Washington County Planning & Zoning

Regular P & Z Commission Meeting February 18, 2025

COMMISSION MEMBERS:

Eric Johnson Jeri Soulier Ron Jaeger Katie Rollins Debbie Warren Donovan Galligar John Hoff Karen Powers John Jensen

ADMINISTRATION: Bonnie Brent-Dowell, Planning & Zoning Administrator

SECRETARY: Cindy Womack-Steele, Planning & Zoning Administrative Assistant

COUNTY ATTORNEY : True Pearce

VISITORS: Seth Matthews

MEETING CALLED TO ORDER:

The March regular meeting of the Washington County Planning & Zoning Commission, held at the Washington County Courthouse, Board of County Commissioner’s meeting room in Weiser, Idaho was called to order at 7:02p.m.by Chairman Ron Jaeger. The following proceedings took place:

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE;

Led by Chairman Ron Jaeger

ROLL CAI L
Eric Johnson	X	Jeri Soulier	X	John Jensen x	Debbie Warren x
Katie Rollins	X	Ron Jaeger	X	Donovan Galligar x	John Hoff absent
Karen Powers	X

APPROAL OF PREVIOUS MEETING MINUTES;

January 21, 2025 minutes were approved as submitted by unanimous vote.

HEARINGS & DISCUSSIONS:

Prosecuting Attorney True Pearce addressed the P & Z Commission members on what his role will be. He will be available during P & Z meetings to give legal counsel regarding the law. True explained I am not here to influence your decisions. I want to help you make sure your findings are applicable to the

facts and take them and apply them to the code. The public does not appreciate what you must do. It is really an important job and I want to help take some of the pressure off you. You must make sure when you speak you want it to make sense on an audio and make sure you are clear and the person listening to audio will know who is speaking. If there was a lawsuit it would make it hard for a judge to listen to the audio and know who is speaking.

We do not want to be doing governing in secret. The public has a right to know how and why we make decisions.

We need to do open meeting training and have that put on an agenda where we don’t have a lot going on. When we go to executive session, the recording will be stopped and the public will leave the room. Do not make any kind of personal statement regarding the hearing or your feelings about the hearing. Before you go to your discussion a commission member will make a motion to move to executive session. By law you have to say, “pursuant to Idaho State Statute 74-206(l)(f): To communicate with legal counsel for the public agency to discuss the legal ramifications of and legal options for pending litigation, or controversies not yet being litigated but imminently likely to be litigated.” Then somebody would second the motion. After the second on the motion, there must be a roll call vote.

Tme will not be giving any legal advice during the public hearing unless it is a simple answer, he will determine what is appropriate and what is not.

When we go out of executive session we will start recording again and bring the public back in for the commission discussion and to make the determination of a recommendation for approval or denial.

Executive session just gives the opportunity to have legal advise, on the appropriate code, to avoid any litigation.

Karen P. asked, “ so you will be taking part in every meeting and be available for legal advise, because before our attorney would just give us advise via zoom during the discussion process while the public was still in the room?” True responded that the attorney at the time should not have been giving legal advice to the commission during an open hearing with the public in the room. If you just ask me randomly during the hearing for legal advice I am not going to be able to give that to you, it must go in to Executive Session for him to answer any legal questions. Ele may answer a simple question, but he will determine if it is appropriate during the hearing with the public in the room.

Katie stated that she feels like once we go into executive session then we aren’t going to be able to make a recommendation that day because we weren’t able to complete the hearing. True clarified that when the commission goes into executive session, he will give the legal advise concerning code and the direction the commission is thinking about going and then executive session will be adjourned and we will return to the hearing with bringing the public back in to the room and doing the commission discussion and making the recommendation for the Board of County Commissioners.

Jeri stated that she has seen on many occasions from her time on the commission that someone will state, “you can’t do that, it is against their private property rights, or you can’t do that it is a taking”. Is there something coming up that you have heard about that we possibly have pending litigation? True responded that he does not have anything pending and is not picking on the commission. Ele is simply educating the commission and letting them know they can go into executive session during a hearing and have legal counsel address any questions to avoid litigation.

Eric J. asked, “ if this goes to the county commissioners why would they sue the P & Z Commission when the Board of County Commissioners makes the final decision?” They could sue the Board of County Commissioners because they have the exact same thing. They also need to go in to executive session before making a determination on what they want to approve or deny.

Chairman Ron J. asked, “what about when we are writing code, do we need to do that in executive session or can you just advise us as we are doing it.” True replied that if it is something that I can make a comment on. If it is regular discussion of an item that you are maybe going to make a final decision on then I might suggest that the meeting go in to executive session.

Karen P. stated that her thinking is that True was at the meeting tonight to help put us on the path the commission should be on. True interjected that he doesn’t know what path the commission is on and he is not criticizing any work the commission has done. He just wants the commission to know he will be at the meetings and he is there to answer legal questions and help guide the commission by code to make the appropriate decision for the applicant. Karen stated , “I appreciate this a lot. You are just doing your due diligence that this is your job and you will be available to us.” True replied, “that is correct.”

True went on to say, ICRMP covers the county for insurance, but the decisions made by P & Z are not covered. You can be responsible personally for any litigation against previous decisions or proceedings in an open meeting.

It is important to make sure that code is referenced when the decisions are made.

The motions are usually the record of the findings of fact and what code is referenced. I am impressed with you guys and the work you do.

We need the open meeting manual for the commission and to have training.

Chairman Ron J. added that at some P & Z hearings he has voted on the recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners and then sometimes he doesn’t vote. Also, what the commission has done in the past, is after a hearing and decision everyone writes out their reasons for decisions and then sends it to P & Z Administrator Bonnie. True responded, “we do need to make findings and I believe Bonnie is the one that types those up and then you would need to vote at the next meeting to accept those Findings of Fact.”

Jeri added that they have been writing them up and then submit them to Bonnie. True responded, that sounds like a lot of work. Let me think about this to make some suggestions for you. I do need you to make the Findings of Fact but, you are going to be making them on the record here in the hearing. You will make a motion with the reason of decisions in the motion. Each one of you do not need to be writing a Findings of Fact. All of those written Findings of Fact should be kept as part of the record and that may create legal issues if you don’t have the same reasons for the decision made.

True will check to see the process for the commission voting on the Findings of Facts and if that is going to happen at the next month’s meeting which will hold up the decision for the applicant.

Jeri mentioned that we have had meetings at large venues that have been rough with people interjecting, yelling out and causing havoc. True stated it is okay to have obnoxious people removed and it is not a violation of the open meeting law. It is part of the Chair’s wheelhouse to control the meeting and not allow the public to speak out over who is supposed to be speaking to the commission.

The public should not be allowed to speak after their initial testimony. Allowing the applicant time for rebuttal is up to the Chair, it is not required.

Discussion on lighting ordinance:

Discussion that included the small changes the Board of County Commissioners wanted and it was decided to have a public hearing on this to get input.

Jeri S. made the motion to have a public hearing on this before any decisions are made. Eric seconded the motion

Motion passed unanimously.

Adjournment

Jeri made the motion to adjourn.

Eric seconded.

Motion passed unanimously. Adjourned 9:00 p.m.

Minutes submitted by Cinthia Womack-Steele