|
By Michael Howell
Last Wednesday, February 23, the Ravalli County Commissioners met to discuss and possibly decide on the future of “the structure, membership, function and necessity of the Planning Board.” The Planning Board is a twelve-member advisory board that works on reviewing and periodically making recommendations to change the county’s subdivision regulations as well as reviewing and making recommendations on subdivision applications themselves. The Planning Board works closely with the Planning Department staff.
Commissioner Ron Stoltz requested the meeting primarily over concerns that were raised by the failure of the planning board to hold a meeting last October as required by law. A few people in attendance also expressed concern, especially Planning Board member Jan Wisniewski, who helped call a special meeting at the end of the month to meet the requirement. That meeting was cancelled when a quorum did not appear.
Tristan Riddell, Interim Planner for the county, agreed that the Planning Board did not meet the letter of the law but called it “a Planning Department oversight.” The Planning Department handles the scheduling of the Planning Board meetings and Riddell told Stoltz that his department dropped the ball.
“By the time we caught it we proceeded to correct it but could not get a quorum,” said Riddell.
“The problem is the law was broken,” said Stoltz. “These people on the planning board are giving us advice and are supposed to be doing it in a way that's legal to us. So how can I trust what they're giving me?” He said it was basically an issue of trust.
“I think we are a nation of laws,” said Commissioner Suzy Foss. She agreed that it was an issue of trust.
Commissioner Greg Chilcott said that the letter of the law was not met, but he commended the board for its hard work.
“We are where we are,” said Chilcott. “But the law has no penalty.” He said that the commissioners should not try to sweep something like this under the rug, “but we don’t need to execute anyone either.”
Planning Board Chairman Lee Tickell defended the board. He said it was a minor infraction and that corrective action had been taken to see that it would not happen again. He said that upon investigation he discovered it was a mistake made commonly by planning boards throughout the state.
It was clarified at the meeting that the county is not required by law to have a planning board. But any consideration of actually disbanding the Planning Board did not gain much traction as the commissioners discussed a range of issues amongst themselves, including the number of board members, the make-up of the board, and the cost of having a board.
It was noted that the Planning Board is an all-volunteer board and the only expense is for mileage to attend meetings. That totals about $2,700 for the year.
Commissioner Matt Kanenwisher wondered what the value to the public was.
Riddell said the board was “definitely a value to the public at large.” He said it provided the public an essential opportunity to comment upon subdivisions under review and express their concerns.
Chilcott noted that it also provides the developer with the opportunity to hear the public’s concerns before going before the Commissioners.
“It’s the hardest working board that we’ve got,” said Chilcott. He said that as a commissioner he liked having the filter and the extra opportunity for public involvement. He said it was like having an extra set of eyes when examining things.
As far as the number of members goes, Riddell said that it was a large board but it was working well. He said a large number assured that a wide variety of views would be represented. It also made committee formation easier.
Riddell said he was uncertain about how the number was originally arrived at. He said there were 11 until recently when a seat to represent the Park Board was added. The make-up currently is one member from each school district, one from the Conservation District, one from the Park Board, and three at-large seats.
Kanenwisher questioned the logic of using the school districts for such a membership. He suggested that it made more sense to select members according to their expertise and background relating to the various issues the board addresses.
Chip Pigman, a local builder and former member of the Planning Board, spoke strongly in favor of the Planning Board and the importance of its function. He called it a valuable asset and a good process to get things that may have been missed by the Planning Department and the applicant.
Planning Board member Les Rutledge noted that the Planning Board has saved the Commissioners many hours of work on subdivision review that they would have to do if the board did not do it for them.
Foss remarked that the Commissioners are looking at all the county’s boards systematically to see if they can find ways to make them more efficient or more equitable.
The Commissioners adjourned without making any decisions.
Leave a comment on our blog Back to top
|
