Become a Founder Member Now!

Clatsop County planning commission discusses removing real-estate occupation limit in bylaws

October 14, 2025 | Clatsop County, Oregon


This article was created by AI summarizing key points discussed. AI makes mistakes, so for full details and context, please refer to the video of the full meeting. Please report any errors so we can fix them. Report an error »

Clatsop County planning commission discusses removing real-estate occupation limit in bylaws
Veil Henriksen, Clatsop County community development director, told the Planning Commission that staff recommends removing a bylaw provision that limits how many commission members may be engaged in buying, selling or developing real estate.

Henriksen said the recommendation follows a recent legislative change: “The change that was made, from house bill 31 36, removes the prohibition of having more than 2 members of the planning commission be engaged in the buying, selling, or developing of real estate,” and that the county's bylaws, last updated in 2022, still include that language.

The recommendation is intended to help recruit volunteers in a small county, Henriksen said. The Planning Commission currently has seven seats; the staff proposal would keep the membership at seven but remove the specific occupation prohibition from the bylaws.

Commissioners raised questions about whether removing the prohibition would actually increase applicant diversity. Commissioner (unnamed) said the restriction "places a restriction on limiting a certain [group] and doesn't necessarily encourage more diversity." Other commissioners noted common multiple occupations in the county—examples cited included building, commercial fishing and title work—and said it can be difficult to determine a person's "primary" occupation for purposes of the rule.

Commissioner (unnamed) asked whether the restriction reflected long-standing practice. Henriksen replied that the bylaw language came from ORS and that she would verify whether the remaining wording is required by state law. Henriksen specifically offered to check the relevant ORS language before the commission took any formal action.

Members also discussed geographic representation. Henriksen said the Board of County Commissioners had asked staff to encourage applicants from either Commissioner District 1 or District 5 for the most recent vacancy; that guidance, not professional restrictions, led staff to advance a particular candidate. Commissioners noted the county has two commissioners who represent incorporated areas and that past recruitment sometimes favored applicants from Warrenton or Astoria.

No final change was adopted. Commissioners agreed to defer any bylaw amendment until the commission's next meeting so staff can verify the state statute language and the commission can solicit any input from the Board of County Commissioners. Several members offered alternative suggestions, including limiting (rather than eliminating) the number of members in particular trades to three or four instead of removing the restriction entirely.

The discussion took place during the planning commission's work session; commissioners did not make a formal motion to change the bylaws at this meeting.

View full meeting

This article is based on a recent meeting—watch the full video and explore the complete transcript for deeper insights into the discussion.

View full meeting

Sponsors

Proudly supported by sponsors who keep Oregon articles free in 2025

Scribe from Workplace AI
Scribe from Workplace AI