Grand County attorney urges commissioners to disclose off‑record contacts, avoid ex parte influence

Steven Stocks, Grand County attorney, opened the discussion by reminding the Planning Commission why ex parte rules exist and how they are applied in practice. “You don’t get to use what you had heard down the street or about something else,” Stocks said, adding that the goal is to have application review “here in person” and on the public record.

Stocks advised commissioners to err on the side of disclosure if they receive outside information, whether in conversation or by email, and to route substantive materials through staff so they become part of the official packet. He warned that informal site visits or private fact‑finding can create the appearance of bias and can lead to litigation or requests for rehearing: “It is better to over disclose than to under disclose on just about anything,” he said.

Commissioners asked practical questions about handling unsolicited resident contacts, responses from county employees, and whether they may visit sites. Stocks’s guidance was consistent: commissioners may speak with residents about general goals, but must avoid deliberation or substantive fact‑gathering outside the public meeting; if they do obtain information they should disclose it so the applicant and public can respond.

Why it matters: The commission regularly adjudicates applications where procedural fairness matters to applicants and to neighbors. Stocks’s briefing clarified how commissioners should protect the record and the public’s confidence in land‑use decisions. The commission did not take formal action on the guidance; staff was asked to circulate instructions and to incorporate disclosure steps into meeting procedures.