A proposed RV park in Ridge Manor has been vigorously opposed by residents of a golf community. The plan for intended rezoning would change the area from single family homes and recreation to park model trailer homes and RVs. In March, the BOCC initially approved the request with a vote of 3-2. Due to public concerns that they were not properly noticed and additional information that was learned after the 3/8/16 hearing, the BOCC seemed to change their collective minds and voted 5-0 to have a re-hearing on 5/10/16.
The attorney for Just So You Know, Bruce Snow, asked the Board to consider their original decision as the correct choice. Snow stated an application was made by Just So You Know, was noticed appropriately and heard in early March. Because of the vote to approve, the applicant spent “tens of thousands of dollars” in good faith that he could begin work on the development. The second meeting in March was to be just “administrative” in nature, but then another hearing was requested.
Snow stated this created “a terrible dilemma” because it was a change to due process. The procedure set forth in the current law was followed and there was a ruling. But then, stated Snow, the decision “was negated.” There is no provision in the law for this, and the applicant does not have the ability to obtain due process.
When the BOCC presides over quasi-judicial hearings/matters, they are acting as judges. As judges, Snow reminded the BOCC, they have to follow the rule of law and its procedures, which does not give them the authority to re-hear zoning matters. For future cases, the BOCC could amend the procedures so that a re-hearing is legal. Snow asked the Board to acknowledge that they have already made a decision in the matter and that changing that decision is not proper procedure.
Commissioner Dukes stated that he appreciated Snow’s comments and recalled a previous zoning issue with a proposed methadone clinic. The BOCC voted against it and were sued, with the judge agreeing with those who wanted the clinic.
County Attorney Garth Coller admitted that there was nothing in the code which provides for re-hearings. There have been cases where applicants asked for re-hearings and they were denied, and the decisions were upheld in a court of appeal. He stated that the wisest course would be to abide by the original decision. Otherwise, Coller said, if the applicant in this case asks for an appeal, the County is likely to lose.
Nicholson asked why the matter was even brought back if Coller knew the BOCC could not re-hear the case. Coller responded that he did not have the authority to veto the Board’s decision. Nicholson clarified that the residents could appeal the Board’s decision.
Holcomb agreed with Snow and Coller, stating that when a decision is made in favor of an applicant, they rely on that ruling and may spend money based on that decision. It sets a bad precedent for the BOCC to reverse itself and will lead to confusion and indecision on the part of citizens who want to move forward with their businesses.
Dukes entered a motion to decline the hearing. Holcomb seconded it, and it was voted 3-2, with Rowden and Nicholson voting against it. The BOCC’s original approval will stand, and the RV park may move forward. Citizens who disagree with the BOCC’s ruling may appeal.