Cities and counties are authorized by state law to hire or contract with a hearing examiner for the purpose of conducting administrative or quasi-judicial proceedings on a variety of land use development applications or appeals to agency decisions. Hearing examiners may also conduct hearings on other issues such as proposals for road abandonment, the removal of junk vehicles from private property, and formation of a local improvement district or a road improvement district.
The local legislative authority may adopt a hearing examiner system under which hearing examiners may hear and decide applications for amending the zoning ordinance when the amendment which is applied for is not of area-wide significance. The local legislative authority may authorize a hearing examiner to hear and decide other issues, including but not limited to:
The local legislative authority must adopt procedures and specify by ordinance the legal effect of the decisions made by the examiner. A hearing examiner's decision may be considered: (1) a recommendation to the local legislative authority, (2) an administrative decision appealable to the local legislative authority, or (3) a final decision of the legislative body except in the case of a rezone.
In order to implement a hearing examiner system to hear and issue recommendations for plat and subdivision approval, a local legislative authority must adopt procedures and specify by ordinance the legal effect of the decisions made by the examiner. A hearing examiner's decision may be considered: (1) a recommendation to the local legislative authority, (2) an administrative decision appealable to the local legislative authority, or (3) a final decision of the legislative body.
Each final decision of a hearing examiner must, in writing, include findings and conclusions, based on the record, to support the decision. The findings and conclusions must also set forth the way the decision would carry out and conform to the city's or county's comprehensive plan and the city's or county's development regulations. Each final decision of a hearing examiner, unless a longer period is mutually agreed to in writing by the applicant and the hearing examiner, must be rendered within ten working days following conclusion of all testimony and hearings.
The local legislative authority must adopt a hearing examiner system under which hearing examiners hear and issue decisions on proposals for plat approval and for quasi-judicial development permit applications subject to the zoning ordinance. The limitation that the amendment to the zoning ordinance not be of area-wide significance is removed.
The decision of the hearing examiner constitutes the final decision, subject to appeal under the Land Use Petition Act (LUPA). The local legislative authority must adopt procedures to be followed by a hearing examiner ensuring all decisions are consistent with the future land use map of adopted comprehensive plans and comply with clear and objective development regulations. Findings and conclusions in the final decision of a hearing examiner must set forth the way the decision is consistent with the future land use map of adopted comprehensive plans and comply with clear and objective development regulations, rather than that the decision would carry out and conform to the county's comprehensive plan and the county's development regulations.
Provisions authorizing a hearing examiner to hear and decide other issues, including but not limited to; applications for conditional uses, variances, subdivisions, shoreline permits, or any other class of applications for or pertaining to development of land or land use; appeals of administrative decisions or determinations; and appeals of administrative decisions or determinations pursuant to the State Environmental Policy Act is removed. The requirement that the local legislative authority specify by ordinance the legal effect of decisions made by the hearing examiner is removed.
The local legislative authority must adopt a hearing examiner system to hear and issue recommendations for all quasi-judicial land use decisions including, but not limited to, preliminary plats, planned unit developments, variances, and conditional use approvals. The decision of the hearing examiner constitutes the final decision on all quasi-judicial permit applications including, but not limited to, preliminary plat, planned unit development, variance, and conditional use applications, subject to appeal under LUPA. The local legislative authority must adopt procedures to be followed by a hearing examiner ensuring all decisions are consistent with the future land use map of adopted comprehensive plans and comply with clear and objective development regulations.
PRO: This bill is a way to improve the hearing examiner process and make it more efficient and effective to build homes of all types for people. Some cities use hearing examiners to conduct and administer the public hearing and review the land use application based on compliance to the city's comprehensive plan and development code. The hearing examiner renders a recommendation, including any required conditions. This bill will change the recommendation to a decision, eliminating additional time and steps in an already expensive and long process to get homes on the ground for residents.
This bill requires all cities and counties to use hearing examiners to make final decisions on quasi-judicial permit applications, ensuring a more consistent, predictable, and legal process. Currently, cities and counties have flexibility in using hearing examiners and inconsistencies in adoption has led to inconsistencies, delays, and inequities. City and county legislative bodies acting in a quasi-judicial role face political pressure when they act in a judicial capacity, and this blurs separation of powers and further slows approvals as they may face intense opposition to the housing development under consideration.
CON: This bill is concerning as there has been an increasing number of political subdivisions going to this model and the state does not need to mandate the use of hearing examiners. Decisions relating to plat approvals should remain in the hands of local leadership. This bill removes control from the locally elected bodies and professional planning staff and mandates the use of an unelected hearing examiner who is not accountable to the taxpayer. The bill also requires the hearing examiner's decision to be final and consistent with the future land use maps of adopted comprehensive plans instead of the existing wording of carry out and conform to the city's or county's comprehensive plan. One size does not fit all for the cities and counties in our state.
OTHER: This bill creates a one-size fits all approach that prescribes the scope of the hearing examiner role and mandates that their decision be final. Preserving local government control of this process is important to avoid disruption on current local planning processes and ensure that each county can continue to decide the system that best fits their specific community. The bill removes the ability of local governments to have a hearing examiner hear appeals to administrative decisions and that is an important role in many counties.
Using a hearing system is considered a best practice from a risk management point of view for cities, particularly where the question is whether or not the letter of the law is appropriately applied. This bill mandates the use of hearing examiners for variances and conditional use permits which are more discretionary by their very nature. The biggest challenge is the availability to hire hearing examiners in many parts of the state. Requiring hearing examiners to look at future land use maps is a narrower obligation that the cities would have currently for some of these decisions.