Oak Harbor officials received some undeserved criticism at a Planning Commission meeting last week as citizens complained of plans to put more land use decisions in the hands of the hearing examiner.
The hearing examiner in this case is land use attorney Michael Bobbink, who has done a very good job in that role for Island County for a number of years. Oak Harbor hired him in 2004 when it adopted the hearing examiner model.
When people are dissatisfied with a land use decision, they can appeal to the hearing examiner. He takes public testimony, hears from both sides of the dispute, and rules based on the law. It’s a much clearer process than taking disputes to a large body like the Planning Commission which consists of appointed citizens with better things to do than become acutely informed on the minutiae of land-use law.
The city now wants to expand the authority of the hearing examiner to a wider range of land-use applications, such as preliminary plats, planned resident developments and planned industrial parks. These are complex matters, better left to an expert like a hearing examiner.
The public retains its right to testify on issues of interest, and hearing examiner decisions can be appealed. The city gets an official record of the proceedings overseen by a legal expert which is defensible in court should a disgruntled applicant sue. The hearing examiner makes recommendations to the elected members of the City Council. They have the final say.
The appointed body is not left out of the process, its role simply becomes one of oversight and planning for the future. The Planning Commission still helps decide on urban growth boundaries and areas of specific zoning for single family, multi-family, and business uses. Once the City Council approves, these recommendations become law for the hearing examiner to enforce. The amount of behind-the-scenes politicking over individual projects should be significantly reduced with Planning Commission members excluded from the enforcement end of the process.
Involvement by the hearing examiner would make land use decisions more open, more accessible to the public and more professional. It’s a good idea, but whether its time has come will ultimately be decided by the City Council.
