Loading...
1994-08-11 JOE BENTLEY RECEIVED 214 WESTWOOD DRIVE 481 6644 92 W7881'7- AU6 1 7 1994 CITY SECRETARY August 17, 1994 Honorable Gary Fickes, Mayor City of Southlake 667 North Carroll Avenue Southlake, Texas 76092 Dear Mayor: While there appears to be doubt in the minds of several council members concerning the propriety of my actions relative to ZBA case # 204, I have no such reservations. The aspersions cast in my direction most recently have not deterred me from my convictions, nor caused me any pain. Others may disagree with me, but they can never assail my honor. Nonetheless, for personal reasons indirectly related to the above O mentioned case, I have decided to resign from the Board of Adjustment, effectively immediately. With kind regards, I am sincerely yours, Joe Bentley P.s. Please find enclosed a page from a January 1993 draft of rules for the Board of Adjustment regarding voting precedence. cc: Council Members, City of Southlake Board of Adjustment Members, City of Southlake IR ZBA Standing Rules Page 12 1 official "Decision of the Board." All "Decisions of the Board" shall be filed in 2 the office of the Board immediately upon adjournment of the meeting whereat 3 they were adopted. A copy of the "Decision of the Board" shall be made 4 available to the applicant on the next following working day. 5 9. Voting. In order to comply with Texas law and city ordinances, the 6 following procedure shall be followed in voting: 7 a. In regards to any main motion pertaining to a case before the 8 Board, there shall be a roll call vote. 9 b. In regards to any other motion pertaining to a case before the 10 Board, the Chair may, but is not required to, direct a roll call vote. 11 Such a decision by the Chair cannot be appealed. 12 c. A roll call vote pertaining to a case before the Board will be 13 conducted in the following manner: 14 (1) Five members and/or alternate members shall be called upon 05 to cast a vote; provided, however, that only four votes may be 16 called upon if only four members and/or alternate members or 17 present. 18 (2) If any member or alternate member called upon does not OR 19 cast a vote, that person shall be shown as "present," or "abstain" 4W 20 on the record of the vote, and will be counted toward the total 21 number of members and/or alternate members called upon to cast 22 a vote. 23 ..i~~ (3) The precedence of voting shall be members first, in order of 1 24 their appointment, and then alternate members, in order of their 25 appointment. If two or more alternate members share the same 26 date of appointment, then their voting precedence shall be 27 determined by the toss of a coin. (The precedence of voting need 28 not determine the order of the roll call, since it is customary to is 29 call upon the Chair to vote last.) n . D dC~ cr a~ PD i ^'lYiv~ yre AV"5 ~ JAN 93 ~ ~ I>~ECEIVED AUG 1 6 August 16, 1994 To • CITY SECRETARI~,V Mr Fred Joyce Chairman, Board of Adjustment City of Southlake (via Office of the Board) From: Art Sorenson Member, Board of Adjustment (Alternate 2) :1k Conies to: Mayor Fickes; each City Council member; Chairman, Planning and Zoning Commission; members of the Board of Adjustment; City Manager; Zoning Administrator; Building Official; Landscape Administrator; City Attorney Subject: Request for clarification of certain provisions of the city's zoning ordinance and matters related to interpretation and appeal thereof. Background: The Board of Adjustment has heard a number of cases over the years which have indirectly questioned the ordinance's definition and use of W the title Administrative Official, and of the widely varied responsibilities and authorities assigned to its differing usages. These questions have centered on a citizen's right to appeal a zoning-related decision made by a city official other than the Zoning Administrator. - The Administrative Official is defined by the ordinance as the official or his designee "appointed by the City Manager to enforce and administer the terms of this ordinance" and the "individual whose decisions and interpretations are appealed to the Zoning Board of Adjustment". This definition suggests an organizational matrix in which one individual holds the title and authority of "The Administrative Official" and in which the decisions and interpretations of that official's designees are subject to his or her continuing, active review and approval in all areas of the ordinance's administration and enforcement. - But the ordinance elsewhwere clearly envisions a plurality of administrative officials whose authorities and duties are variously and appropriately assigned to separate functions within city staff. And in both necesssity and practice, the daily administration and enforcement of the ordinance is done by individuals placed in authority over organizational functions most appropriate to the various duties being performed. Some of these duties require interpretations and decisions to be made under ordinance-directed authority of the administrative official. But in fact, and necessarily so, many are made outside the routine purview of The Administrative Official whose "decisions and interpretations are appealed to the Zoning Board of Adjustment". The diversity of authority, interests and tasks of individuals performing duties under the aegis of "the administrative official" as mandated by the ordinance, while understandably necessary to the orderly management of 1 t rli~ the city's business, has been a matter of concern to the Board for some time AWftL as a possible impediment to the appeal process. These concerns have on occasion, perhaps as recently as six months ago, been remarked in the board's record with the intent that they be given consideration in future ordinance revision work sessions. Situation: More recently, an appeal to the board has brought this question directly to the table. The implications of certain issues raised in this appeal are critical to the quality of our city's future development. These issues will unquestionably come before the board again, and I suspect with +m greater frequency and in greater numbers in the near future. Recommended Action: In order that the Board be properly informed, I request we be furnished clarification of intent and enforceability of several provisions of the ordinance as currently written. These clarifications should be developed in a joint work-session environment attended by representatives from the City Council, the Planning and Zoning Commission, the City Attorney, j and with the availability to the session of supervisory city staff members whose functions are tasked by the ordinance with duties requiring action by "the administrative official". I believe the session should focus on the following matters while being open to others of concern to those in attendance: 1. Authority of the city's various administrative officials to enforce specific provisions of the ordinance by exercise of prudent judgement where the provisions are qualified by descriptive verbage, but are not couched in language capable of mathematical quantification. This discussion must include a review of permissive and mandatory language throughout the ordinance. 2. Authority of the Board of Adjustment to hear appeals of decisions made by staff administrative officials in performance of duties mandated by the zoning ordinance (or other ordinance adopted under the same subchapter of the law) when such decisions, if made by the Zoning Administrator acting as The Administrative Official, would clearly be appealable to the Board. 3. Authority and responsibility of the various administrative staff functions to insure procedural integrity in matters related to a potential appellant's access to appeal of zoning interpretations and decisions under Texas law. 4. Authority of the city staff to block an appeal of an administrative official's decision by denying an appellant's access to a Board of Adjustment hearing. This must include discussion of - the efficacy of an artifice of regulation which shields all such decisions by administrative officials except the Zoning Administrator's from appeal and ensuing stays of proceedings; and, if the artifice is to be retained in the ordinance, further discussion of the apparent need to educate de facto designees of "The Administrative Official" in recognition of qualified appeals originated against their decisions, and in enforceable procedure developed to insure that any requests for appeal be promptly referred by them to the office of the 2 a~ dd Zoning Administrator (The Administrative Official) for timely action under the law. S. Authority of the city staff to determine that the Board has acted illegally or in excess of its authority, and to reach that determination prior to a decision of the court of record to which a Board action has been appealed. 6. Authority of the city staff, city attorney, or any other individual or entity to act in any matter in the name of the Board of Adjustment without the knowledge and concurrence of the Board, and specifically in the matter of response to a writ of certeriori by a court of record which requires a reply by the Board. 7. And finally, the obligation of the city to furnish to the Board timely advice from, and representation by, the City Attorney in matters relevant to defense of any decisions made by the Board whether or not those decisions meet with the approbation of the city's governing body, its staff or the city attorney; and if such advice and representation may not be so furnished, the means by whichs the Board is to properly defend its decisions when they have been appealed to a court of record. Conclusion: Our board has grown apace with the city over the years of my service to it, and to my knowledge it has acted with high integrity throughout. But the city is growing rapidly, and both its rate of growth and the complexity of its affairs are accelerating. - Our ability to stay apace will increasingly depend on foresight, anticipation of the city's needs, and preparation. r Efforts such as that recommended above are needed in this process. 40 The integrity of the Board's future decisions are dependent on such efforts. The quality of the city's future development may be adversely affected without such efforts. The Board's responsibilities are too critical to the community's welfare to be discharged from a position that is less than fully informed. 4% - We must not settle for less than full support of these responsibilities by all involved in the oversight and administration of the Board's business and affairs. Respectfully, on Arthur J. Sorenson 1201 Oakhurst Court IN Southlake 488-4633 3