Pacific County Commissioners’ Meeting Room

Yesterday Nyel and I drove around the bay at an early hour in order to be at the Pacific County Annex Building at 9:00 a.m.  Sharp.  The Board of County Commissioners (BOCC) was holding A Continuance of the Public Hearing pertaining to the Adoption of Ordinance No. 162B amending Section 20 of Ordinance No. 162.  That’s Bureaucrat-Speak for replacing our 38-year-old Oysterville Design Review Board with a Hearing Examiner.  Additionally, the BOCC was considering the adoption oi Resolution 2016-(number not given) dissolving the Oysterville Design Review Board.

The process had begun last week when Nyel and I were in Ashland. We understand that a number of Oysterville residents were at that first meeting and spoke, either pro or con, regarding the proposed ordinance.  We had both sent our letters of concern to be included in the public record.

Although we knew there had been no decision made last week, we weren’t clear when the “Continuance” would be held.  Nyel and I found out about it by chance.  Only two others were there from Oysterville.

The entire procedure took less than five minutes.  Public testimony was called for and, since we had not been at the first go-round, Nyel was given an opportunity to speak. Then the items were moved, seconded, and passed and it was a done deal.  There was no indication from Chairperson Frank Wolfe that any public comments, pro or con, had been considered by the BOCC.  And, there was no copy of the proposed (now passed) ordinance or resolution (now passed) available to the public.

The Commissioners turned to other items and we left feeling very much shut out of the process.  When we returned home I looked up “Public Hearing” and learned, much to my amazement, that the process gives the public a chance to talk but it does not in any way obligate the officials conducting the hearing to listen or to incorporate any concerns into their legislation.

A public hearing is a type of public meeting, and much literature refers to it as such, however there are some distinctive aspects that make a hearing different. Abigail Williamson and Archon Fung define a public hearing as “an open gathering of officials and citizens, in which citizens are permitted to offer comments, but officials are not obliged to act on them or, typically, even to respond publicly.” [2] The main purpose of a public hearing is to allow citizens the chance to voice opinions and concerns over a decision facing a legislature, agency, or organization.

Oysterville Roadblock

I must say I felt a bit foolish about thinking “Public Hearing” meant that the Commissioners might be listening to Oysterville’s concerns.  And I felt even more foolish thinking they might adjust the wording (much less the substance) of the ordinance because of what they heard us say.  Somehow, I thought the ‘Public’ part of Public Hearing meant that we and John Q could have a say in things.  Why don’t they just call it an Open Hearing and leave the public out in name as well as in deed?

It’s always good to know about one-way streets.  It will be a while before I again feel comfortable traveling on any of them here in Pacific County.