Supervisors Slash County Planning Board’s Powers : Government: Half of the commission’s workload is shifted to a new zoning administrator’s office. Panel chairman harshly criticizes the move.

Reflecting the slowdown in the local development industry, the County Board of Supervisors significantly pared the responsibilities of its Planning Commission on Tuesday, shifting half the panel’s current workload to a newly created zoning administrator’s office.

The action, approved unanimously, was immediately and harshly criticized by the commission chairman as a threat to the integrity of the five-member panel that now oversees most county land management decisions.

“They have (messed) up the county so much,” Roger D. Slates said in remarks laced with expletives. “For the life of me, I can’t figure out why they are doing this.”

In a subsequent interview, after Slates was informed that at least one supervisor was dismayed by his remarks, Slates said he “would do whatever they (the supervisors) wanted.”

“If I said something out of line, I didn’t mean it. It’s their (the supervisors’) call. . . . I think it’s a great idea.” Last month, Slates joined a commission majority in advising staff against the reorganization plan proposed by Planning Director Thomas B. Mathews. At that time, commissioners said the move would be perceived by the public as a “very arbitrary process.”

Supervisors, however, had nothing but praise for the new strategy, which they said would allow the five-member commission to focus on broader, regional planning issues. The change would leave minor requests for permits and plan changes, which do not require formal commission approval, to the newly created position of zoning administrator.

As recently as three years ago, the county employed a zoning administrator to help the commission handle the crush of new development requests. But two years ago, the number of requests declined, and the position was eliminated

Supervisor Harriett M. Wieder, who appointed Slates to the board, said she was “shocked” at the chairman’s reaction and thought her appointee would have welcomed the board’s action.

“If he had a problem with this, he should have called me, and I could have educated him,” Wieder said. “I always thought the commission would rather be addressing regional issues, not whether somebody would be able to add a garage on their house. It’s a wise move for the county. I don’t think Roger gets it.”

Supervisor Gaddi H. Vasquez said the action was not an attempt to strip the commission of its authority.

“The work of the Planning Commission has changed dramatically,” Vasquez said, referring to the proliferation of cities in the county that have their own planning bodies. “It’s an attempt at channeling energies and time to become more proactive in the county. We all need to take a more regional perspective.”

Under the plan, officials said, minor requests for modifications of existing development plans would be referred to the zoning administrator and could not be appealed to the board.

Requests of more critical importance, such as complete zone changes, environmental studies and general development plans, would remain within the Planning Commission’s jurisdiction.

The board’s action was at least partially sparked by results of a study that showed that 177 of the 308 items brought before the commission between Jan. 1, 1991, and Sept. 30, 1992, could have been handled by a zoning administrator. The balance were items requiring more critical planning reviews.

As part of its new role, the commission could place more emphasis on issues ranging from habitat conservation to a coordination of city planning proposals, county staffers said.

Although commenting that the administrator’s position could evolve into a “pretty powerful job,” Supervisor Thomas F. Riley said the commission should not be concerned about losing any authority.

“Significant projects are what we’re freeing the commission to look at,” he said. “We need to take a more regional approach to planning.”

Michael M. Ruane, director of the county’s Environmental Management Agency, said the zoning administrator’s position would be filled from within the agency’s existing staff. He said the position would not require additional funding or salary from the county. The position has not yet been filled.

Included in the division of labor, Ruane said, would be a reduction in deposits required for proposed actions taken before the zoning administrator. Ruane said fee deposits for various permit requests would drop from $3,800 to $1,900, while site plan fees would also be cut in half from $2,000.