Planning Commission chair urges charter clarity on land transactions, zoning transparency and attendance rules

Sarah Polley, chairwoman of the Gahanna Planning Commission, presented detailed proposals to the Charter Review Commission on March 26 aimed at increasing clarity and transparency in the charter while preserving the city’s operating structure.

Polley proposed four primary changes to the charter: require council approval for the purchase, sale or transfer of city-owned real property; clarify that development agreements involving city-owned land or significant municipal commitments receive legislative review; require a clear statement on the record of the basis for zoning decisions (for example, consistency with the comprehensive plan or compatibility with surrounding land uses); and specify when additional council authorization is needed for major contracts by establishing a threshold via ordinance.

On boards and commissions, Polley recommended moving from a fixed-number missed-meeting removal standard to a percentage-based attendance standard (she suggested 75%), eliminating automatic removal for consecutive missed meetings in favor of an evaluation of overall participation, defining "excused absence," and clarifying who determines "just cause" with due-process protections for removal.

Commissioners asked Polley to define "significant" decisions and how to measure "participation." Polley said she preferred flexible language for the charter and suggested that specific thresholds (for example, dollar amounts or percentage tests) could be set by ordinance, while baseline definitions such as what constitutes an excused absence or the appointing authority’s role should be codified in the charter for consistency. She said she would email proposed language and benchmarking examples (including references to Upper Arlington, Dublin and Westerville) to the clerk for the record.

Polley also discussed the Board of Zoning and Building Appeals and the property appeals board, noting that some appeals might be better routed to court and that the property appeals board — created by ordinance — primarily hears sidewalk appeals and rental-registration appeals and meets infrequently.