By John Schwing
WESTPORT — There’s a time for everything.
But the recently rescheduled time for the Planning and Zoning Commission’s regular meetings — from Thursday to Monday — is not one of them.
At least that’s the view expressed Tuesday by most members of the Representative Town Meeting’s Planning and Zoning Committee, as well as some members of the public, during what was billed as an “open discussion on process, procedures and RTM observation of the P&Z Commission.”
The P&Z decided last December to make the change from its longtime meeting day of Thursdays to Mondays. The change took effect in February.
Committee members voiced criticism of that decision shortly after P&Z Chairwoman Danielle Dobin signed out of Tuesday’s Zoom meeting.
Dobin attended the first part of the session to explain the Planning and Zoning Commission’s decision to recommend “opting out” of two state policies regarding the size of accessory dwelling units and parking requirements for multi-unit dwellings, in favor of locally drafted rules.
The committee unanimously endorsed both opt-out recommendations and forwarded them to the full RTM for final action, where a two-thirds vote is required in order for the alternate local policies to take effect.
Monday meeting schedule fails to make the grade
But the sense of harmony evaporated after Dobin’s departure as committee members and other faulted the P&Z’s choice of meeting dates and times.
Wendy Batteau, District 8, said she had a problem with the “unilateral” way in which the P&Z made its decision, choosing a date that coincides with regular Board of Education meetings.
Next week, for instance, both boards are scheduled to meet at 7 p.m. Monday, while no major board meetings are scheduled Thursday evening.
That now forces citizens interested in the business of two major town boards to choose one at the expense of the other, Batteau and other committee members complained.
Gloria Gouveia, a longtime Westporter and land-use consultant, agreed, saying the “community of professionals” who bring applications before the P&Z “groaned” when they learned about the new meeting date.
She and others noted the change adds pressure on those professionals or anyone else who wants to file material for the record of a Monday night meeting to pull things together over the weekend so the information can be submitted by a noon Monday deadline.
Ellen Lautenberg, District 7, said she also feels the P&Z’s new meeting date is inconvenient for the public.
Harris Falk, District 2, suggested appealing to the P&Z to consider scheduling its meetings on alternate Mondays from the school board.
Weekday noon meetings called “terrible,” “ridiculous”
Committee members were unhappy not only with the full P&Z’s new Monday meetings, but also criticized the weekday noontime meetings scheduled by some P&Z committees and subcommittees.
Committee Chairman Matthew Mandell, District 1, said such sessions are increasingly inconvenient as the pandemic eases and many people return to a standard workday routine.
Gouveia called the noon weekday meetings “terrible,” making it nearly impossible for people who want to “chime in” on issues before they rise to the full commission for final action.
Karen Kramer, District 5, labeled noontime weekday meeting “ridiculous for people who work.”
Another noon meeting is set Wednesday, April 13, by the P&Z’s Affordable Housing Subcommittee.
That session’s agenda calls for the panel to work on drafting a state-mandated affordable housing plan, which town officials have said is a major priority over the coming weeks.
The schedule of weekly meetings was a maximum function sequence for everyone interested in participating in local government. The Thursday night P & Z meeting following the Tuesday ZBA meeting provided a clear and sensible path for applicants. This was an unfortunate change especially when you also consider the conflict with the Board of education meetings.
Was the re-schedule more for the convenience of the Commissioner rather than the convenience of the public, which it serves?
Or was the decision based on some other ill- served objective?
About 90% of the meeting was devoted to discussion of state vs town policies on accessory dwelling units and parking. The remarks about the meeting schedule were made later in response to a query from the committee chair about concerns the RTM P&Z committee might have in its role overseeing the P&Z commission. The comments are largely valid in my opinion, but they were expressed almost an afterthought to the substance of the meeting. The whole RTM will vote on the issue of accessory dwelling units at its next meeting next Tuesday. That meeting will be streamed and televised for anyone interested.