Members of the Clay County Planning Commission spent a sustained portion of the meeting discussing ex parte communications and the limits of commissioners’ interactions with applicants, members of the public and third parties.

Commission members said a continuing-education presentation had raised a more cautious interpretation of ex parte contacts than some commissioners had previously followed. Staff told the commission it has collected ex parte and public‑hearing policies from surrounding counties as examples and will prepare a written policy for the commission to review.

Commissioners and staff discussed several recurring issues: when a casual drive-by view of a parcel becomes a site visit that should be disclosed; whether a site visit that produces information not presented during the hearing can be relied on; and how to avoid testimony arising from a commissioner’s personal observations. The commission noted that state law allows some ex parte communications but that disclosure is important when an outside contact could influence or prejudice a member’s ability to decide impartially.

Members also discussed limits on applicant presentation time. Staff said other jurisdictions set longer applicant time limits (one example cited was 15 minutes in another county) and acknowledged the commission’s current informal practice of allowing faster presentations is inconsistently enforced. Commissioners said the chair retains authority to require speakers to be concise and that a formal time policy may be warranted.

Next steps: staff will draft a written ex parte communications policy, circulate it to the commission for review and return to the commission for possible revision and adoption. No formal rule was adopted at the meeting.