Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Permits topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Hearing examiner pauses decision on No Paws Left Behind conditional use permit; record closed for written decision
Summary
Okanogan County hearing examiner heard staff and the permit holder on compliance with a 2024 conditional-use permit condition for No Paws Left Behind dog rescue, admitted late reports into the record and closed the hearing; a written decision is due within 10 working days.
A hearings examiner in Okanogan County heard testimony Wednesday on whether No Paws Left Behind, a dog rescue operating at a property subject to CUP 2016-02, complied with condition No. 12 of the permit renewal and admitted submitted reports into the record.
The hearing examiner said staff exhibits and submitted reports would be part of the record and that a written decision would follow. "I will have a decision made within the next 10 working days," the examiner said.
Pam Wilson, Planner II for Okanogan County, told the examiner that the reports submitted used the county-provided template intended to satisfy condition No. 12 of the 2024 CUP renewal. Wilson said the county's zoning administrator had determined that the rescue's operations met the definition of a commercial kennel and therefore required a conditional use permit under Okanogan County code. "The Office of Planning and Development is requesting that the hearings examiner confirm that the conditional use permit is required for the proposed use of a dog rescue consistent with the operation of No Paws Left Behind," Wilson said.
Christopher (Chris) Allen, listed in the record as the landowner, permit holder and No Paws treasurer, testified that he retained counsel, had revised reports and supplied supporting veterinary documentation. "We are attempting to becoming compliant and have been working with Miss Wilson," Allen said. Allen disputed whether a CUP should be required but said he was trying to meet county requirements and reserved the right to raise the jurisdiction question later.
County staff and the examiner noted the reports were not timely. The examiner said that if he found compliance, it would not be due to the late timing of those filings. The examiner closed the public record for the item and said he would review the file and issue a written decision within the statutory period.
No vote or final ruling was issued at the hearing. The transcript shows no other public testimony was presented in person or online for this item.
