Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Board Composition topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning & Zoning Commission votes to deny ordinance limiting number of members from same profession
Summary
A proposed ordinance to limit concurrent members from the same "preferred profession" on the Planning & Zoning Commission was denied by the commission on June 4 after commissioners questioned whether the proposal would unfairly exclude licensed but non-practicing residents.
A proposed ordinance (24-25) brought by Councilmember Long to restrict the number of commissioners from the same "preferred profession" drew extended discussion June 4 and was ultimately denied by the Planning & Zoning Commission.
Chad Boyko, the city’s principal planner, explained the current draft would limit "no more than two members from any preferred profession [serving] as regular members concurrently," removing language that had referenced appointment timeframes. Commissioners debated whether the rule would unintentionally exclude otherwise qualified applicants who hold licenses but do not actively practice.
Commissioner Senator argued the proposal would effectively target real-estate license holders because they are the most numerous license-holders in Cape Coral and noted that many people hold inactive licenses. "It feels like that's what's being targeted here," Senator said, adding that some license holders do not practice and should not be disqualified on that basis.
Other commissioners echoed concerns about the definition of "preferred profession" and whether the rule should distinguish between active practitioners and those who merely hold a license. Commissioner Severson said the goal was to avoid an overwhelming majority from one profession but said he would not advance an amendment at this time.
The commission first voted on a motion to approve the ordinance; that motion failed, with three ayes and four nays. A subsequent motion to deny the ordinance passed, 4–3.
Ending: The P&Z Commission denied the proposed limitation; staff said the proposal would not be applied retroactively to remove current members but could inform future appointment decisions by City Council.
