Chad Roko, director of the Grand Island Community Redevelopment Authority and a professional planner, laid out the basics of comprehensive planning and local zoning at a North Platte work session on Oct. 24. Roko and a co-presenter discussed how a community comprehensive plan informs zoning regulations, the duties and powers of planning commissions and boards of adjustment, and procedural requirements for conditional use permits, variances and enforcement under Nebraska statutes.

Roko told attendees that a comprehensive plan implements public policy and provides the legal basis for limiting private uses that affect others. “You have to have a public purpose for controlling people's private use of property. That’s your comp plan,” he said. He also urged local control where practical: “Who should make decisions regarding your community except the people who live here?”

Why it matters: The session reviewed how the plan and zoning shape growth, protect natural resources and provide predictability for developers and neighbors. Roko stressed that planning and zoning are tools — not instant fixes — and that elected bodies and planning commissions must document findings and follow statutory notice and hearing procedures to reduce legal risk.

Most important points

- Role of the comprehensive plan: Roko said the comp plan should identify a community’s future land use, transportation, utilities, parks, energy and community facilities elements and be the policy foundation for zoning and capital improvements. He said plans should include both graphic and textual material and emphasized citizen input as central to a successful plan.

- Planning commissions: Roko reviewed statutory requirements for planning commissions (typical membership, staggered terms, residency or ETJ representation where required) and their advisory role. He noted the governing body “shall not take any final action” on specified planning and zoning matters until it has received the commission’s recommendation, making the commission’s recommendation an important procedural step.

- Board of Adjustment and variances: The session covered the board’s quasi‑judicial role, membership, hearing procedures and the five factual findings generally required for a variance, including proof of undue hardship unique to the property and absence of substantial detriment to adjacent property.

- Conditional use permits and zoning amendments: Roko explained three common processes: (1) the planning commission may be authorized to grant conditional uses; (2) a two‑hearing process sends a recommendation to the governing body; or (3) the governing body may retain sole authority. He cautioned that statutes contain language that creates an anomaly—planning commissions are described as having exclusive authority in some passages while counties may retain that authority.

- Notice, posting and protest rules: Roko reviewed statutory notice requirements: at least 10 days’ public notice (newspaper or statutory publicity options for small/rural jurisdictions), a site sign (statute cites minimum 18 by 24 inches and minimum letter height), and certified mail to record title owners when required. He highlighted the remonstrance/protest rule that, if an adopted change is not in accordance with the comp plan and owners of 20% of the affected area or abutting property protest, a three‑quarters vote of the governing body is required.

- Nonconforming uses and amortization: Existing lawful uses remain lawful after a code change, but a nonconforming use may be forfeited if discontinued for a statutory period (Roko noted the statute uses 12 months and practitioners debate whether that is consecutive or cumulative). He cautioned against arbitrary sunset/amortization provisions because of fairness and political challenges.

- Enforcement and remedies: Roko described criminal penalties in the zoning statute (misdemeanor fines) and civil remedies, including injunction and, in extreme cases, mandamus to compel an administrative officer to perform duties. He recommended careful use of fines and noted that jail exposure can trigger right‑to‑counsel/cost issues for the municipality.

Context and process guidance

Roko repeatedly emphasized documented findings of fact. “Never make naked motions,” he said, urging decision makers to record why they approve or deny an application so courts reviewing appeals can see the basis for decisions. He advised that applicants and officials use checklists (complete application, proper notice, certified copies of maps and regulations) to ensure an administratively defensible record.

On coordination across jurisdictions, Roko discussed interlocal agreements (citing the Interlocal Cooperation Act, chapter 13) that allow municipalities and counties to share planning authority and powers. He also noted extraterritorial jurisdiction (ETJ) rules and the precedence that municipal zoning can have inside its ETJ or after annexation.

Quotes

“The only dumb question is the one you don't ask,” Roko told the audience while encouraging questions and public input.

“If you want to control what happens on the property around you, buy it,” he said in the context of private solutions people sometimes use to protect neighboring land uses.

Ending

Presenters closed after more than an hour of instruction and audience Q&A. Roko flagged recent and pending litigation involving wind farms (he recommended attendees watch a related session at the fall workshop that will include discussion of the Knox County case) and encouraged use of the comp plan to support local policy choices. No formal votes or regulatory changes were taken at the work session; the meeting was an informational presentation and discussion for local officials and volunteers.