Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Board Members topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Design Review Board members introduce backgrounds, emphasize objectivity and recusal practices
Summary
Board members introduced professional backgrounds — licensed architect Joe Greer, landscape architects Toby Norton and Jim Mayan, and interior designer Kelly Murphy — and discussed recusal practices and efforts to avoid favoritism when board members present their own projects.
Board members used the joint session to introduce themselves and describe the professional expertise they bring to the Design Review Board. Joe Greer said he is a licensed architect with local family ties and emphasized the seriousness of the Board's advisory role. Toby Norton described more than two decades of landscape experience in the Treasure Valley, and Kelly Murphy said she runs an interior-design business and has been an Eagle resident for 10 years. Jim Mayan identified himself as a practicing landscape architect who owns civil engineering, planning and landscape firms and noted his years of experience in the state.
Board members and councilors discussed how to manage conflicts when a board member is an applicant. A board member explained the standard practice when a member has an application on the agenda: that member recuses, exits chambers during deliberation and lets the vice chair or another member lead the discussion. "When the time comes for that application... I exit the chambers and I go out and sit," a board representative said. Other board members said they often spend more time preparing presentations when they present to their peers and that they aim to be more critical, not less, of projects they have a stake in.
The introductions also served to surface technical specialties on the Board and to emphasize that applicants should expect consistent professional review. Council and staff asked the board to share their individual areas of focus so councilors have clearer expectations when cases come forward. The meeting concluded that the board would continue to operate under existing recusal norms and that clearer communication of specialties and expectations would be part of the updated design guidance work.
