Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutConduct of Public Hearings and Meetings 2005 WESTERN PLANNER/UTAH APA CONFERENCE August 4, 2005, 8.30 am— 10:40 am PUBLIC MEETINGS —ASSURING DUE PROCESS Panelists —Gene Moser, Gene Carr, Pat Comarell, Ted Gage, special guest Brief intro - Carr I. What are Public Meetings and Public Hearings? Gene Moser Background information Regular scheduled public meetings—advisory,review and approve Public hearings Preparation,posting and publication of Agendas Notice,quorum,wind-up (introduce Ted Gage) Training Meetings—Ted Gage Training public officials;selection of subject;preparation of training materials; determining dates &venues; advertising;participants;training instructors;meeting room preparation;follow-up;costs. II. The Meeting Environment— Will it Work? Gene Carr Do the physical facilities anticipate and accommodate the purpose of the meeting? Audio/visual presentations—assure comprehension and effective placement. Room arrangements to achieve maximum visibility,participation,comfort. Break i o minutes III. Conduct of the Meeting— Can we Bring People Together? Pat Comarell Set meeting times—start,finish. What are the expectations of those participating in the meeting? Dealing with controversial meetings. What are the key techniques to move the meeting and motions along? Findings of fact and good records. IV. Questions for the Panel and Wrap-up—20 minutes THE CONDUCT OF PUBLIC MEETINGS AND HEARINGS 2005 WESTERN PLANNERS/UTAH APA CONFERENCE What are Public Meetings and Hearings? presented by GENE MOSER PART ONE Background The concept of doing Business in Public and the Importance of meetings Political, Ethical and Legal Considerations Legislative, Administrative, Quasi-judicial Actions The accumulation of all powers legislative, executive, and judiciary in the same hands, whether of one, a few or many, and whether hereditary, self appointed, or elective, may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny James Madison Roles and Responsibilities Legislative Body Planning Commissions Board of Adjustment Staff The public and citizen activists Media The Law — U.S. Constitution, State Law, Case Law If a policeman must know the Constitution, then why not a planner ? Supreme Court Justice William J. Brennan Jr., San Diego Gas &Electric v. City of San Diego People whose rights are potentially affected by your decisions have a right to access the same information that the council or commission will depend on as a basis for decision. Due Process - procedural and substantive Effective notice A fair hearing before an impartial tribunal Decisions based on evidence Types of meetings Public Meetings Conducting business Informative - share information / education Public hearings Listen, get information both in written and spoken testimony Open meetings Executive sessions Minutes and Findings "If it's not written down, it didn't happen." Reviewing courts have established prerequisites for adequate judicial review: A well-defined record, identifying the nature of the decision and its basis. Findings that identify the standards considered and the factual basis for action. A clear expression of action taken by the decision- making body, the persons or entities affected by the action, and the extent of such effects. Approval of minutes Bylaws Ethics, ex parte contacts, conflicts of interest PART TWO Political and legal mistakes made in public meetings and hearing Inadequate notice and agenda Meetings arranged for convenience of staff and not the public Executive sessions Treating people differently Taking a tally Incomplete Minutes and Findings of Fact Use of acronyms and jargon in printed materials and discussions Laws are made for men of common understanding and should therefore be construed by ordinary rules of common sense. Thomas Jefferson PART THREE A suggestion for more effective meetings Be Prepared - Detail, detail, detail Some common sense questions you can ask yourself to test the correctness of your procedures: *Is an accurate agenda published well in advance of your meetings? Does everyone who is likely to be affected by your decisions have a reasonable chance of knowing about your hearings? *Do all sides have an opportunity to present all their views? *Are you following clear rules for your proceedings? Do you use bylaws and rules for your proceedings? *Are your actions or recommendations consistent with adopted plans? Have you checked? *Are your decisions made based on the evidence and facts presented — clear of bias or prejudice? Are any conflicts of interest (personal, financial, professional) identified? •Do your regulations advance a legitimate public interest? *Are your regulations a reasonable way to accomplish that public interest? Is there a logical and reasonable connection (nexus) between the actions taken and the problem? *Are regulations fairly applied? Are similarly situated properties treated equally? •Are your decisions made within a reasonable period of time? *Can you explain your actions to the applicant or the neighbors about what you have done by pointing to specific policies or regulations that helped you reach your decision? elf someone reads your minutes a year later, will they understand from that information alone why you did what you did? Do your records include written information provided by witnesses, staff reports and recommendations, and all other information received? The Role of Education in Public Hearings and Meetings Some interesting websites with information on public hearings and meetings: Park City Municipal Corp, City Attorney's Office & Citizens Allied for Responsible Growth - Citizens Public Hearing Handbook http://www:parkcity.org then go to City Departments, then click on City Attorney, then on the bottom of that page, you'll see Public Hearing Workshop document. Seldovia, Alaska (284 city residents, 100 out of town residents and 50 resident eagles) www.seldovia.com/sub—Cityruieswofprocedure.htm New York—Conducting Meetings and Hearings hftp://www.co.suffolk.ny.us/planning/scpLrm_2002—secO6.pdf Ohio State University Ohioline.osu.edu/cd-fact/l 555.html Municipal Research & Services Center of Washington http://www.mrsc.org/subjects/governance/participation/effective.aspx Preparing written finding of facts www:nrpcvt.com/documents/findingsfact.pdf A news writer's point of view University of Missouri http://foi.missouri.edu/informal.html r CITIZEN' S PUBLIC HEARING HANDBOOK *� Prepared by rw �. ' ' Corporation, City Attorne 's Office '- Park City Municipal Cop ty Y & Citizens Allied for Responsible Growth ' January,2003 June, 2005 Update �� : • Park City Municipal Corporation Citizens Allied for City Attorney's Office Responsible Growth '' P. O. Box 681764 •; ,,� �,=.� �` P.O. Box 1480 Park City,UT 84060 Park City,UT 84068 (435) 615-5025 mail@carg.org '� '' i www.parkcity.org www.carg.org TABLE OF CONTENTS I. The Public Hearing A. What exactly is a Public Hearing and why is a Hearing part of the process? . . . . . . . . . . 5 B. Notice—Legal Notice: Published and Posted; Courtesy/Mailed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 C. Who attends and why . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 D. Public Hearing Process—Order of Business. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 E. Types - Legislative v. Administrative/Quasi-judicial. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 F. Demystification and Deconstruction: The Utah Public Clamor Doctrine . . . . . . . . . . . . . .8 II. Procedural Due Process A. What is Procedural Due Process? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 B. Vesting and the Multiple Approval Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 III. Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Conditions of Approval A. Findings of Fact . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .12 B. Conclusions of Law . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .12 C. Conditions of Approval . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .12 IV. Standards of Approval A. CUP (Conditional Use Permit) Review Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .14 B. MPD (Master Plan Development) Review Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 • Public Pre-Application Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .15 ■ Findings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 C. Subdivisions Review Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ■ Preliminary Plat Pre-Application Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .17 • Review of Preliminary Plat . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .17 • Planning Commission Review of Preliminary Plat . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 • Preliminary Approval . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 • Zoning Regulations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .18 • Final Subdivision Plat: Planning Commission and City Council Review . . .18 D. Plat Amendments Review Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 E. Variances Review Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 F. Code and Zoning Amendments Process. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 • Amendments to the Land Management Code and Zoning Map . . . . . . . . . . . 19 • Hearings Before Planning Commission. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .20 • Action By Planning Commission . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 • Hearings Before City Council . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .20 • Joint Hearings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 2 t2EEC (�C,F S v ► . S\)cc95s ccr�fl•r�� a� A �ub1�c �1Eu�.ranc� cwA _G k�\(--o� v c�4i-�Un l X Gcnow _W PlPA� Presented by Pat Comerall Why Does Conflict Happen?* Conflict is never about things, it is about fear and respect Why Fear? The need for respect -- Controversies are inevitable in planning . Respect for them -- Citizens need to (1)because planning and zoning are know the government officials are such powerful tools shaping a listening, caring, interested in what community, and (2)they arise from they have to say, and what their values clashing and the fear of what concerns are. Individuals must feel: might result. o fairly treated o their input is valuable in making • By their very nature, controversies decisions generate fear--of what will change, o they have some power to of the unknown outcome, of a bad influence government experience repeating itself, and from the stereotypes of government; • Respect for you -- Citizens want developers, and bureaucrats which elected and appointed city officials one may have. that they can respect, identify with, learn from • In addition, disagreements often happen because each participant in o They expect you to make good the process approaches the issue decisions which solve problems. playing different roles, and each role necessitates a different "view of o They will expect you to act land." (See below) reasonably and responsibly. • Lastly, the decisionmakers must o But, if they feel that a major make value judgments based on decision was made in a manner assumptions and information that is which is not appropriate or provided. Sometimes,these legitimate,they will not accept assumptions and information may the decision (irrespective of seem inadequate to base decisions whether the vote on the issue on. went for or against what they wanted to happen). *Prepared by Pat Comarell for Utah Risk Management Mutual Association 1 The need to know what to person has depends on the role expect they are asked to play at the time, e.g.,the Planning Commission When citizens (staff, applicants) come to concern with health, safety and public meetings,they need to know what welfare, the neighbors wanting to the rules are.People need structure, a conserve land for open space, framework,where everything else fits. etc. Not having rules stated upfront or not knowing what to expect makes people • Fears,myths and rumors nervous and contributes to the negative image of"politics." • Stereotypes To address this need, reviewing the • History of relationships,e.g., procedures to be followed during the the neighbor who went to school meeting will let citizens know how the with one of the councilmembers, meeting will be conducted and when the developer who was once they will have the opportunity to married to a commissioner's comment. sister,etc. And, of course, each individual expects • Assigning motives, e.g., the rules will apply equally and fairly to expressing what you think the everyone. others taking part in the meeting want,think, or feel without _ asking them Dealing with the Intangibles • Credibility of the city/staff As mentioned earlier,planning by its • Communication and use of very nature is controversial because it words involves the values of a community. To make effective decisions, it is What is not so obvious is the important for you to distinguish these "intangibles"present during the and base your decisions on: discussion, i.e.,the many ideas, concepts, and thoughts which go through • The information presented into an individual's mind while listening the public record during the meeting and which go beyond the details of the proposal being • Procedural and substantive due presented. These might include: process • How one views land: need to • The objective of the maintaining conserve land, land as a the health, safety and welfare of commodity;the right to do what your community you want with your property; health, safety and welfare; • Your own experience aesthetics, etc. Which view a *Prepared by Pat Comarell for Utah Risk Management Mutual Association 2 Tools to Deal with Controversy Preparing for the meeting o Handouts needed. If maps, To deal with controversy, the Planning graphics, and general data are to be Commission and Council can use presented, it often helps the public to techniques to structure a meeting so they have a handout of these so they can are effective in getting everyone's ideas more easily see the information and and concerns out, and still avoid the can share it with their friends and meeting turning into chaos. Such associates after they leave the techniques include: meeting. It also allows them to overcome the stereotype of • Information. The Council,Planning government trying to "hide" things. Commission, and their staffs should anticipate the questions which will come up at the meeting and determine if the information in the Conduct of the Meeting presentations and any handouts are sufficient to address those questions. . At the meeting,the Chair sets the Typical questions might be: tone and the rules. o The Chair lets everyone know o Are all the key stakeholders what to expect. The rules should affected by this proposal in the be given upfront before the room? proposal is presented. o What were the key points made in the Staff reports? o The Chair structures the meeting o What were the recommendations so all can express their ideas and of the Commission or advisory concerns, and yet, keeps it from committee? Why did they getting out of hand. For example: recommend what they did? o What options does the Council or ■ The Chair gives an Commission have in making a introduction of the proposal decision? ■ The Staff gives an overview o How are they limited? of the issues and ordinances requirements • Graphics needed. The Staff should • The developer makes his/her prepare information which includes: presentation o an overview of the proposal, ■ The public is asked to data, and recommendations being comment made, and ■ Discussion amongst the o graphics which illustrate those Council or Commission points (people respond better to a ■ A motion is made to approve, visual display of the important not approve, approve with points than having a lot of words changes, or table. on the screen). *Prepared by Pat Comarell for Utah Risk Management Mutual Association 3 • The way a Planning Commissioner • At the end of the hearings, or Councilmember expresses summarize the basic concerns so the themselves will affect the tone of the public knows you have heard them. meeting • Keep track of what the real question • The Commission or Council must is. Sometimes in the midst of battle, frame the meeting -but not be it is hard to remember what the basic controlling. questions are that the planning commission or council is asked to • The Commission must seek to decide. This is especially true if understand what the concerns are those giving input to the Council or before answering those concerns. Commission ask questions which takes the discussion off the topic at • Explaining why the Commission has hand (which often happens when taken the action you have will help people are upset.) the public understand the action and determine whether they think it is • Take a break. If the meeting gets legitimate and reasonable. too intense or personal, call a fifteen _ minute break for everyone to take a moment to relax and get their Techniques to keep meeting thoughts together. It will have a from moving into chaos calming effect on the meeting. It is important, however,to state how • Place the rules on the back of the long the break will be and to agenda. By putting the steps of how reconvene at that time. and when the public can have input on the back of the agenda, it allows • Specify a time for comments. Some the Chair to walk the public and cities announce and enforce strict d beginning and ending times for all developers through the procedures for the meeting. This keeps discussions. individuals from interrupting because they will know when they • Cut the elephant into parts. will be called on to comment. Sometimes proposals or issues are so complex,people get confused or • Let everyone talk, but keep the overwhelmed by the discussion. To procedures tight. The procedures make this more manageable,try are meant to set the rules of etiquette breaking the proposal into parts, for the meeting. This also keeps the making decisions on the easy ones meetings from getting out of order. first,then having more discussion on the one or two more difficult issues At the point people start repeating after that. comments/thoughts made before, request those coming next to limit • If you have to postpone an issue, give a specific their comments to new ideas and fic reason(s) why and a specific date when this item will be concerns. placed on a future agenda. *Prepared by Pat Comarell for Utah Risk Management Mutual Association 4 SALT WE CITY GouNQI Date Pusuc MaTum REmigMT10m Fow+ Agenda Item a�a k Name Phone (lip ldM arty) Address E-Mail Address Subject 0 I wish to speak (O in support of) -or- (13 in opposition to) the subject noted above. O I do not wish to speak, however, I would like to Submit remarks(please use back of card). How did you learn about this meeting? I would Pike to receive information about: O my community council D serving on a city board. To learn more about Salt Lake City government, view cable Wevision channel 71 or visit our web site at http://www.sic.ut.us. The Council Office phone number is 535-7600. To submit comments to the Salt Lake City Council, call the 24-hour comment line at 535-7654; send a fax to 535-7651; e-mail individual Council Members from the web site or e-mail all Council Members at council.comments@ci.sic.ut.us