Last post, I looked at Section 1502. This post, I will look at Section 1503.
I will analyze the proposed amendments. The proposed amendment's wording will be in italics, and the original wording will be in bold italics. The differences will be underlined. The analysis will be in plain text.
Section 1503
Rules and Regulations
The Zoning Board of Appeals may adopt rules and regulations, copies of which shall be made available to the public at the Hayes Township Hall (office of the board).
I am assuming that the "Board" referenced throughout the proposed Amendment to Section 1503 is the Zoning Board of Appeals, but that should be specified and clarified throughout this section, lest it be used at a later time as a loophole because it wasn't specific enough, because this has been done by the Planning Commission already. (Doug Lonenecker's credentials as a welding engineer were accepted because a land engineer was not specified in the Zoning Ordinance regarding Site Plans and who is authorized to draw them up. Although what makes a welding engineer qualified to draw up a land Site Plan is questionable.) If the Board is the Zoning Board of Appeals, all references to it should be written out so as not to cause any confusion and for the sake of continuity throughout the document.
Copies of any newly adopted rules and regulations should also be made available on the Hayes Township website in a timely manner.
I am assuming that the "Board" referenced throughout the proposed Amendment to Section 1503 is the Zoning Board of Appeals, but that should be specified and clarified throughout this section, lest it be used at a later time as a loophole because it wasn't specific enough, because this has been done by the Planning Commission already. (Doug Lonenecker's credentials as a welding engineer were accepted because a land engineer was not specified in the Zoning Ordinance regarding Site Plans and who is authorized to draw them up. Although what makes a welding engineer qualified to draw up a land Site Plan is questionable.) If the Board is the Zoning Board of Appeals, all references to it should be written out so as not to cause any confusion and for the sake of continuity throughout the document.
Copies of any newly adopted rules and regulations should also be made available on the Hayes Township website in a timely manner.
1. Meetings of the Board shall be held within a reasonable time following the presentation of matters to the Board for its consideration and at such other times as the Board may determine. The time and place of meetings shall be specified by the Board in its rules and regulations.
"The time and place of meetings shall be specified by the Board in its rules and regulations." What exactly does that mean? The sentence makes no sense. Are there other "rules and regulations" governing this "Board" besides the Zoning Ordinance? Are there set times for the Zoning Board of Appeals to meet given in some other document? Like monthly or quarterly or as needed?
This sentence should be reworked to make more sense. "The time and place of meetings shall be specified as needed by the Zoning Board of Appeals and notice of Zoning Board of Appeals meetings and the matter(s) being appealed shall be published in the local newspapers and on the Hayes Township Website." That sentence is specific and makes more sense.
"The time and place of meetings shall be specified by the Board in its rules and regulations." What exactly does that mean? The sentence makes no sense. Are there other "rules and regulations" governing this "Board" besides the Zoning Ordinance? Are there set times for the Zoning Board of Appeals to meet given in some other document? Like monthly or quarterly or as needed?
This sentence should be reworked to make more sense. "The time and place of meetings shall be specified as needed by the Zoning Board of Appeals and notice of Zoning Board of Appeals meetings and the matter(s) being appealed shall be published in the local newspapers and on the Hayes Township Website." That sentence is specific and makes more sense.
2. The presence of four (4) (three (3)) regular members (out of five (5)) shall constitute a quorum. Once a quorum is established, (At all times), a majority vote of the regular and alternate members present (a minimum of three (3) concurring votes, the simple majority of the five (5) members), shall be sufficient (necessary) to pass any resolution including granting a variance, a special exception use request, or to reverse an administrative decision.
The word "regular" should be changed to the word "voting" members. Case in point: Lyle is a "regular" member of the Zoning Board of Appeals, but apparently lately he is not a "voting' member of the Zoning Board of Appeals because he has already voted on the Moto Mania issue as a member of the Planning Commission. Has Lyle in the past been casting votes on the Zoning Board of Appeals up until the scrutiny has come to bear on the inner workings of the Hayes Township boards? If so, Lyle has had two votes on every matter that has come before the Zoning Board of Appeals. What are the implication for decisions previously taken by the Zoning Board of Appeals?
Requiring the presence of an even number of voting members to establish a quorum sets up another potential deadlock among the members of the Zoning Board of Appeals. If there are to be 8 members of the Zoning Board of Appeals (7 plus an alternate,) then the quorum should be set at five (5) voting members. Requiring an odd number precludes potential deadlocks. Use the alternate to make the voting members an odd number. That way there will be a clear majority when a quorum is established. If 4 is a quorum, an even number, a 2-2 tie deadlocks. That does not solve anything and sets up the same kind of problem we have now.
The word sufficient replaced necessary.
The granting of a "special exception use request" is a new power granted to the Zoning Board of Appeals, and differs from the old language. What exactly is a "Special Exception Use Request"? How is it different from a "Special Use Request"? Is it a special use not listed under each of the zoning designations? Does this "Special Exemption Use" allow the Planning Commission or the Zoning Board of Appeals to make up new uses and make them allowable without changing the Zoning Ordinance whenever some new business wants to open in Hayes Township in an area not zoned for that specific use?
It is important to parse these words lest the Planning Commission and Zoning Board of Appeals use it for a loophole. Also if this new language creates a new class of "Special Use," then the glossary portion of the Zoning Ordinance should also be amended to reflect this new language and it's definition. If all that is meant by this new language is just a simple "Special Use" as it is currently defined in the Zoning Ordinance, then the word "exception" should be stricken form this paragraph. Again the language should be consistent throughout the document.
3. The Board shall keep minutes of its proceedings which shall record all of the following:
The word "regular" should be changed to the word "voting" members. Case in point: Lyle is a "regular" member of the Zoning Board of Appeals, but apparently lately he is not a "voting' member of the Zoning Board of Appeals because he has already voted on the Moto Mania issue as a member of the Planning Commission. Has Lyle in the past been casting votes on the Zoning Board of Appeals up until the scrutiny has come to bear on the inner workings of the Hayes Township boards? If so, Lyle has had two votes on every matter that has come before the Zoning Board of Appeals. What are the implication for decisions previously taken by the Zoning Board of Appeals?
Requiring the presence of an even number of voting members to establish a quorum sets up another potential deadlock among the members of the Zoning Board of Appeals. If there are to be 8 members of the Zoning Board of Appeals (7 plus an alternate,) then the quorum should be set at five (5) voting members. Requiring an odd number precludes potential deadlocks. Use the alternate to make the voting members an odd number. That way there will be a clear majority when a quorum is established. If 4 is a quorum, an even number, a 2-2 tie deadlocks. That does not solve anything and sets up the same kind of problem we have now.
The word sufficient replaced necessary.
The granting of a "special exception use request" is a new power granted to the Zoning Board of Appeals, and differs from the old language. What exactly is a "Special Exception Use Request"? How is it different from a "Special Use Request"? Is it a special use not listed under each of the zoning designations? Does this "Special Exemption Use" allow the Planning Commission or the Zoning Board of Appeals to make up new uses and make them allowable without changing the Zoning Ordinance whenever some new business wants to open in Hayes Township in an area not zoned for that specific use?
It is important to parse these words lest the Planning Commission and Zoning Board of Appeals use it for a loophole. Also if this new language creates a new class of "Special Use," then the glossary portion of the Zoning Ordinance should also be amended to reflect this new language and it's definition. If all that is meant by this new language is just a simple "Special Use" as it is currently defined in the Zoning Ordinance, then the word "exception" should be stricken form this paragraph. Again the language should be consistent throughout the document.
3. The Board shall keep minutes of its proceedings which shall record all of the following:
A. Any action or decision of the Board and the vote of each member.
B. The absence or failure of a member to vote.
C. Any other official action.
The language of part 3 has not changed.
But I would like to address the keeping of minutes. If the meeting in question is a public hearing, then the following should also be reflected in the minutes to make it a part of the public record.
A. The person who stood up to speak by name.
B. A short summary of his or her concerns regarding the action being discussed.
C. If letters are read "into the record," the name of the writer whose letter was read aloud.
D. A concise summary of the writer's concerns regarding the action being discussed.
This should apply to all minutes of every board in Hayes Township.
The approved minutes of every meeting of every Hayes Township Board should also be be published on the Hayes Township website for the general public's access. Transparency in government is a good thing.
Record keeping has been rather shoddy of late in Hayes Township. The minutes of the public hearing held by the Hayes Township Planning Commission on 12 May 2010 were a joke. The Planning Commission made a big show of introducing someone who was supposedly a court recorder to keep the minutes of the Public Hearing. She barely wrote anything down and had her head down on the table in front of her throughout most of the evening. As the evening wore on, Lyle decided that there were certain letters that were not going to be read at the hearing, thereby suppressing the writers' of those letters free speech in the matters discussed. The public was assured that those letters would be "read into the record." What record? There is no record. The minutes are sparsely written notes, taken by hand, and not formally typed up or approved as part of any public record. The legitimate concerns of all, on both sides of the issue, who took the time to write and stood up to speak were completely ignored. That is a failing on the part of the Planning Commission and of Hayes Township. The citizens of Hayes Township were lied to and free speech was suppressed. The shoddy minutes are but one illustration that the public hearing was nothing but the Planning Commission going through the motions to fulfill a perceived legal requirement because they got caught trying to sneak something through the back door.
4. All records shall be filed promptly in the office of the Township Clerk and shall be a public record.
The language of paragraph 4 has not changed.
The current Township Clerk is Kevin Breese.
Anything that is in the public record should be made available on the Hayes Township website.
The language of part 3 has not changed.
But I would like to address the keeping of minutes. If the meeting in question is a public hearing, then the following should also be reflected in the minutes to make it a part of the public record.
A. The person who stood up to speak by name.
B. A short summary of his or her concerns regarding the action being discussed.
C. If letters are read "into the record," the name of the writer whose letter was read aloud.
D. A concise summary of the writer's concerns regarding the action being discussed.
This should apply to all minutes of every board in Hayes Township.
The approved minutes of every meeting of every Hayes Township Board should also be be published on the Hayes Township website for the general public's access. Transparency in government is a good thing.
Record keeping has been rather shoddy of late in Hayes Township. The minutes of the public hearing held by the Hayes Township Planning Commission on 12 May 2010 were a joke. The Planning Commission made a big show of introducing someone who was supposedly a court recorder to keep the minutes of the Public Hearing. She barely wrote anything down and had her head down on the table in front of her throughout most of the evening. As the evening wore on, Lyle decided that there were certain letters that were not going to be read at the hearing, thereby suppressing the writers' of those letters free speech in the matters discussed. The public was assured that those letters would be "read into the record." What record? There is no record. The minutes are sparsely written notes, taken by hand, and not formally typed up or approved as part of any public record. The legitimate concerns of all, on both sides of the issue, who took the time to write and stood up to speak were completely ignored. That is a failing on the part of the Planning Commission and of Hayes Township. The citizens of Hayes Township were lied to and free speech was suppressed. The shoddy minutes are but one illustration that the public hearing was nothing but the Planning Commission going through the motions to fulfill a perceived legal requirement because they got caught trying to sneak something through the back door.
4. All records shall be filed promptly in the office of the Township Clerk and shall be a public record.
The language of paragraph 4 has not changed.
The current Township Clerk is Kevin Breese.
Anything that is in the public record should be made available on the Hayes Township website.
5. The Board may call on any other officers or Boards of the Township for assistance in the performance of its duties.
The language of paragraph 5 has not changed.
Inasmuch as paragraph 5 is the same, then this option is currently available to the Zoning Board of Appeals. Since the Zoning Board of Appeals already has the latitude to call upon any other officers or Boards of the Township for assistance in the performance of its duties, then the Zoning Board of Appeals can call upon the Hayes Township Board of Trustees to help them deal with their impasse and decide the matter. The Zoning Board of Appeals' current duty is to take a decision about the Special Use granted to the Gamble-Longenecker property on Mostetler Road. Since they are deadlocked, the Zoning Board of Appeals may, according to paragraph #5, call upon the Hayes Township Board of Trustees to vote to break the tie. That would assist the Zoning Board of Appeals in the performance of their duties. Why don't they do it? Lee Dancer should not vote because he has already voted as a member of the Planning Commission. Bob "Joe" Hale should not vote because he has already voted as a member of the Zoning Board of Appeals. But there is absolutely no reason why Chairman John Scherrer, Treasurer Elizabeth Wilson and Clerk Kevin Breese cannot vote and decide this issue for the Township and conclude this process. Let the chips fall where they may.
Has this solution not occurred to anyone on any of the elected or appointed Boards? Has it not occurred to Mr. Dreyer who authored this document? Changing the Zoning Ordinance seems to be the best solution Attorney Dreyer can come up with. This alternative is a simple solution and leaves the Township less open to litigation than changing the rules in the middle of this contentious issue before it is decided at the Township level.
I suspect that if anyone has thought of it, they'd rather not do it because the members of the Board of Trustees do not want to be responsible for the final decision in this debacle. No one on any Hayes Township board wants the responsibility because no matter how the Township government decides it, they will be unpopular with one side for doing the right and lawful thing, and unpopular with the other side for doing the popular, unlawful thing. Either way, they are going to make about half the citizens and taxpayers of Hayes Township angry. It was a slick trick trying to pass it to the judge to decide for them. He passed it back to them. They have made their bed. They must now lie in it.
The language of paragraph 5 has not changed.
Inasmuch as paragraph 5 is the same, then this option is currently available to the Zoning Board of Appeals. Since the Zoning Board of Appeals already has the latitude to call upon any other officers or Boards of the Township for assistance in the performance of its duties, then the Zoning Board of Appeals can call upon the Hayes Township Board of Trustees to help them deal with their impasse and decide the matter. The Zoning Board of Appeals' current duty is to take a decision about the Special Use granted to the Gamble-Longenecker property on Mostetler Road. Since they are deadlocked, the Zoning Board of Appeals may, according to paragraph #5, call upon the Hayes Township Board of Trustees to vote to break the tie. That would assist the Zoning Board of Appeals in the performance of their duties. Why don't they do it? Lee Dancer should not vote because he has already voted as a member of the Planning Commission. Bob "Joe" Hale should not vote because he has already voted as a member of the Zoning Board of Appeals. But there is absolutely no reason why Chairman John Scherrer, Treasurer Elizabeth Wilson and Clerk Kevin Breese cannot vote and decide this issue for the Township and conclude this process. Let the chips fall where they may.
Has this solution not occurred to anyone on any of the elected or appointed Boards? Has it not occurred to Mr. Dreyer who authored this document? Changing the Zoning Ordinance seems to be the best solution Attorney Dreyer can come up with. This alternative is a simple solution and leaves the Township less open to litigation than changing the rules in the middle of this contentious issue before it is decided at the Township level.
I suspect that if anyone has thought of it, they'd rather not do it because the members of the Board of Trustees do not want to be responsible for the final decision in this debacle. No one on any Hayes Township board wants the responsibility because no matter how the Township government decides it, they will be unpopular with one side for doing the right and lawful thing, and unpopular with the other side for doing the popular, unlawful thing. Either way, they are going to make about half the citizens and taxpayers of Hayes Township angry. It was a slick trick trying to pass it to the judge to decide for them. He passed it back to them. They have made their bed. They must now lie in it.
For a period of ninety (90) days following a decision by the Board, no reconsideration of that decision shall be given unless the Board, in its sole discretion, determines that there has been a material change in applicable facts and circumstances.
This language has not changed.
In summary, the Hayes Township Zoning Ordinance needs to be updated and revised. The entire document, and not just one section at a time, piecemeal. But not by these people who are currently embroiled in controversy. There should be a fresh committee appointed for this purpose, and not just a single, unelected lawyer who represents no one but the interests of his client. All members of the committee should come at this objectively at a time when there are no outstanding controversial zoning issues to be decided. The language should be consistent throughout the document. Perhaps the final document should wait until an updated version of the Clare County and Hayes Township Master Plans are revised based on the latest census, if there are updates to those documents in the works. The Master Plans are, after all, the foundation and guidance upon which the Zoning Ordinance is to be laid, if it is done properly.
Bottom Line: Now is not the time to change the Zoning Ordinance. This amendment as it is currently written can wait.
This language has not changed.
In summary, the Hayes Township Zoning Ordinance needs to be updated and revised. The entire document, and not just one section at a time, piecemeal. But not by these people who are currently embroiled in controversy. There should be a fresh committee appointed for this purpose, and not just a single, unelected lawyer who represents no one but the interests of his client. All members of the committee should come at this objectively at a time when there are no outstanding controversial zoning issues to be decided. The language should be consistent throughout the document. Perhaps the final document should wait until an updated version of the Clare County and Hayes Township Master Plans are revised based on the latest census, if there are updates to those documents in the works. The Master Plans are, after all, the foundation and guidance upon which the Zoning Ordinance is to be laid, if it is done properly.
Bottom Line: Now is not the time to change the Zoning Ordinance. This amendment as it is currently written can wait.
No comments:
Post a Comment