In light of the recent proposed changes for Troy’s Planning Commission, please find some data below:

Every city needs to have a way to vet projects that are proposed to ensure the safety of the residents and adherence to local code and zoning requirements. The City of Troy has a Planning Commission as outlined in Section 71 of the city code whose stated objective is “guiding and accomplishing a coordinated, adjusted and harmonious development of the City which will, in accordance with present and future needs, best promote health, safety and the general welfare as well as efficiency and economy in the progress of development.”

The Mantello Administration has proposed a resolution to dissolve the current Commission and establish a new Planning Board. The stated purpose of the change from the Mayor is to improve the efficiency of the organization and help businesses and developers have a better understanding of project requirements. Let’s explore the differences and implications of the proposed changes.

1. The current Planning Commission has 7 members appointed on a staggered schedule so that one Administration does not have full authority over members. The new proposal would have 5 members all appointed by Mayor Mantello right now.

2. The current Planning Commission has 3-year terms for members that are carried over unless a new qualified candidate is found. The new proposal stipulates a 5-year term with the same carry-over clause.

3. Neither the current nor the proposed Planning organization states specific attendance requirements of members.

4. Neither the current nor the proposed Planning organization allows for members to vote via Zoom if they happen to be ill or have an emergency.

5. The new proposal does not change the Application for Planning Commission review, review process, or checklist of review items.

6. The new proposal does not account for the loss of institutional knowledge of the Commission, process, previous meetings and decisions, or the time, effort, and energy required for a fully new Board to get up to speed.

7. The new proposal does not address any need for training the organization’s members. While members are to have experience in one of five specified land use professions (engineering, architecture, real estate, law, surveying), that does not mean they have experience in city government or knowledge of topics outside their expertise.

8. Both the current and the proposed Planning organization allow for removing a member with cause and after a public hearing.

9. The new proposal would allow the Mantello administration to appoint all 5 members of the new Board right now instead of having staggered terms.

Under the current Troy City Code, the mayor has the power to remove a member from the Commission if there is a legitimate reason to do so. However, the fact that she has decided to attempt to dissolve the whole Commission instead of using the outlined powers she already has implies that there is no legitimate cause to remove any of the current members.

The administration has publicly stated that developers are threatening lawsuits against the city but has yet to provide evidence of these alleged lawsuits or what they are claiming. Before dismantling an established body, it seems prudent to provide the City Council and the public with proper evidence. All Planning Commission meetings are recorded and questions, concerns, and directions are all provided in accordance with state and local law.

I hope the Mantello Administration takes a step back, provides the appropriate documentation, and starts to serve the residents of Troy. The Commission can be improved, but this resolution does not accomplish anything in the way of improvement, just more political power grabs.