Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning Commission Recommendation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Worth County zoning commission advises keeping five-member panel, cites recruitment and quorum concerns
Summary
The Worth County Zoning Commission reviewed sizes of comparable Iowa counties and unanimously recommended no change to the county's five-member zoning commission, saying five members best matches recruitment availability and geographic representation.
The Worth County Zoning Commission has recommended that the county keep its zoning commission at five members after reviewing commission sizes in other Iowa counties, a representative reported at the Worth County Board of Supervisors meeting.
The commission, which reported to the Board of Supervisors, examined 52 counties: counties in Iowa with populations under 10,000, the 15 largest counties by population, and counties surrounding Worth County. The review found no clear correlation between county population or number of supervisors and the size of zoning commissions; sizes across the sampled counties ranged from two to nine members, with most counties specifying either five or seven members.
The commission told supervisors it considered the advantages and disadvantages of five- and seven-member panels and concluded that enlarging the panel above seven would be disadvantageous. The commission noted scheduling and recruitment challenges for larger panels and said a five-member commission provided adequate geographic representation. On a motion by Meyer, seconded by Rothauve, the commission voted unanimously that "there was no need to change the zoning ordinance to adjust the current size of 5 members," according to the report given to the supervisors.
Commission members also discussed residency and representation. The commission endorsed the existing rule that members should reside in the county's unincorporated areas and advised supervisors to aim, as a goal, for appointment of members from each of the three supervisor districts and a mix of backgrounds — for example, agriculture, business and acreage owners — but recommended these aspirations not be codified in the zoning ordinance because doing so could reduce flexibility when willing volunteers are scarce.
The zoning report noted that in 15 of the 52 counties reviewed the specified number of zoning commission members could not immediately be determined. The commission recommended keeping the five-member structure in part because it felt five members better matched the pool of available volunteers and reduced the scheduling problems it had experienced with the current membership.
The Board of Supervisors received the report and asked clarifying questions about geographic representation and recruiting. The commission representative thanked supervisors for their time; no ordinance change or public hearing was proposed by the commission at this meeting.
