COM 1051.021 1996-1998 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Nonetheless, the council seems reluctant to seize the opportunity to address the subject and provide needed certainty in those instances where a developer needs the council's zoning approval. AaenQdCouncil Differences In those instances where a landowner requires council approval (rezoning, General Plan amendment, under 15 acres boundary amendment, etc.), an important separation of powers issue is present. For example, in this instance, the proposed ordinance conditions E and U simply adopt the agency version of the IRMP (as it may be amended and enforced by the "affected [executive] agencies." As the public record indicates, the action of these "agencies" will probably go down the same path as the LUC proceeding quasi-judicial proceedings, with mandatory fact-finding and lengthy judicial review. In essence, the agency will be directing the effort to address the subject, nDt the council, even though the council has greater freedom to address the subject and, particularly, even though the council's decision is not subject to the same level of judicial scrutiny as an agency would be under current law. For example, the current LUC and SMA proceedings are highlighted by the absence of clear agency decision criteria which effectuate the broader statutory and constitutional provisions and the danger which ad hoc decision making brings to the process. 1 At the council level, a zoning ordinance can actually be the driving force on the subject of cultural resources, z but the current bill i In Aluli v. Lewin (1992) the Supreme Court warned agencies that the public would hold all of government in contempt if agencies ignored the demands of the quasi-judicial process and used ad hoc standards without predictable certainty. z The requisite SMA permit must implement and be consistent with the General Plan and zoning ordinances, all of which are the product of the council's legislative powers. 4