Skamania County commissioners interview Sarah Perry for planning commission seat

Skamania County commissioners on May 5 interviewed Sarah Perry, a local resident applying to fill a vacancy on the Skamania County Planning Commission, asking about her land-use experience, approaches to public engagement, and how she would handle conflicts of interest and lot-size averaging.

Perry told the commissioners she has followed planning work in the county closely, attending nearly every planning commission meeting and several county commissioner meetings from August 2023 to June 2024, and said she wanted to “give back to the community” and help preserve the county’s rural character. “I think it’s important to give back to the community, especially when it’s a small community like ours where we have limited resources,” Perry said.

The interview touched on development pressures from nearby population centers such as Vancouver and Camas, local infrastructure limits, and tourism. Perry said strategic, periodic reviews of the county’s comprehensive plans and increased use of public engagement tools — including notices, surveys and workshops — would help align development with community goals. She also cited recent fiber installations as an example of infrastructure that can support economic diversification.

On lot-size averaging — a provision in Skamania County code that allows reduced lot sizes under certain conditions — Perry said she had read the code and tested scenarios on county maps. She said the code’s constraints, including a 50% limit on subdividing parcels noted in her review, and protections that prevent further subdivision without a zoning change, are important safeguards. “If the laws allow for lot size averaging, [and] it’s not creating an adverse effect for anyone around that property, I would have a hard time objecting,” she said.

Commissioners asked how she would balance developers, environmental groups and residents. Perry said the county’s comprehensive and sub-area plans should serve as the decision framework, combined with transparent communication and data-informed analysis to make decisions defensible and less emotional.

Perry described approaches to conflicts of interest that emphasize disclosure, recusal when necessary and documentation of decision rationales. Drawing on eight years at the City of Portland Revenue Bureau, where she supervised 18 people, she said she used standardized assessment processes and transparency to reduce the appearance of bias.

After the interview the board moved into a 20-minute executive session to discuss the qualifications of an applicant, citing the authority for executive sessions in the Revised Code of Washington (RCW 42.30.110(1)(h)). The commissioners announced the session would conclude at 10:25 a.m. and said they were not expected to take action following the executive session. When the meeting returned to open session, the board made and seconded a motion to adjourn; the motion carried by voice vote and the special meeting ended at 10:26 a.m.

No appointment or formal decision on Perry’s application was recorded during the open session. The interview record shows commissioners probed for familiarity with county code, public outreach methods and impartiality safeguards; Perry repeatedly emphasized listening to residents and following code and ethics rules.