Please note that I’ve referred to the Local Historic Districts Act (MCL 399.201, et seq) as the LHDA, the Clarkston ordinance (152.01, et seq of the Clarkston Code of Ordinances) as the Clarkston Ordinance, and the HDC charter proposal as the Charter Proposal.
Discussion:
The LHDA, MCL 399.205(10), Clarkston Ordinance 152.07(K), and Section 16.9(d) of the Charter Proposal allow the HDC to create specific written standards and delegate the authority to issue Certificates of Appropriateness for specified minor classes of work that the full HDC would review quarterly. This allows the HDC to address minor changes that affect the exterior of a resource without having to formally meet, provided the minor changes fall within the written standards. Approvals must take the form of a Certificate of Appropriateness rather than the made-up Memorandum of Administrative Approval (sometimes referred to as a Memorandum of Approval), neither of which are authorized forms of approval under the LHDA or the Clarkston Ordinance and are intended to avoid the requirements of Michigan’s Open Meeting Act.
The Charter Proposal limits the people to whom the HDC can delegate authority to the HDC chair, HDC secretary, and the city manager. Similar to the Charter Proposal’s Section 16.5 (Commission Policies and Procedures), this section requires the HDC to submit proposed (or revised) standards for delegation of authority to the city council until they are approved.
Notes:
This would not be reinventing the wheel. HDC commissioner Lisa Patercsack publicly stated the HDC has procedures (though they are not on the city’s website as she claimed they were). An HDC representative would presumably be present at a city council meeting to answer questions and would undoubtedly receive quick approval from the council.
Paid for by Susan Bisio, P.O. Box 1303, Clarkston, MI 48347 with regulated funds.)