Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the County Planning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee approves amendment to require two-thirds of county planning board members live in unincorporated areas in select counties
Summary
The Senate City, County & Local Affairs Committee advanced Senate Bill 87, as amended, which would require at least two-thirds of voting members on county planning boards in certain large counties to live in unincorporated areas.
Senator Mark Johnson, R-District 17, presented Senate Bill 87 to the Senate City, County & Local Affairs Committee and described the bill as an effort to ensure county planning boards include members who live under the boards’ jurisdiction. “The purpose of this bill is to make sure that those people, that live in those areas are governed by people that share their situation,” Johnson said, citing concerns that Pulaski County’s planning board had a majority of members who did not live in the unincorporated area.
Johnson said he amended the bill to limit its current application to counties with a population of 200,000 or more and eight or fewer municipalities, and that the amendment requires at least two-thirds of voting members to live in unincorporated areas rather than all members. He described the revision as a compromise to address concerns raised by local officials.
Adam Fogelman, Pulaski County civil attorney, appeared on behalf of the County Judges Association and urged caution. Fogelman told the committee the bill could undermine the quorum court’s authority by effectively giving voting authority to a subset of members and could reduce the pool of qualified appointees. He gave the example of a Little Rock Air Force Base planning board that involves multiple jurisdictions and warned the residency requirement could create conflicts about where appointees must live rather than their qualifications.
Committee senators asked whether the bill would apply to specific counties such as Washington or Benton; Johnson said he had calculated that it would apply only to Pulaski County under current census figures. Johnson said he had amended language removing the word “flagrantly” from a subdivision-violation provision so that a fine would require proof of knowing violation rather than “flagrant” conduct.
After discussion and public testimony from Fogelman, the committee voted to pass the bill as amended by voice vote. The chair announced the bill passed; no roll-call tally was provided in the transcript.
