Commission recommends denial of city proposal to replace hearing examiner with special magistrates

The Planning and Zoning Commission on July 1 recommended denial of Ordinance 2026, a city-initiated ordinance that would replace references to a hearing examiner with special magistrates for quasi-judicial decisions and align submission deadlines for hearing materials.

Amy Years of the City Planning Division described the ordinance as a procedural change intended to provide flexibility and ensure compliance with statutory timelines, noting that the proposal would allow decisions made by a special magistrate to be appealed directly to circuit court and would set a five-day deadline for both applicants and staff to submit materials to the decision-maker.

Commissioners pressed staff on practical details including the typical number of hearings per year (staff said about 10–12), how special magistrates are compensated and appointed, and the meaning of removal language in the draft ordinance. Commissioner Ortona Estés argued for greater public participation and proposed considering a three-member panel drawn from commissioners instead of hiring a separate hearing officer; other commissioners raised concerns about due process, constitutional limits on dual-office holding and the specialized legal training required to rule on hearsay and procedural evidentiary issues.

After debate, the commission moved to deny the staff recommendation and forward to city council a recommendation that the council consider a three-member panel drawn from planning commission members (with training provided by the city attorney) as an alternative. The motion to deny carried on roll call.

The commission’s action is advisory; final authority rests with the Cape Coral City Council. The commission asked that its concerns about due process, term lengths and removal authority be noted in the record for council consideration.