Piqua Seeks to Combine their Planning Commission and Board of Zoning Appeals
A Proposed Ordinance would seek to combine two boards with two very different roles
At the last City Commission meeting in Piqua, the City Commission held the first reading of an ordinance that would, in part, merge two key civic bodies, the Planning Commission and the Board of Zoning Appeals. This move, presented as a measure of efficiency, is meant to streamline processes and reduce redundant efforts in city planning and zoning appeals.
As the discussion unfolds, various concerns and perspectives emerge. Some commissioners express support, recognizing the potential for streamlined processes and improved service delivery to citizens, developers, and landowners. The rationale is clear: combining bodies handling similar functions should lead to more efficient and effective governance.
However, it needs to be noted that the Planning Commission and the Board of Zoning Appeals have different roles and responsibilities. Here is a quick rundown of the separate roles and functions of these two vitally important civic bodies:
In Ohio municipalities, the two critical entities often work in the realm of development and land use are the Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA) and the Planning Commission. While both play significant roles in shaping the physical and regulatory landscape of a city or town, their functions, powers, and responsibilities are distinct.
The Planning Commission:
Role and Purpose:
The Planning Commission is primarily focused on the long-term planning and development of the municipality. It is involved in creating and updating the master plan, which outlines the city's vision for future growth and development.
Responsibilities:
Reviewing and recommending zoning ordinances and amendments.
Overseeing subdivision plans and ensuring they comply with the master plan and zoning ordinances.
Advising the city council on land use policies and planning issues.
Composition and Appointment:
Members are often appointed by the mayor (such as in Troy) or city council or commission (such as in Piqua). They typically include residents with diverse backgrounds, including planning, architecture, real estate, or community development.
Decision-Making Power:
The Planning Commission usually acts as an advisory body. Its decisions are recommendations that require final approval from the city council or other governing bodies.
The Board of Zoning Appeals:
Role and Purpose:
The BZA operates as a quasi-judicial body that handles exceptions to the existing zoning laws. Its primary function is to oversee variances, conditional uses, and appeals regarding zoning decisions.
Responsibilities:
Granting variances to zoning regulations, such as setback requirements or height limitations, when strict enforcement would cause unnecessary hardship.
Deciding on special permits or conditional uses that may be allowed under certain conditions in a zoning district.
Hearing and deciding appeals where it is alleged there is an error in any order, requirement, decision, or determination made by an administrative official in the enforcement of zoning laws.
Composition and Appointment:
Like the Planning Commission, members are appointed, often by the mayor or city council. Members are expected to have an understanding of zoning laws and local ordinances.
Decision-Making Power:
The BZA makes binding decisions within its jurisdiction. While its decisions can be appealed, they do not typically require further approval from other city bodies.
While both the Planning Commission and the Board of Zoning Appeals are integral to the governance of land use in our local municipalities, their roles are fundamentally different. The Planning Commission is more forward-looking, focusing on long-term planning and development, whereas the BZA is reactive, dealing with specific cases and exceptions to the existing zoning laws. Understanding these differences is crucial for effective municipal governance and for residents seeking to engage with local land use policies.
But back to the ordinance under discussion, some of the issues that the proposal presents are potential conflicts of interest. The same group of people making initial decisions in the Planning Commission would also be the ones handling appeals in the Board of Zoning Appeals. This dual role raises questions of impartiality and fairness. Can an appeal truly be considered fair if it's reviewed by the same individuals who made the original decision?
Who will benefit the most?
As the meeting progresses, the commissioners recognized the need for public input and seemed hesitant to go with the proposal. In defending the proposal, city staff stated that a combined Board of Zoning Appeals/Planning Commission would “make things easier on the end user”. That is a very interesting turn of the phrase because who city staff believes is the end user and the who elected commissioners believes is the end user are not always the same party.
Government bureaucrats and staff members see applicants as the end user. These applicants come to the city wanting something done; a permit, a zoning change, an incentive. City bureaucrats are naturally there to help those applications come to fruition. An application for something is a tangible and physcial result of government in action. Many times, this framework causes city bureaucrats to have efficiency as the paramount value to achieve with applicants as the end user.
Elected officials must balance efficiency with the needs of the community, primarily because they are the only ones in local government accountable to the populace. Governmental systems based in the democratic spirit are not efficient creatures. Our practice has always been the rule of the majority while the rights of the minority are respected. Elected officials see the residents as the end user.
Rightly so, the City Commission wants comments from citizens who have interacted with these boards, seeking to understand the real-world implications of such a merger. This gesture reflects a democratic spirit, acknowledging that governance is not just about administrative convenience but also about serving and engaging with the community.
In the end, the decision to merge these bodies is not just an administrative one; it's a statement about how the city views its governance structures. It raises critical questions about efficiency versus effectiveness, centralized power versus distributed decision-making, and the role of public participation in civic affairs.
This issue is reflective of many other issues facing the City of Piqua. It seems that the community is standing at a crossroads. The decision to merge these bodies could streamline operations and make governance more efficient. But it also risks creating a system where checks and balances are weakened, and public trust is compromised. The way forward requires a delicate balance, weighing the benefits of efficiency against the need for transparent, fair, and participatory governance.
A Quick Note of Thanks
Yesterday, our project hit a significant milestone as we have come to have over 50,000 views of our posts over the past six months. This means that every new post is attracting more readers and more subscribers. All of this is being done with the desire to connect you, our loyal readers, to the place you call home and the decisions being made that will have an impact on the life of your community. If you feel that this project is worthwhile, please take a moment and leave your ideas and insights in the comment section or share this information with your friends and neighbors. Thank you for reading!
Hopefully Piqua realizes what it currently has and can make it work. Very good explanation of the system of checks and balances in this particular arena.
Why have either?They do as they want.City officials lie under oath to do whatever they want to residents,and once again why do they want resident feedback?They could care less about what the residents think,not to mention they like to email each other making fun of residents and covering for each other.Something is seriously wrong when you have department heads making fun of a family's house catching fire.The corruption is from the very top until the very bottom,heck even the utilities officials give out personal information and think nothing of it.Wake up people,it's corruption at its finest in the city of piqua.