Making Local Government a Participatory Sport Public Hearings Making Local Government a Participatory Sport

Conflict of Interest Prohibitions Idaho Code §67-6506 Participation forbidden if economic conflict of interest. Disclosure of conflicts is mandated. Participation means serving as a decision maker or taking part in deliberations. Board members can speak as citizens as long as they do not participate in decision. Knowing violation is misdemeanor crime

Types of Public Hearings Legislative hearings Adopting or amending plan and land use ordinances Open-ended for comments Quasi-judicial hearings Deal with specific sites Due process is required Notice and opportunity to be heard

Introduction of Hearing Process Introduce the participants Explain the nature of the issue Describe what will be persuasive Outline steps that have gone before Completed application Notice Information from other agencies

Legislative Hearings Subject (ordinance draft) must be rough- prepared at time notice is published Record should be built from date of publication Comments can be received anytime – even after public hearing Open format for hearing – no particular order “Closing” hearing doesn’t affect rights

Quasi-judicial Hearings Land use (and licensing) – primary topics Due process is imperative Comments should come during hearing – no ex parte contact Create a record Explain effective participation methods Describe roles of participants

Steps in Order Applicant presentation Staff presentation Written correspondence (limited) Testimony by supporters Comments by neutrals

Present and Rebut Opponents speak

Rebuttal by Applicant Address only points raised by objectors. No new evidence should be submitted. If new evidence is presented, hearing should be reopened for limited response to rebut the new evidence. All comment should be directed through the chairperson.

Decision essentials Decisions must be based on express standards and objective criteria in comprehensive plan and ordinances. Decision must be in writing accompanied by a written statement that explains criteria and standards, facts relied upon and rationale. Legislature directs courts to be practical in their review of decisions emphasizing fundamental fairness and remedying only actual harms, not the mere possibility of harm.

Area of City Impact (ACI) Mandatory procedure (shall adopt) - §67-6526 Map identifying area (both city and county ordinance) Separate ordinance applying plans and ordinances for ACI (both city and county) Implementation requires total of four separate ordinances

Authorized Options Application of city plan and ordinances Application of county plan and ordinances Application of mutually agreed upon plan and ordinances Apply Blaha – Cities have no authority outside corporate limits Only second and third options remain – third option must be implemented by county

Failure to Agree Either City or County “may demand compliance” by written notice – start in 30 days. Begins “committee of nine” process 3 county commissioners 3 elected city officials appointed by mayor/confirmed by council Together – choose 3 more

Committee of Nine (Dispute “Resolution”) Develop recommendation in 180 days Refer to respective governing boards Governing boards have 60 days to act If either fails to implement – other can seek declaratory judgment identifying area and establishing requirements Factors: (1) trade area; (2) geographic factors and (3) reasonable expectation of annexation

ACI Details Overlapping ACI – agree to adjustments or election ACI remains until renegotiated – if cannot agree, resort to judicial review Renegotiation starts within thirty (30) days of request by either party – then follow original negotiation procedures P-Z must review before process moves forward – negotiation or renegotiation

Further Details Review status every ten years Growth not precluded in areas outside ACI Representation from ACI on city P-Z required if city regulations apply in ACI – question if possible in light of Blaha decision Allows expansion of P-Z to accommodate

Further thoughts for consideration Real agreements have far greater potential to last than “mandated agreements” Issues of all kinds don’t care about legal boundaries – consider broad issues Budgetary effects of trying to deliver urban services in unincorporated areas can be very burdensome Commissioners are elected by all electors in a county, not just those in unincorporated areas