Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> <br />Planning Commission Authority / Roles and Responsibilities <br /> <br />Planning Director Wood presented a discussion of the Planning Commission’s authority and roles and <br />responsibilities relative to Colorado State Statutes, the Louisville Home Rule Charter (HRC) and <br />Louisville Municipal Code (LMC). <br /> <br />City Attorney Light clarified that with the adoption of the HRC, to the extent there may be conflicting <br />regulations, those from the HRC control. <br /> <br />Mr. Wood explained the role of Staff in supporting the Commission. <br /> <br />Chairman Lipton emphasized that the Commission relies heavily on Staff for their review and <br />recommendations. <br /> <br />The group discussed the various types of applications that will be heard by the Commission. <br /> <br />Mr. Light answered questions pertaining to annexation standards, in particular enclave annexations <br />and annexation eligibility. <br /> <br />Mr. Martell discussed the role of the Commission in taking a “Big Picture” perspective on planning <br />issues. <br /> <br />(Commissioner Kalish excused herself from the meeting at this time.) <br /> <br />Legal Issues <br /> <br />(Please refer to the attached copy of the presentation slides of the City Attorney’s discussion.) <br /> <br />Mr. Light reviewed the due process requirements in a quasi-judicial hearing setting, including public <br />notice requirements. He also provided a general definition of a quasi-judicial hearing, as opposed to <br />an administrative or legislative action. <br /> <br />Mr. Light described issues pertaining to the conduct of a quasi-judicial hearing, including the lack of <br />formal rules of evidence and the need to form a clear record of the basis of the Commission’s <br />decision. Mr. Light explained the importance of the Commission’s role as an impartial decision <br />maker, and elements necessary to maintain that impartially, including the need to avoid ex parte <br />contacts. Mr. Light also briefly discussed elements of the City Charter related to conflicts of interest <br />and disclosure requirements for the Commission members. <br /> <br />Mr. Light defined “open meeting” and public notice requirements for those. He also explained when <br />it would be legal for the Commission to conduct executive sessions. <br /> <br />Mr. Light explained open records requirements, including the evolving area of open records/open <br />meeting pertaining to electronic communications such as e-mails. <br /> <br /> <br />2 <br /> <br />