit is something you should
stay away from. Uh discussions of
project details outside the scheduled
public hearing uh creates an ethical
issue. Don't engage in that behavior. Uh
if you've got a personal relationship
with an applicant, an agent, a member of
the a participating party, that in and
of itself is not a problem. But you
certainly should be open and honest to
say while I don't like my
brother-in-law, he is the applicant on
this particular case and I'm going to go
ahead and recuse myself um because I
don't want there to be any appearance of
impropriy. Uh always take the take the
high road on situations like that. But
those are pretty easy, right?
>> Mine's working.
>> Oh, good.
>> Yes. Thank you. I think you just went to
sleep there for a second. Sorry about
that.
>> How about some not so obvious
ethical issues.
Uh, how about advising a community
member on how they should prepare their
application?
You're at Walgreens on a Saturday
morning and somebody says, "Aren't you
the chair of the planning and zoning
commission? You do a great job." Hey,
listen. Um, I'm gonna I'm thinking about
asking for a variance. I want to build
an addition on the back of my house.
What What do I need to say? What should
I fill out on my application so that I
make sure that I get approved? Because,
you know, the stuff like the back of
your head, right?
Do you engage in that conversation? No.
Uh answering phone calls, emails, or
text messages with questions from the
community member about a particular
piece of property. I see that five acres
there at the corner of Corales Road and
Applewood uh is going up for sale. Uh
Commissioner, do you know what the
zoning designation is for that? And
could I put a bed and breakfast in
there?
That could create a problem. Stay away
from that. Um this is big one,
conducting site visits in order to to
get a feel for the property. I want to I
want to listen uh to how much traffic
affects this particular location or I
want to see how many trees are are on
the property or I want to touch the
dirt. I'm just one of those people that
likes to to feel it with my hand. So,
I'm going to take a trip out to the
property. That creates an ethical dile
that creates a problem. We'll talk about
that more in a question about that.
Sure. Suppose the
In a public forum, all the commissioners
said, you know, we need to get a better
understanding of what the applicant
requesting. Therefore, we as a whole
field trip to that site and look to see
what's going on. Is that
so
should stay away from it? But as a
whole, the commissioners agree that
that's good feedback.
» That's correct. And and the distinction,
very good question. The distinction is
an individual commissioner or a couple
of commissioners taking it upon
themselves to conduct that site visit
versus the group deciding and you have
to invite the public.
>> Yeah.
>> Uh to to attend a site visit. It may
come up that a site visit is deemed
necessary. But again, this is not
something where you as a commissioner
would go out and and do an invest an
independent investigation to try and
gain some facts. Uh because as we'll
talk about in just a minute, that
constitutes exparte communication, which
you can't be doing as it relates to the
matters that come before you.
>> Can I make a quick comment on that?
>> Sure. Because um in a case like that, if
all of the commissioners were going to
do a site visit, I would have to do the
public notice.
Okay? I would have to do a public
notice. Um in fact, there was something
recently where it was understood that
probably a lot of counselors were going
to attend and the clerk's office put up
possible quorum just just to let the
public know that a bunch of counselors
were going to be in one place at one
time. Um and and it would say and in the
other instance in this instance I don't
think I could say that there might not
be or that that there's not going to be
any discussions made but uh or decisions
made. There shouldn't be any decisions
made on the fly. Um so it's kind of
treading dangerously a little bit.
>> Right. Again it's very similar to the
communication issue that came up
earlier. It's possible there are ways to
do it. I am aware of one community.
There may be more, but I'm aware of one
community in New Mexico uh that
schedules a a site visit uh and they
literally take a school bus and they put
all the commissioners on that on that
bus and any members of the public that
wish to participate uh they have very uh
specific rules that they're not to talk
about the case uh during the site visit
portion but they drive to property A and
then to property B and then property C.
Uh but uh that is not typical
uh of the way site visits should they be
deemed necessary site visits should
occur.
>> Yes sir.
>> So if commissioner my neighbor is going
for some issue I should recuse myself.
[clears throat]
>> Uh I and that's I think you know
generally speaking again painting with a
broad brush here but I think that would
be appropriate. But uh if you have a
situation where this comes up sometimes
where you as a commissioner are familiar
with a a subject property that's on the
agenda because you drive by it every day
when you take the kids to school or go
to work or whatever.
>> That's going to be my next question.
>> That is okay. The problem is created
when an individual decision maker makes
a singular purposeful trip to the site.
you drive by it and you're familiar with
it or you lived in the community for 53
years and you just you know it used to
be the old garage and it was a saloon
for a while and I know that property
very well. That's different than uh
going out and again conducting an
independent investigation.
Okay,
good questions.
So, uh, my scenario here, I'm not
getting the look. I'm not getting a
confused look, uh, on your faces, but
I'm not telling you, uh, or excuse me, I
am telling you as as a commission
member, I'm not telling you you can't
talk to the community. You just have to
be careful about when you do it and how
you do it. Uh, we'll talk about this a
little bit more in just a second, but
again, you're acting as a judge and you
have to be judgeike.
So, uh, I get a speeding ticket. Uh, is
it okay for me to go knock on the
judge's door or call him up in his
chambers and want to talk to him about
my speeding ticket and how the officer
aired when he wrote me a ticket for
doing 65 and a 45? No. The judge would
never talk to me, right? The same
concept needs to apply to planning and
zoning matters that come before this
commission.
Um, so what do you do? Well, you rely on
staff. And whether that's staff of one
or that's an a team of five or more. Uh
you rely on staff and or the
administration to assist you. Um you get
questions, you get emails, you get phone
calls. Uh refer those pass those along.
Give those to uh to Lori, give those to
give folks the the phone number for
planning and zoning or direct them to
the website. But you want to make sure
that your involvement in those
situations is limited and that you're
again essentially keeping your hands
clean by passing that along to staff.
That that's their job. Uh very quickly
it's important to know what staff does.
I can tell you that uh before a meeting
staff is consulting with applicants.
Rarely if ever does an application come
in that staff has no idea that somebody
was going to file. Usually there's inquiries, there's emails, uh
sometimes it's the result of enforce
code enforcement action. Uh but staff
typically has a pretty pretty good idea
uh of who's getting ready to or who's
submitting an application to come before
the planning and zoning commission. Uh
they're engaged in public outreach. Uh
advertisements are sent to the
newspaper, legal ads, uh mailouts.
Staff's making sure those are done
correctly. Uh providing one or more
signs for an applicant to post on the
property, including a report of some
form based on the criteria in the code.
They may be giving you a recommendation.
It appears based on review that this
proposal meets the applicable criteria
of the zoning code and the planning
department is recommending approval.
Maybe something like that. That all
occurs before the hearing. During the
hearing, they're making sure uh that the
signup sheets are kept. That's part of
the Inspection of Public Records Act
requirements and the Open Meeting Act
requirements. uh that minutes are being
kept, accurate minutes are being kept.
Uh and they're also working on the
notice of decision. Not exactly sure how
you all do it here. It could be
something that's prepared by staff. Uh
you may be a decision based on
recommendations that you find in your
staff report. Uh but again, staff is
making sure after a decision is made
that the that the mail out that the
notice is sent out in accordance with
the board. [clears throat]
And then after the meeting, uh it's
certainly possible and plausible for uh
reports or updates of some sort to be
given to the administration.
Uh staff also works uh just because
people get a decision at the planning
and zoning commission uh doesn't mean
that their project uh automatically
continues to move forward. So staff
works to advise to consult uh with
property owners uh maybe something
associated with plan review or somebody
may want to file an appeal of a decision
that's made at the planning and zoning
commission. So again staff is continuing
to work with uh participants after the
public hearing.
It's really a two-way street.
Commissioners can expect from staff uh
advocacy for good planning. Uh the
American Planning Association has a set
of ethics uh and they require uh
planners to to act in accordance uh to
advocate rather for for good planning
and so you can expect that from staff.
Uh things like tonight training on
process, procedures, legal requirements,
terminology. Uh you can expect that out
of out of your staff. Uh report the
facts of the case related to the code.
Identify uh the connection or the
relationship between uh the comp plan
and the code and the subdivision
ordinance, things of that nature.
And then a commission should be able to
get and expect to get from their staff
jargon free, easy to use, easy to read
staff reports. Um, we want to make we as
staff so to speak want to make your job
uh as easy as possible. There still
requires a lot of brain power, requires
a lot of work that goes into it. But we
want to make sure that any
communications that we are preparing for
you, which are public communications, so
the public also gets to look at those
make sense and they're easy to use and
they're easy to read.
Uh what can staff expect from
commissioners? Uh before you get to the
hearing, please review your materials. I
have dealt with some commissioners that
expected that staff gets to the podium
and to tell me everything I need to know
when all of the pertinent details are
usually included within that staff
report. So be familiar with that. Uh if
you got a question you're going to ask
that please uh if you've got concerns
about something uh it's appropriate
we'll talk about the parameters uh to
give some forewarning or to ask what is
the acreage of the property? Is it 80
acres or is it
things of that nature would be
appropriate. Uh don't blindside staff uh
if you've got issues again uh that are
not pertinent to the cases that are
being heard. That's a conversation for
outside the public hearing
and um and then just showing respect for your staff.
So key points here, uh, discussing the
potential conflicts of interest promptly
and clearly. Recusing yourself from
voting on a matter you have a real or a
perceived conflict of interest is
appropriate. It's required. It's
expected. It is not a bad thing to have
to recuse yourself. I've seen some
commissioners that struggle because uh,
you know, again, they were related to an
applicant, say, um, but they didn't they
didn't want to say anything because they
didn't want it to make it they had done
something wrong. It's not a bad thing to
recuse yourself. It really helps
demonstrate what we've been talking
about openness, transparency, honesty,
ethical behavior. If you even if it's a
perceived or a possible perceived
conflict, uh identifying that, calling
it out, saying I want to make sure for
the record, uh that you know it it shows
that the applicant is my brother-in-law.
Uh I feel like I can make an unbiased
decision, but from a perception
standpoint, I understand how people
could be confused. So, I'm going to
recuse myself.
>> Okay. So, random question.
>> Yes, sir.
>> Suppose a commissioner lives within the
legally required uh radius of a property
that's being brought before the
commission for review.
>> Is that an automatic recusal for that
commissioner?
>> You guys, you got good questions.
Um I don't think so. And I'll tell you
kind of where I'm coming from is I would
certainly uh make sure the record, you
know, I I would say something or read
something into the record, but then it
becomes a personal decision. You're
going to rec, you know, you're letting
other members, participants, whether on
the commission or in the audience, know
that you live within 300 ft of the
subject site and then you make a
decision, a personal decision. and being
prox in close proximity to that site.
Does that somehow influence or bias your
ability to listen to the proposal as it
comes forward? Um, it might it also
might not. I mean, I've got people that
live near me that
probably need to go knock on their door
and meet them. I don't know them that,
you know, they've lived in the
neighborhood for a couple years and I
see them come in and out every once.
situation like that. I feel like if I
was a decision maker, I could make an
unbiased decision. Conversely, there's
people that live in the neighborhood
that I think are great, uh, and if that
were the situation, I, you know, an
applicant were to come forward that was
somebody I knew or I knew very well, uh,
I would probably choose to recuse
myself. But again, it's an individual
decision in a scenario like that.
>> That's good. Thank you. [clears throat]
Um, and then the last sub point there,
just remember, it's always better if
you're the one to mention a conflict or
a perceived conflict than to have
somebody call you out on it after you've
voted or after you've already started to
engage in in the public hearing process
of that. So, again, just being honest
and open.
Uh, very recently, the legislature
adopted House Bill 298 and specifies
that uh when a hearing body member has a
conflict of interest uh by state statute
they are required to do the following.
They have to state the conflict on the
record. So what what's the issue or the
perceived issue and then secondly they
have to leave the room until the matter
is decided and the hearing body has
moved on to the next matter. standing at
the back of the room. I've seen this
before. Uh and uh engaging in nonverbal
communication,
you know, is is not allowed. Or sitting
in the front row and and glaring at your
fellow commissioners, you guys better
approve this. You know, my mother-in-law
needs this. Um that that is not
appropriate. Wasn't appropriate to begin
with. Uh but this this bill goes on to
specify that should a decision maker
whether it's at this level or at the
governing body level if you've got a
conflict you got to declare it and you
got to leave.
What if you don't think you can make an
unbiased decision as an individual?
>> If you you don't think you can make an
unbiased decision then you need to
recuse yourself whatever sort of
inclination against or for the
>> proposal. Correct. I personally I could
not vote for anybody that was a fan of
the Dallas Cowboys. It was just
something unique. Uh but yes, if you if
you had an issue that you convinced
yourself or maybe a fellow commissioner
reminded you uh that that you had bias
or you had a pre-existing opinion.
>> Um yes, by all means, you know, again,
this is for the long haul, right? We we
want decisions that are made that are
legally sound, compliant with the with
the criteria. Uh we don't want a
situation where a decision is made uh in
haste or a decision is made improperly
or incorrectly only to have a court
overturn that uh because that doesn't do
anybody.
» Yes, sir.
on the on the
believe the room law. Yes, you said that
was recent.
>> Uh yes, I think it was it went into it
was adopted.
I believe it was adopted last
not the most recent legislative session
but before that but it went into effect
recently. I don't think it was July one.
I think it was at the end of the
calendar year last year. So, I'm sort of
thinking
it just as a reminder, we might put that
in our rules of procedure.
>> I I would agree with that and advise
that and be fully in support of that.
>> It just again, if you've got it in
writing, it just helps us helps helps
you remember and then if there's ever a
question, theoretically, it's black and
white.
>> Yes, sir. So basically um something that
keeps on just coming to my mind is we're
a small community. So at what level I
mean I run into the same people
constantly. Is it just okay if someone's
if you know if you're just like I don't
want to hear anything. I'm leaving. I'm
not going to talk to you if you're going
to discuss a a project or I don't tell
me if you're going to come before P&Z or
at what point because the more active
you are in the community the more people
you're going to cross paths with. So I
just see that being really difficult in
a place like Corales.
>> Yes, I would agree with you. It's not it
doesn't happen
>> in larger communities.
>> But yes, I mean it's very common
>> for me to hear and I understand that
>> you know if you grew up here or you live
here and you laid down roots and you've
got a large social circle and and things
of that nature which are all benefits to
the community. Uh but you have to there
gets to the point uh where individually
uh you need to be able to say guys I
can't talk about this right now. Can we
change the conversation to
>> the Real Housewives of Miami or whatever
would be more appropriate than talking
about my plans to subdivide my 10 acres
and I'm going to you know create lots
and I'm going to start building houses
and do you think you know we're just
here at the cocktail party but can you
just give me some off-the cuff advice?
You're You're bleeding in over. You're
bleeding over into dangerous territory.
>> Yeah. No, and I get that. But I guess
what my concern would be is we talked
about the perception. So then you I
wouldn't want someone else being like,
"Oh my gosh, like you I know you know
that person." So I think we need to be
trusted to show our good judgment and we
need to Okay.
>> Absolutely. Absolutely. And again, I
think
>> we've kind of touched on it a little
bit, but we may be good friends. uh
there come and if I come before you come
before this body um I probably as your
friend would want to tell or make a good
argument for why my project should be
approved uh because I want to be treated
fairly. But if you feel at a personal
level that it either could be a conf
would be a conflict or could be
perceived as a conflict then you have an
obligation to to call it out and if you
feel the need to recuse yourself
statewide and reform. But there could
be, you know, there could be a situation
where we know each other, but our
relationship or our the circles that we
ran in or the little league team that we
coached together doesn't affect your
ability to to make a judgment about a
land use.
But again, it all comes down to what
you're comfortable with, too.
Uh as decision makers, you need to base
your decision on the facts and the
evidence presented, not on personal
preference, on bias or individuals that
are involved. Uh none of those things
matter. Name, age, race, religion, how
long I've lived in the community, uh
things of that nature. All discussions,
deliberations, and resulting decisions
have to be properly documented and must
be accessible to the public. And if you
have questions when in doubt, It's
almost always appropriate to reach out
to staff to your to your attorney to get
clarification,
particularly when it's related to
process and not the details of a
particular request.
Pause one more time for questions.
All right.
So, matters that come before the hearing
body fall into one of two categories. Uh
they're either legislative in nature or
they're quasi judicial. We're going to
focus on quasi judicial matter. The
distinction or the difference between
the two depends upon the subject matter
of the proceedings. Quasi judicial
matters while they do uh pertain to or
affect or go before a governing body uh
the meat and potatoes of what you do as
planning and zoning commissioners is
quasi judicial in nature. And this is
when the commission is charged with
rendering a decision on the rights of a
specific individual or a small group of
affected people or a specific piece of
property based on the criteria that's
outlined in the code. And you have to
base that decision on the evidence
that's within the record. Again, you're
acting as a judge. Uh I'm dating myself
here, but when I was a kid, I wanted to
grow up and be Judge Wner. I've loved
the People's Court. come home every day
after school and turn on the people's
court. And if you'll think about the
people's court or other judicial shows
like that, you have a judge that's
sitting behind the dis or the desk and
you've got typically two parties and the
judge starts with the first party and
the judge says tell me your side of the
story and gives uh that individual an
opportunity to to tell what happened and
that may include uh diagrams and that
may include pictures or um recordings of some sort. And then after the judge
listens to the first party, they turn to
the second party and they say, "Okay,
you tell me your side of the story and
they do the same thing, right?" Then the
judge collects all the evidence and
what's the next thing they do?
They take a commercial break because
they recess to the chambers and they
look over all of the evidence that's
presented and they think about the the
testimony and the credibility or the
lack thereof of people that participated
in that process and then they re render
a decision based on the law. That's
exactly what you guys are doing in your
capacity as planning and zoning
commissioners. In order to do that, you
have to afford participants these three
things. Due process, the opportunity to
be heard and a written decision based on
the evidence in the record that provides
findings which demonstrate how the
applicant met or did not meet the
applicable criteria. Let's talk about
those. Due process comes in two forms,
procedural and substantive. Procedural
due process is guaranteed by the 14th
and the fifth amendments of the United
States Constitution. You've also got
mirroring standards in uh in state
requirements. But in a nutshell, it
ensures that uh the fairness of
government actions that might deprive
someone of their property, excuse me,
their life, their liberty or their
property are undertaken. people are
protected from from that type of
government action. What it requires is
notice an opportunity to be heard and a
neutral decision making body. That's why
we if you need to recuse yourself
because you might be biased in some way.
You want to make sure that that the
decision-m body is neutral.
Secondly, subjective due process talks
about uh those same protections from
state and federal uh authority.
Give me just a second. So,
>> you're okay.
» You're good. Um, again, protects
people's fundamental rights. Uh,
ensuring that there's a compelling
government interest associated with the
determination that's being made. Uh, and
really the focus in substantive due
process is on the result of the hearing.
These questions are typical from uh, a
court. Uh, was the decision that was
reached arbitrary or capriccious? Fancy
words to say. Was it a reasonable
decision? Does it make sense based upon
the evidence and the criteria?
Um secondly, was it based on substantial
evidence in the record? Um a decision, a
determination to deny something because
uh traffic is an issue without any sort
of scientific traffic study of that
nature. Um that is not evidence,
substantial evidence that's in the
record. So that could create a problem.
Don't just wing it. Right.
Finally, was the result otherwise in
accordance with the law? Those are those
are considerations that a court makes to
ensure or to test if due process has
been provided.
Next, opportunity to be heard. All
witnesses that come before you, anybody
that's going to testify, including
staff, uh has to be sworn in, is
required to be sworn in. Uh you don't go
to zoning jail uh if you don't tell the
truth when you stand at the podium here.
There's no such thing as perjury from a zoning standpoint. However, it is
a reminder to participants that this is
a formal proceeding. They are to be on
their best behavior. They're to put
their, you know, good foot forward, that
sort of thing. They're to participate uh
professionally and ethically.
Uh if necessary, time periods can be
established uh for testimony or
presentations. That's very common. You
may do that already. It may be in the
rules of procedure, but an applicant
will have 10 minutes to explain their
proposal. Uh, individuals in support of
that will have two minutes to talk about
that. Then we'll jump over to anyone uh
that's in opposition. We'll give them a
certain time period. Uh it's okay to to
limit time period. Sometimes you'll hear
two minutes isn't enough. Uh don't
forget there are other methods of
communicating with the commission. You
can send your emails, provide written
comments to staff, things of that
nature.
uh opportunity to be heard also includes
uh providing for an opportunity for
cross-examination of witnesses. It
really just gives each party the ability
to to question uh motivation or bias or
things of that nature uh should that be
offered. Uh this is not a you know Jack
Nicholson you can't handle the truth
kind of situation. I've seen uh various
commissions that will either uh offer a
cross- examination uh time period uh
once testimony has been provided once we
get to that point in the hearing and the
commission and the chair will say uh all
commissions, excuse me, all questions
need to be submitted in writing and then
the chair will read the commission. It
kind of helps to take should it be a a
controversial matter kind of takes some
of the sting out of you know what do you
mean you did do a traffic study or how
much did you pay your your traffic
engineer? It just helps to keep things a
little bit calmer and more professional.
But the witness uh but witnesses during
cross- examination should never be
subject to to badgering or anything of
that nature. They should be treated with respect.
Finally, the written decision. So all
evidence that's presented has to be
reflected within the decision. And it's
aokay to give different weight and
different influence to different
evidence. Uh things like scientific
reports, professional studies, or
testimony by a subject matter expert
typically warrant significance because
they're grounded in technical expertise
and objective analysis.
Courts usually rely on the record and
not the emotion that may be in the room
or not anything that's not already
codified or written down in the
standards.
when they determine a matter that comes
before them, they're simply looking at
uh what was said and how the connection
is made from the evidence that was
presented to the determination that was
ultimately rendered.
I think it's important to remind uh the
commission that a decision isn't
official until it's in writing. Uh I am
aware that uh some commissions make a hearing on uh excuse me make a
decision on Tuesday night during the
hearing and then staff turns around
Wednesday morning and writes it all up
and and sends it out. There also
jurisdictions that make a decision at
one meeting and then two weeks later
they have another meeting where uh
findings and conditions have been
prepared based on the discussion and
decision that was rendered two weeks
prior. It doesn't really matter, but
it's not official until it's in writing.
So, if I'm standing before you and you
approve my my subdivision request and
you have the authority to approve it at
this level, I can't go out tomorrow
morning and start digging trenches and
that sort of thing. It's got to be in
writing and if there's an appeal period
to that, the appeal period needs to
expire before any rights have been
conveyed to me as a property owner based
upon the decision from this commission.
The decision must outline findings of
fact to support the determination. This
is really nothing more than a sufficient
explanation that connects the evidence
that's presented to the criteria. And it
really comes in three components. The
applicable standards as they are
enumerated in the code, the evidence
presented or not presented that's in the
record, and a conclusion explaining
whether the criterion was met or not.
Another very quick practical example
here. I'm making this up, but section
5.5.3
L of the zoning ordinance requires that
the proposed garage for automobile
repair be compatible with surrounding
development.
Factual statement, right?
Evidence presented during the hearing
established that the surrounding area
contains commercial and mixeduse
properties on three sides of the subject
site, including a gas station in the
east, gymnastics and trucking facility
in the west, and a retail establishment
to the south. The 3acre size of the
property is sufficient in size and shape
to meet all applicable development
requirements for yards, open space,
parking, loading, and landscaping. And
the applicant has testified that all
noise generating activities will occur
inside the building will occur indoors.
Here comes the concluding statement.
Based on this evidence, the planning and
zoning commission finds that the
proposed use is compatible with the
surrounding area and the applicable
development standards. there's a
connection between the evidence and the
resulting ultimate decision.
Um I also recommend highly recommend
that the decision if there is
conflicting evidence uh that it be also
referenced. Um, I think ignoring
unfavorable
uh evidence or or evidence that is
contrary to the decision that's made weakens your decision. So,
it could include something like this.
Although several residents expressed
concerns regarding increased traffic
congestion, the traffic impact analysis
prepared by a licensed traffic engineer
concluded that the increase in traffic
um created by the project would remain
within acceptable level of service
standards established by the village.
The planning zoning commission assigned
substantial weight to the professional
traffic analysis submitted with this
request because it was based on
measurable data and accepted engineering
methodologies. you haven't ignored the
people that said, "I feel like I may not
have evidence, but I know in my gut that
traffic is going to be a problem." And weighing that against
a study, an official study, analysis
using adopted methodologies.
So, we've touched on this very briefly.
Let's just run through it quickly. But
exparte is any communication that occurs
outside of a public. It involves fewer
all the parties having a legal interest
in the matter. It's about a pending or
an upcoming matter in front of the
commission and it's made to or initiated
by a commission member having
jurisdiction over the matter. Again,
you're acting as judges, so you want to
avoid any discussions outside the public
hearing.
Examples include uh having
communications with people involved or
not involved in the subject matter uh
pending before the hearing body,
independent investigations. We talked
about site visits just a few minutes
ago. even communications that are made
with the best of intentions. I'm just
trying to help. My advice is don't be
unhelpful. Uh but make sure you qualify
that you can't help in that situation
because again your role is to be a
judge. And you want to make sure that
there's a very clear delineation between
acting as a judge, acting as a hearing
officer, acting as a commission member
and quote unquote helping in the
situation.
Exparte includes uh discussions, phone
calls, emails, text messages,
independent internet research, uh
pictures, uh site visits. Now, again,
things that don't come up during the
hearing
or outside the public hearing fall into
the into the category of exploit.
Really, the key point is that as I
mentioned earlier, all factf finding
should be done during the hearing. It's
the applicant's responsibility to
communicate to you to your satisfaction
that their proposal meets the criteria.
If you feel that [clears throat]
uh an aerial photograph of the property
is important, uh the applicant is the
one that bears the responsibility to do
that. And it's absolutely acceptable for
this commission to say, "Mr. Williams,
we need to see an aerial photograph."
And you keep talking about how the
topography on your lot is much different
than than surrounding lots. give me
something that I can, you know, roll up
my sleeves and look into. Uh I need more
than than you simply just testifying to
the fact that that's absolutely
appropriate uh to come from the
commission.
Why prohibit export communications? It's
not fair. That that's in a nutshell. The
decision maker can be accur inaccurately
informed. They can be improperly
influenced. Uh it only gives one side of
the story. if we're having a
conversation about my project uh while
we wait for our prescriptions to get
filled at Walgreens, right?
Even if there's an absence of actual
influence or misinformation, other
parties may feel that they've been
cheated and and believe that the the
process has been tainted and we don't
want to do that. Again, you want to hold
on and retain community trust.
Uh it's possible for a commission
engaged in exartic communication,
particularly of an ongoing or recurring
nature to develop a reputation for being
susceptible to improper influence. Uh
and again that diminishes community
trust. Uh and the big one uh expparte
communications can invalidate the
actions of the hearing body should an
appeal be filed uh and it gets to the
court or it even gets to the governing
body and the governing body determines
that some sort of exparte communication
has taken place. It is not uncommon for
courts to say, "We're saying you
shouldn't have done that." So, you get
dinged for doing something you shouldn't
have done. Uh, and then they make you do
it all over again. Uh, and that
essentially is waste of time, effort,
and resources because you have to do it
again because you didn't do it right the
first time.
I am a a baseball fan. Uh, not because
I'm a retired old man, but I just I've
always loved baseball. But in the last
couple years, I have the striking
similarities between baseball and
planning and zoning. Think about it.
Baseball is established on the seven
rules and when it's appropriate,
those rules can be changed. Those rules
provide predictability.
If my good buddy uh Mr. Show Atani hits
a sharp drive to right center field,
what's he going to do?
You guys know this, right? He hits the
ball. Where's he gonna run?
>> First base.
What if he said, "Well, in
Japan, we always run to third base. We
I've never been taught to run to first
base. Does that matter?" No. We would
say it's the rules of the game.
Um, so it provides a level of
predictability. There's a large focus uh
on the fans in baseball. I love going to
the Isotopes game because it's it's very
familyoriented. They want people engaged
and having fun. That's part of it. So
they remember who their who their
audience is, right? Cheating is
condemned.
I won't say to you US. Uh and finally,
the contest is determined based on the
culmination of events. It doesn't matter
how many runs are scored uh you know in
the first inning. I could score 12 runs
and doesn't mean that the game is is
locked up. We we wait till we get to the
end of the game and it's a culmination
of everything that's occurred. Uh it
renders the result as to who won and and
who didn't. Planning and zoning stuff
is very simple. There's a set of
established rules that we have to play
by. There's a level of predictability
that should be part of the process. If
it's necessary to modify, to change, or
to tweak a rule, there's a process to do
that. There's a large focus on the
public. Maybe they're fans, maybe
they're not, but again, who are we here
to serve? It's it's a public process uh
meant to engage the public. So, we need
to stay focused on the public. In this
P&Z process, much like baseball,
cheating is a no-go. You cannot cheat.
You have to play by the rules. You can't
bend them. You can't tweak them.
There is a process if they're not
working you you can go through but
making up your own rules is not allowed
in planning and zoning matters. Finally,
a decision is based on the culmination
of the evidence that's presented to the
decision.
Here are the rules of the game. All
witnesses have to be sworn in and all
testimony has to be provided under oath.
You've got to provide an opportunity for
cross-examination of witnesses.
expert and communications must be
avoided.
All the evidence in the record has to be
considered in the decision. And again,
as I mentioned earlier, some evidence
can carry greater weight than others,
but everything that's presented has to
be considered.
You've got to provide a written decision
which outlines the facts that support
your determination. And last but not
least, all involved or interested
parties are entitled uh to notice. They
get a copy of the decision that's made.
They get a copy of announcement about
where the hearing will be held, things
of that nature.
Last time I'll ask this questions.
>> Yes,
>> this is I think similar to the question
I asked you
almost a year ago.
>> Um,
>> seems to get the same answer, right?
>> I hope so. Um,
so if uh In the example you gave, uh,
the commission says, "We can we don't
have a real sense of what you're saying
about the contour of your land."
Um,
and we need more information. What do we
do with the application? Do we
hold it over to the next meeting? Is
there a technical word for that?
Sometimes people
I need you to decide one way or another.
I've got all this money put into it.
>> Um well, you could I mean I've heard it
referred to as a deferral. We're going
to take item 5G and we're going to defer
it to the August 12th meeting. Uh you
could also continue and again the
distinction is really not important uh
for our purposes today but you could
continue the matter meaning you're going
to pause it and you're going to pick up
later when it's rescheduled. Uh but if
you've got and I've been there uh you've
got you know give me some give me
something to sink my teeth into help me
help you kind of thing and you've got
people that say I don't know what to do
or I've already been doing this months
and I don't want to spend another $3,000
as my engineer.
Um, you've kind of painted yourself in a
corner as an applicant. Uh, if the
commission doesn't have enough
information to make a favorable
decision, you're left with one choice.
Well, really two. You could you can
continue it and ask them to give you
that additional information. But if an
applicant won't or can't uh get to you
what you need, then I would argue that
they're not meeting the criteria. You've
still got questions. You're not
convinced that uh that the applicant's
argument meets the the criteria for
approval by default. You're denying the
request.
>> So, with a denial, uh they can obviously
come back at a later date, but they have
to go through the whole start all over
again.
>> Sure. Or they could uh they could appeal
that denial uh to the governing body,
>> right? who again in my scenario here in
our little scenario here I would hope
the governing body would say well the
planning and zoning commission asked you
Mr. Williams to provide uh topographic
survey and you said that costs too much
money.
What's changed? Well, nothing. I just
don't want to do it. Well, again, now at
the governing body level, we're unable
to make a decision because we need this
evidence or we need this information as
well,
>> right?
>> But if you
defer or continue,
uh does notice have to be reposted? Uh
well, it's possible. I mean, it would
depend on on what your what your code,
your local code requires, some
jurisdiction and your rules of
procedure. Uh some communities require
notice all over again. Some don't. Uh
sometimes that's an argument that
applicants will make to avoid uh that if
there's a requirement for me to pay for
signs and repost and pay for the legal
ad that's going to be run in the
newspaper again, pay for mail out. Uh
have that kind of money. Um, you
[snorts] know, it's not meant to be
punitive in nature. Uh, but we it's a
public process. So, we've got to make
sure we meet all those public
notification requirements and they come
with a cost.
>> I I can answer part of that if if you if
allowed. So, this has happened a couple
of times where something had to come
back as long as during the actual
meeting we say this matter will be
deferred to a date certain, which is
potentially the next meeting. You know,
we've asked the applicant, can you have
what what we need you to have by the
next meeting or should we make it two
meetings out? Then the presumption is
that everyone in the room or on the Zoom
who's interested in that matter will
hear, oh, now it's going to be heard in
September on this date and then it will
show up on that meeting notice and and
agenda and that's sufficient. But if it
just if it just takes them six months,
then we just they they're going to pay
for certified letters again and etc,
>> And that's a very common
approach is to you know it
[clears throat] can there's no hard and
fast rule on that other than uh notice
has to be uh initially provided but some
commissions may choose to not have to
renotice or not send mail outs or things
of that nature and some commissions may
choose to
may opt to to require
>> and I want to clarify the distinction
between your 15 days and our 20 days.
Yes. Yes. 15 is is the legal minimum. Uh
if you've got something more than that, that that's a okay. It just can't
be 14 or fewer days. It's got to be at
least 15.
>> So Brandon, you think uh premeings would
solve some of these problems?
>> Oh, good point. Uh yes. I mean, that's
an option that I've seen in communities.
Uh some communities, Albuquerque for
example, for certain requests require a
pre-application.
>> Yeah, I think we need to look at that
>> and and that really kind of uh creates a
step in the process that helps you as a
commission ensure that people aren't
[clears throat] just coming in blind,
right?
>> Because not everybody that comes before
you has experience in development, land
use, subdivision, things of that nature.
So, uh, if you've got somebody that's
relatively new, a local mom and pop come
in and they want to subdivide their
property, requiring them to go through a
pre-application meeting ensures that
staff takes time to explain to them,
give them the materials that they need,
outlines the criteria, tells them the
process. This is step one, this is step
two, this is step three. So,
>> and I've been to Albuquerquey's and
Santa Fe's pre meetings. They're great.
They solve a lot of problems before
we end up looking at things.
>> Correct. And that that's the that's the
benefit which is yes uh staff is
identifying issues that may come up. My
earlier example about the you know the
fire lane had that particular developer
gone through a pre-application meeting.
Perhaps they could have uh they could
have saved some time in their design and
their layout.
>> U so there there are benefits to that
but again there's not a requirement. It
would be something
>> you as a commissioner the governing body
uh could push forward.
>> So, can the commission require that? Can
we make that ruling or do we need to go
before the council?
>> Well, you got you got to have to make it
a require has to be adopted, codified,
and finally [clears throat] adopted
through through the legislative process
to do that.
>> Okay.
>> Uh just requiring it uh not spec if it's
not called out in the ordinance, you're
you've got some legal liability in
requiring people to do that if if the
code doesn't specifically they have to
do.
>> It's definitely a positive thing to do.
>> Sure. And and I've also seen communities
that uh strongly recommend it. They
don't require somebody to go through it.
Uh but they will say something along the
lines of all applicants are strongly
recommend to meet with the planning and
zoning director prior to filing an
application so that you understand the
process, the steps, the costs, things of
that nature.
>> And you got it. I was going to say I do
that already. You're talking about
having an extra commission meeting
because all applicants do meet with me
prior to
>> Yes, it's a premeating where commission
are present
but we're not making a decision. We're
listening to and the applicants are also
present too to listening to the
discussion and we're taking in that
information and we're not making a
decision at a premeating
>> and I
>> am I accurate on my description
>> very common do you all have a a sketch
plat process here as it relates to your
subdivision application so that's what a
sketch plat meeting is is that it's it's
informal a decision is not made but it
allowsbody
everybody everybody to get in the same
room and kind of look at the map or roll
out the map and and say this is what I'm
proposing and there may be some
suggestions or there may be some
cautions uh that are that are expressed
to an applicant but it's really just to
kind of get everybody familiar uh in
this scenario with a subdivision
application get folks familiar with
what's coming what what's going to be
coming formally before the commission.
>> Yeah. But not everything we see goes
through a sketch plot. Correct.
Everything we can
>> correct. If it's a if it's a summary
plat, you know, one lot into two,
something like that, I I don't require a
sketch, but if it's one of those pretty
good size subdivisions, we absolutely do
so that you can see it and, you know, we
can thrash out things like fire
suppression and etc. You know, just
something of a large nature.
would change
the actual
» um if I'm understanding it would depend
upon what what your rules require.
So if if you have adopted
on the books rules that that don't
require a second round of notice after
the initial,
then you wouldn't have to worry. You
know, the time periods wouldn't really
come to effect. However, if if you don't
have some exclusion or something that
allows you to kind of deviate from the
normal process,
it it may bump when your hearing can be
heard because you got to backdate it in
order to meet all your public notice
requirements. And so, uh you know, I
need I want to come back in August. I
want to come back in August. Well, we
don't have enough time to advertise and
send notice and do all that sort of
thing. The earliest we can get you in
would be September. And that's just
because the rules are written that way.
>> Have you ever seen
» separate notice for meeting? Um,
» I will say the questions to I I don't
think so would be my horrible answer to
that.
>> Um,
I mean there would be nothing wrong. Let
me put it this way. You have to meet the
standard. you have to meet the minimum
that if you're going above and beyond
that generally is not an issue. So I'm
thinking of a scenario where there's a
particular case in Bernalo County that
was controversial
and the planning department decided uh
to to send a second notice even though
that was not the practice at at the time
but there were you know somebody above
my pay grade made the decision to say I
know it's going to cost an extra $200
but we want to make sure that community
members stay informed. So, let's send
out those letters again just to remind
them that this matter had been deferred
until the August hearing or whatever the
situation is. So, again, there wouldn't
be a problem with that. The problem
would be if you're required to send
notice and you don't send notice.
>> Okay.
>> So, can a premeating be set one week
before uh planning a zoning meeting?
>> You have to meet the publication dead.
So depending upon the action,
you [clears throat] should have an
established calendar that says in order
to meet this meeting, whether it's a pre-application meeting or a
sketch plat discussion or whatever it
might be, you need a hard and fast date
for the application to be submitted, the
fees to be paid, the legal ad to be run,
things of that nature. A week is not
going to give you enough time.
depend a lot on if 1% of the cases that
come in front of the commission
are have to have a delay because there
was more information
then there's
probably 95% of the time you can't make
a decision because
>> true
of
you know, the nuts and bolts of things
to make sure that when things come in,
they're in front of the commission in a
way that there's low chance of something
missing.
>> Yeah.
» Well, I I'm trying to think this through
in terms of, you know, we we have that
calendar that's in your packets and and
I I have the, you know, there's the date
of the meeting and then we back up.
Okay. We do a 30-day beating notice even
though 15 is. So, I'm trying to think,
okay, if if we're automatically going to
hear every single thing twice,
I have to make sure that all the
materials are still in by a certain
date. What if there's the premeating
here in a public meeting and the
commission asks for something else? Now,
how does that jive with, you know, now
there's a new notice and there's a new
application because there's new
information. I'm just trying to puzzle
this through. And I will say that when I
first started working here, I did notice
that there were a lot of things that
seemed to be heard over and over. Took
forever to get anything decided. And I
thought, well, how can that be remedied?
Well, the way it can be remedied is for
you to see it in its entirety. The first
time you see it, you know, to the best
of my ability, if something comes out in
a meeting, I didn't know about it, then
so be it. But um if somebody gives me
half an application, you're not going to
see it unless they insist. That's
happened one time. I said, you know,
it's your money. You're welcome to bring
this half an application and and try to
convince everyone, but 99.9% of the
time, they know everything they need in
the application, everything that the
code asks for. And and I I tell them,
you need to tell the planning and zoning
commission what it is you want to do.
you know, don't don't change your tune.
This is what you're going to do. If you
do a little less than that, then so be
it. But they need to know what is it you
want to do. Here's all your supporting
documents that they will need, the
commission will need.
>> So, Brennan, in City of Albuquerque,
what's the process for premeings? Is
there 30-day notice or can it be done?
>> Do you remember? Um,
I I don't to be completely honest. I
mean, I know that uh there are often
back in the day there used to be a rush
of pre-application meetings as we got
closer to uh application submission
deadline. So, people would uh want their
premeings so that they could then turn
around, you know, identify any issues or
any problems and then turn around and
submit their site development plan
application the following week because
that's
Thursday at close of business,
everything must be in in order to make
the August hearing. Um, but very good
points made here. A, is there an
operational need? Are you frequently as
a commission seeing stuff that you feel
is incomplete?
uh maybe we change the process, maybe we
create a pre-application, maybe we
modify uh the the standards, the
application standards and so we start
requiring
a a topo map to be submitted or or
whatever it is that you know your common
issue that you see overlooked or you
feel is pertinent to you making a
decision that applicants a lot of times
just come up shortly.
>> Yeah. And it may not be every month that
we need a premeating.
>> Correct.
>> Can I ask a clarifying question? I'm
sorry. I feel like there's two separate
definitions of premeings going on right
now.
>> I feel like you're talking about a
premeating being with staff and the
applicant to walk through what's needed.
And I feel like what's being conveyed
here is about the letter that we got
that you weren't privy to about Well,
but you were in the room, so you got to
hear it is about the commission meeting
um with
>> staff and potentially the applicant just
to hear everything that's being Correct.
>> And have the input by staff but not make
a decision. So I just want to make sure
that we're being really clear about the
two conversations.
>> I appreciate that. And you're right. I'm the way I'm thinking is it could be
done.
Both both paths are possible whether
it's it's a meeting outside of of
commission involvement that occurs prior
to an application being made and it's
simply uh planning staff. It may I'm
just making it up here. It may include
uh the public works department and it
may include the fire department. Um and
they're each checking for respective
aspects of this conceptual development
proposal. Uh and then Lori's explaining,
okay, uh if you want to get on the
August agenda, we need your fees and
your materials submitted by such and
such a date. Yeah, I think what Jod just
said is she clarified what I was going
for this meeting where we're all
involved but no decisions are made. No,
the staff presents it to us and the
applicant.
So, we have something to work with prior
to the meeting actually coming up. We've
had
>> the materials. So, I don't understand
what this pre [clears throat]
meeting would be about. We have all the
materials in our notebooks ahead of
time. One of the points that was made is
that you should review it ahead of time.
You know, we had one meeting where we
did not have sufficient quorum and we
had to cancel it. People were very angry
that they were here. I don't think
they're going to be happy to come twice
and we say the first time, oh, we just
want to know what you're going to say
next week, but we're not going to make a
decision. So, I I am against that pre
premeating meeting. It just doesn't make
any sense to me,
>> particularly if it involves the
commission. And I apologize. I was here.
I was conscious. I think uh I didn't
catch all the the specifics, but I I
would question
back.
» Hey there. I I just wanted to uh chime
in with a little bit of a two cents,
which is that I think that
Well, the distinction that I would make
is that if you feel the need,
it's it's a commission decision, but if
there's a need to have some sort of a a
pre-application meeting, a you have to
make sure that
the rules allow you to do that. I would
question personally,
why would I need to come back twice?
Um, so I'm not understanding that need
or that distinction. Um, but
having people meet with staff, so
outside the commission would avoid
notification, you know, publication
fees, mail out fees,
legal ad things of that nature. If it
can [clears throat] be resolved at the
staff level, I think from an operational
standpoint, that is the mo most
efficient way to do it. Now, that may
not always work for every type of
application. So, some sort of
determination can be made if it's above
10 acres or or if it pertains to a
shopping center site or or whatever the qualifier is that requires a some
sort of a pre-application meeting in
front of the not pre-application,
well, like a sketch plat,
>> uh, some sort of a a conception. We're
not going to make a decision on that.
Again, it's got to be you got to have it
in writing. You can't just make that up
on the fly, but it might be appropriate
for this commission to consider certain
qualifiers that would necessitate that.
But you don't have to do that. I I
agree. I think while the public loves
government and I love planning and
zoning commissions, there gets to, you
know, you get to a point where you don't
want to have to go to another public
hearing. I I just want a decision
rendered uh on this so that, you know,
we can either build or
try something else or whatever it is.
So, you want to that you're not
exhausting the public by having so many
meetings without rendering a decision.
When an application comes in, to some
degree, it needs to be complete. What
that is really depends upon
you all and how you do your business.
>> Corey, can you unmute?
>> Uh, I should be unmuted hopefully.
>> She wanted to say something.
>> Go ahead.
Uh, can you guys not hear me?
>> We can. We can hear you.
>> Oh, okay. Good. Um, so what I wanted to
say, and I think we sort of steered away
from it, our attorney go ahead.
>> Uh, we we are veering into I think to
the point of this entire training into a
subject that is um not been
appropriately noticed, right? we're doing a discussion about procedure
um and we're treading into discussions
about our actual rules of transacting
business. Um so I would a I think we
sort of already did but b caution that
this is the kind of thing if we want to
engage in this discussion in a in a
further detail. We should consider
adding it to a future meeting where we
can get into the weeds about whether or
not this is something we deem necessary
here in the village. Um or I mean even
another alternative is if it's a routine
thing that we're finding that
applications feel incomplete
then it would behoove us to be
requesting more out of our ordinance or
application process and maybe not
entertaining changing our rules of
procedure. Um but that's all things sort
of just to noodle with outside of this
meeting. But again, we're we're veering
into territory that has not been noticed
um appropriately. So, I just wanted to
give that word of caution.
>> And if I could, as uh chair, I would
agree. And uh I was going to mention
that when we get to the item on the
agenda called commissioner's forum, we
might want to have a discussion as to
whether or not this item would uh be
noticed as part of our agenda for the
next meeting or some future meeting. Any
further questions for Mr. Williams?
>> Well, I guess um tied into something
that you had said earlier. Um if we feel
that they're okay, it ties into all of
this. If we feel that there sometimes
I've I've come here and I've watched the
meetings, you know, many times and
sometimes it feels like a decision, you
know, there's there's you're under the
gun. you have to make a decision right
now and maybe they're they're all the
different aspects haven't really you
know been considered or you know even
like you said judges go to chambers they
get to look at everything and figure it
out so are there other grounds where
sometimes like you said a pin is put in
it so then it's addressed at the next
meeting or also I forget if it was
planning and zoning or if it was a
council meeting but if there's a
circumstance when legal counsel um
there's a situation that comes up and
then it's like, well, what do we do in
this kind of situation? What's the
ordinance? What? And if the council
says, you know what, um, I'm not sure in
this application. You know what? I think
I need to look into that. Isn't that
grounds right then to also say, you know
what, we need to put a stop to this
right now then and not make a decision
on something without really knowing the
legalities of it or how it's being
interpreted based on the ordinances and
that kind of thing.
>> Yes.
>> Okay. I I mean again um a lot of these
are are issue specific
>> but in in your example if staff or the
attorney doesn't know and that answer is
critical to making a decision one way or
the other then it's absolutely
appropriate to defer continue pause
you know get an answer and then bring it
up at a later time I mean that may
result in somebody, you know, typing
something into their computer and giving
you an answer five minutes later. Uh,
that may may require more research than
that. So, it has to go to another
hearing. Uh, but again, making a
decision without all of the
questions answered or the evidence
clarified
>> should be avoided. You want to get,
>> you know, ideally the commission wants
to make a decision one way or the other
>> based upon the evidence compared against
the criteria.
Further questions if Go ahead Patrick
can make one addition. My letter
specifically referred not to
but my experience with the environment
planning commission was a meeting
between the commission and staff the
week before
where
The the issues that were brought up were
discussed between staff and
the commission
reviewed any questions that they had
regarding the ordinance
questions.
It was just kind of a clarification
where the commission made no decisions.
It was, as I recall, was a public
meeting.
>> Mr. Chair,
» I apologize. This is treading back into
territory that hasn't been appropriately
noticed. We're outside of the public
comment period. I I hate to do this, but
I just don't think that it's appropriate
to be addressing members of the public
at this time.
So [snorts] if we decide to further
pursue this, you as a member of the
public, we'd want to hear more. Okay. So
should we thank our uh presenter, Mr.
Williams?
>> And uh
that was terrific. Thank you.
>> Okay. Uh let's continue with our agenda.
Um and next item of course is the uh
election of officers. I want to point
out that uh there may be
something that the secretary has to do
and the secretary is no longer with us.
Um so
um I was able to chair because I'm here
as chair and Mary is vice chair. But I'd
like to open up the meeting for
nominations for uh chair
and then I'll open it up for vice chair
and for secretary.
>> I'd like to nominate Jerry Stern Sturmer
for chair.
>> I would.
>> All right.
Are there been a nomination and second?
Is there um another nomination?
» If not,
we'll call for the vote.
>> Okay, let me make sure. Uh whoops. Uh
nomination was made by Commissioner
Source and seconded by Commissioner
Harrington. Correct. Okay. For the vote
for Jerry Sturmer as chair, Solom Ward,
>> I.
>> Mike Source,
>> I.
>> Edgar BS,
>> I. Jody Harrington.
>> Hi.
>> Mary Chappelle.
>> Hi.
>> And Jerry, I guess you get to vote, too.
>> Okay. [laughter]
>> So, thank you for uh your your
confidence. Uh I very much appreciate it
and will endeavor to do a good job. Uh
and um
I think that
we've heard a lot tonight about
who we serve and who we're about. and
that's the members of of this community
and that's what I always have in mind
and I hope I'll be able to continue that
working with you. Let me now open the uh
floor for nominations for vice vice
chair.
>> I would nominate Mary Chappelle.
>> Do we have a second?
>> Okay.
>> I'm sorry. Who seconded?
>> Okay.
Uh okay. Are there further nominations?
Seeing none.
>> Okay. For the vote um for Mary Chappelle
as vice chair. Salomay Ward
>> I.
>> Mike Source
>> I.
>> Edgar BS
>> I.
>> Jody Harrington
>> I.
>> Mary Chappelle.
>> Hi.
>> And Jerry [laughter] Sturmer.
>> I.
>> All right. Now we would like to nominate
uh someone for secretary.
Uh, we have a nomination for Jodie
Harington.
>> I'll second.
>> Second by Commissioner Shores. Um, do we
have any other nominations?
Seeing none.
>> Um, before I call a vote, I'll I'll let
you know in in the rules for transaction
of business, it seems to imply that the
secretary has to do the minutes. That's
incorrect. We do those. Um, but you will
sign off on plats that get approved, you
and the chair. So for the vote for Jodie
Harrington as the secretary, Salame Ward
>> I.
>> Mike Source
>> I.
>> Edgar BS
>> I.
>> Jodie Harrington.
>> Can I abain?
>> Of course.
>> Mary Chappelle
>> I.
>> And Jerry Sturmer
>> I.
Okay. Thank you for being officers.
And uh let us go to the planning and
zoning report which we have a written
version of but you may want to highlight
some things and add things if you like.
>> Thank you Mr. Chair. Yeah, I did have
something here to add which I'll pull
out so I don't forget. So for the
benefit of the new commissioners, there
are certain types of home occupations
that I'm allowed to approve. Typically,
that's something where you've got a a
person um sitting at a computer in their
home or they're painting or they're
doing something low impact and have rare
to no client visits. So, I will always
list the ones that happened in the
previous month. Sometimes we have four,
sometimes we have one. So, I'll always
list those. Um, and then I usually just
give you I noticed when I started
working here that someone was saying I
you know I got,242 phone calls and 800
people walked in. I'm like no we're not
doing that. So I try to just pick out
some of the highlights of the previous
month of things that I've worked on. Um,
one big thing that I personally do, I'm
the flood plane manager also for the
village. So drainage issues, storm water
issues are kind of my specialty. So um,
in this case I I met with Scaffa.
There's some some projects within the
village. This the Scaffa owns some land
within the village where they operate
retention ponds. And so we we
collaborate with public works mainly um
but but all of us on you know how how to
help them help us with our um our
drainage problem. We do not have storm
sewers in the village. So you'll you'll
see things like that occasionally.
There's a clean and lean property if you
weren't aware. It's 744 Old Church. I
can tell you that as of today, uh
actually maybe yesterday afternoon, I
did uh the code enforcement officer did
get um a quote that I think we're going
to go with. So, we're going to we're
going to move forward on that hopefully
very soon. Um there's a draft noise
ordinance that many of you probably
already know about. Um,
you know, I I just kind of gave you the
highlights, but the thing that I wanted
to mention and some of the current
commissioners,
um, there was there were questions about
traffic studies actually and I became
aware that NMD dot,
it's not really a traffic study per se,
it's a speeding study that they're doing
right now along Carales Road. They're
collecting data. Um they were hoping to
have a draft report by early July, but
we did not have a meeting with him, so
it hasn't been presented yet. The final
submitt should be later on this summer,
early fall. So they're looking at is
speeding a problem on Corales Road or
not? They're also, interestingly enough,
um, looking at what what they're calling
a four-way stop control analysis on
Corales Road for four intersections,
which would be Cabazone Road, Meadowark
Lane, Lantrada, and Sage Brush. So, in
theory, in the future, there could be
four four-way stops on Carales Road. So,
that's something they're looking at. Um,
and so, unless you have any questions of
me, that's that's my report for tonight.
I I have a couple questions. Okay. The
Scaffa issues, what ponds are they
concerned about? Can we get a little
more detail on those?
>> Yeah, one of the ones we talked about is
at the bottom of
I want to say Coronado Road. Um I
believe it's at the bottom of Coronado
Road. There's a big one at the at the
bottom of Po de
>> Corales.
>> And you know, their concern for the
village is we don't have storm sewers.
So, my department constantly is asking
for grading and drainage plans,
engineered grading and drainage plans.
When folks put in new infrastructure,
they have to have a pond on their
property. And initially, all is well. We
have a a grading and drainage plan. At
that point, we issue a building permit.
We ask for a certified asbuilt from
their engineer that this thing was
constructed as designed. And that's
wonderful. But what about five years
from now when the thing is silted in or
someone else buys the property and says,
"Well, why there's a hole there? I'm
going to fill that in." So, the ongoing
maintenance of the retention ponds was
something we talked about. Um, and and
there are some some grants and some
other agencies that we're going to reach
out to um for maybe educational
materials because we are kind of unique.
you know, other other communities do
have storm sewers and we don't and how
do we keep these retention ponds going
because ultimately all of that flow ends
up in the Scaffa pond or the village
owned pond which wasn't designed
>> exactly
>> for it. So it's it's it's an an ongoing
issue.
>> So the the concern are are we able to
meet the 100red-year event at this
point?
>> The short answer is yes. Um
>> maybe
>> but we have historic flows. So
>> correct. I understand historic flows.
>> There's no statutory or ordinance
requirement that anyone do anything with
historic flows and that's a problem.
>> Yeah. Now redirection of historic flows.
Um we had talked about that and having
meetings on redirection and
is that going to happen anytime soon?
All I can tell you from my standpoint is
I recently got three easements on
private properties and
the property owners are allowing us to
go in and do work and we're going to be
addressing at least in those areas all
of the flows whether it's historic or or
from road or whatever. It's almost I
mean think of the saly basin project
which was huge and there's
>> you you it's it's you almost have to
look at a given area and say what can we
do in this given area what is the
watershed for this particular pond and
then work backwards.
>> Correct. There was a couple roads in the
village that Scaffa is supposed to
review and meet with the property
owners. Is that coming up anytime soon?
I I can't speak to any of their
meetings, but I know that we did bring
up flows coming down Coronado when when
I met with them last time.
>> Right.
>> So, we're we my office is concentrating
on the folks on Coronado Road and Mariam
Acres, which also flows into it and
sending a letter to all of them and and
trying to gently coax them into looking
at their own properties and how they
might be contributing to a problem.
>> Yeah. So regrading, repaving of village
owned properties, is that something that
the village is looking at carefully so
they don't overload?
>> Oh, absolutely.
>> Absolutely.
>> Okay. I think that's part of what the
this upcoming meeting is supposed to be
about. Uh do we have any idea when
that's going to be set?
>> I can find out for you.
>> Thank you.
Father questions.
>> I had a question about what the quote
was to do the
Oh yeah.
» Well, we got a quote from a company that
will come in and remediate the property,
but we don't have a quote yet from
Sandival County Sheriff's
» to watch over. So, I don't have a full
quote yet,
>> but what is it for the
>> um it was less than $20,000, which
shocked me because I But they have, you
know, they have caveats in there. If
they get in there and they find out that
some of these materials are asbestous or
hazardous, that's that quote's going to
change.
>> Yeah.
>> One more question. Um Rachel Lane, can
you give us give us some updates on
that?
>> Oh, that uh that was one of the two
roads where I had gotten um a total of
three easements. One of them is where
Rachel connects to Via Vista. Mhm.
>> Um that property owner actually gave us
two little chunks to work on and then
the the property Rachel Lane is
essentially someone's driveway. It's a private driveway. Um and they
gave us another big chunk. So you put it
all together. It's going to be a unified
design.
>> Who owns these properties then or
>> two property owners, three easements?
They're owned by the village or owned by
the
>> the the easement will be still owned by
the property owner, but we will have
responsibility for
>> Okay. Does that violate the
anti-donation at all?
>> No.
>> Okay.
I know the area because I was on P&Z
when that subdivision was done.
>> There's quite the ao up there on the
other side.
>> Historic flows that run through there.
>> Yeah. Yeah. It's bad.
>> Okay. Now it's time for the
commissioner's forum.
>> It's also time to close the meeting at
9:00.
Um,
shall we take a pass on the forum?
>> Yes, I'm okay with that.
>> Okay. And then I will uh entertain a
motion to adjurnn.
>> I move to adjurnn.
>> Okay.
>> I'll second that. And uh we won't even
take a vote because it's I I declare it
unanimous meeting ended and uh