A. Planning Commission Hearing. Consideration of the development agreement draft document(s) shall be scheduled at the next available Planning Commission meeting following receipt of the Planning Director’s written report by the Commission Secretary.
1. Public Notice. Notice of the hearing shall be provided as required by SCC 20.05.110 which is consistent with the requirements of Cal. Gov’t. Code §§ 65854, 65854.5, 65856, 65867. If state law changes to prescribe different notice requirements, legal notice for the consideration of proposed development agreements shall be given in that manner.
2. Conduct of Hearing. The public hearing shall be conducted as provided by SCC 20.05.120.
3. Recommendation to Board. After the hearing, the Planning Commission shall report its recommendation in writing to the Board of Supervisors. The report shall include the reasons for the recommendation, and findings as to whether the proposed development agreement:
a. Is consistent with the objectives, policies, general land uses and programs specified in the general plan;
b. Is compatible with the uses authorized in, and the regulations prescribed for, the land use district in which the real property is located;
c. Is in conformity with public convenience, general welfare and good land use practice;
d. Will be detrimental to the health safety and general welfare of persons residing in the county; and
e. Will adversely affect the orderly development of property or the preservation of property value.
B. Board of Supervisors Hearing and Decision. The Board of Supervisors shall conduct a public hearing on a proposed development agreement with the same public notice and in the same manner as provided for the Planning Commission. After the Board of Supervisors completes the public hearing, it may accept, modify, or disapprove the recommendation of the Planning Commission. It may, but shall not be required to, refer matters not previously considered by the Planning Commission during its hearing back to the Commission for report and recommendation. The Commission may, but need not, hold a public hearing on matters referred back to it by the Board of Supervisors. The Board shall not approve the proposed development agreement unless it finds that the provisions of the agreement are consistent with the general plan and any applicable specific plan; provided, that nothing in this section shall be construed to mean that the Board of Supervisors must approve a development agreement even if the stated findings are made.
D. Approval of the Development Agreement. If the Board of Supervisors approves the proposed development agreement, it shall do so by the adoption of an ordinance supported by the findings as required in subsection (B) of this section. The agreement shall take effect 30 days after passage of the ordinance, unless a longer period of time is specified.
E. Recordation. Within 10 days after the county enters into the development agreement, the county shall have the agreement recorded with the Sierra County Recorder. If the parties to the agreement, or their successors in interest, amend or cancel the agreement as provided in SCC 25.05.080 (Cal. Gov’t. Code § 65868 incorporated by reference), or if the county terminates or modifies the agreement as provided in Cal. Gov’t. Code § 65865.1 for failure of the applicant to comply in good faith with the terms or conditions of the agreement, the county shall have notice of such action recorded with the County Recorder.
F. Court Review. No action, inaction or recommendation regarding the proposed development agreement shall be held void or invalid or set aside by a court by reason of any error, irregularity, informality, neglect or omission (“error”) as to any matter pertaining to petition, application, notice, finding, record, hearing, report, recommendation, or any matters of procedure whatsoever unless after an examination of the entire case, including the evidence, the court is of the opinion that the error complained of was prejudicial and that by reason of the error the complaining party sustained and suffered substantial injury, and that a different result would have been probable if the error had not occurred or existed. There is no presumption that error is prejudicial or that injury was done if error is shown.