Interviews to fill the Coos County planning director position vacated by Patty Evernden last year are being held tomorrow and it has been confirmed that Chris Hood of Stuntzner Engineering is one of the applicants. Evernden retired last year amidst procedural and budget conflicts created by former commissioner, Fred Messerle that included a fee reduction that forced the department to bill the general fund in excess of $20K.
Planning is often portrayed as a villain and an impediment to development, at least by some “pro-development” factions but its functions are pretty straight forward and guided by a specific set of state and local rules. From the Planning Dept website –
Coos County Planning Department supports our community by promoting orderly growth, while protecting and enhancing the environment; and, conserving and stabilizing the value of property.The Planning Department is an agency of County government that provides information and assistance to the public in understanding the land use process as administered through the Coos County Land and Development Ordinance and the Coos County Comprehensive Plan. The planning program is managed under the guidance of the Board of Commissioners with the advice of the Planning Commission.
The planning process is designed to ensure that all citizens and parties have a fair and equal opportunity to weigh in on land use matters that directly or indirectly impact all residents ranging from simple boundary line adjustments to 36″ natural gas pipelines with 300′ easements across miles of public and private land. Planning is supposed to be impartial and constrained to the scope of Oregon’s land use laws and without discretionary authority. In other words, planning may not issue a permit simply because its staff or commission believe something is a good idea.
Coos County Planning provides services for properties outside of the incorporated areas like Coos Bay and North Bend yet the Bay Area Chamber of Commerce has written to Commissioner John Sweet with a list of qualifications for a new planning director. Signed by Brooke Walton, president of the BACC, the letter demonstrates a clear bias on the part of the chamber leadership against the planning process and names as its number one qualification that a new director possess a bias toward “successful permitting”. (The World reported last October that Walton is a business partner of Commissioner Melissa Cribbins in an organic vodka distillery business).
Private sector land use planning experience in rural Oregon.
A working knowledge of Oregon’s Land Use planning system and extensive experience with county and local land use plans and ordinances as a project advocate and developer.
A collaborative personality that is focused on “successful permitting”, within the regulatory framework, rather than a personality that is focused on finding reasons why nothing can be done, or at least done in a timely fashion.
A fresh persepctive and new insight that truly wants to assist our county to develop in accordance with our laws and ordinances, and understands that this is one way to tackle our rural poverty and government funding issues.
In other words, the current chamber leadership want Chris Hood. Read the entire letter here Chamber solicitation
Four applicants, including interim director, Jill Rolfe are scheduled to be interviewed tomorrow. Let the commission know that citizens believe competence is the number one criteria and we expect a planning director who will administer the county land use ordinances impartially and without regard to ideology or political influences.
Bob Main
(541) 396-7540
John Sweet
(541) 396-7541
Melissa Cribbins
(541) 396-7539
Unfortunately the Chamber is clueless about the statewide planning goals and land use laws and how the Coastal Zone planning process is supposed to work. People who think they can speed up land use permits by fast tracking them through the land use process will just end up killing off a bunch of projects at the Land Use Board of Appeals. Former Commissioner John Griffith and others have had to learn this lesson the hard way. We can only hope that the new Commissioners realize just how critical it is that the person running the planning department know Coos County land use codes and laws and not have a bias. Jill fits that description and should seriously be considered.
This is my email to the commissioners this morning –
Dear Commissioners,
All too often regulatory agencies and planning departments are cast as villains designed to arbitrarily thwart development at the expense of jobs. None of these agencies, from FERC or the US DOE to Oregon’s Department of State Lands or the Coos County Planning Department are in the business of or setup to deny permits. Their sole purpose is to issue permits, if at all possible, to every valid applicant with appropriate conditions as set by statute and local ordinances once the public has had its right to participate. Planning, being quasi judicial must be an impartial process to protect the rights of all citizens and property owners.
The recent letter from the Bay Area Chamber of Commerce calls upon the commission to choose a planning director that is not impartial and someone who would be willing focus upon “successful permitting” possibly at the expense of due process and the rights of landowners in the unincorporated areas.
When considering the choices for a new planning director I would ask that you look for a high level of competence and prior experience on the “government” side of the counter as a prime qualification. Two of the four applicants are from out of the area and as such may be free, for the moment, from the influence of organizations like the chamber that appear to be disinterested in an evenhanded approach to local land use permits.
Thank you for your regard,
Al must be talking about the contents of the structure advisory committee “majority” report
Walton should stick with the potato vodka. Her letter ceratinly demonstrates why that organization has accomplished nothing for its 600 members. Perhaps criteria number one should be a proven track record of success in a government leadership planning organization position. Something that her preferred candidate does not appear to posess.
A “bias” towards success certainly beats a bias for failure, obstruction, complaining and criticizing – as an example.
Non Sequitur. A bias is simply a prejudice. A “successful” placing of a new sewer treatment pant next to 101 HD might be in the eye of the beholder, even if the law was followed. And if the law wasn’t followed that would certainly show a bias toward something eh?
Why bother with a new treatment plant? Dumping excess waste into the bay is a long standing tradition.