Commissioners debate conditional‑use practice as LUDMO rewrite proceeds

Staff updated the commission on the LUDMO code rewrite and asked for public input as the county revises definitions and use tables inherited from earlier codes. Staff said they are pulling language from the 2011 code and tightening ambiguous wording, and urged outreach to small communities and stakeholders to clarify expectations.

Commissioners debated whether to require public hearings for conditional‑use permits while the LUDMO rewrite is pending. One commissioner argued automatic public hearings would improve transparency; the county legal/consultant presenter warned that conditional uses carry precedent and could create legal exposure if conditions are not enforced. "If you want to be safer legally, have as few of the conditional uses as you can," the presenter said, urging the commission to favor permitted vs. conditional designations where practical. Commissioners agreed to consider automatically adding public hearings for conditional uses during the interim code period.