1.

The appeal authority for Kamas City shall consist of those persons or entities designated by KMC 15.03.020.

2.

When a matter may be appealed to the administrative law judge under KMC 15.03.020, the matter shall be heard by an administrative law judge, appointed by the mayor with the advice and consent of the Kamas City Council.

3.

The term of an administrative law judge shall be four years concluding at midnight on the 31st day of December of the year of term expiration. At the expiration of the term, the mayor may reappoint the judge to additional four-year terms with the advice and consent of the Kamas City Council.

4.

Any administrative law judge may be removed for cause by the governing body upon written charges and after a public hearing, if a public hearing is requested by the governing body or the administrative law judge being removed.

5.

Upon the removal of an administrative law judge or the written resignation of any judge, the mayor shall pursue the selection of a new judge to fill the vacancy. Upon the need for the filling of a vacancy or establishing a new administrative law judge, the mayor shall act to post notice of the administrative law judge vacancy as a Class A notice as required under U.C.A. § 63G-30-102. Said notice shall include at least the general responsibilities of the judge, direction for interested applicants to submit a letter of interest, procedure for submitting letters of interest, and the closing date of the vacancy's notice. The notice shall be advertised for not less than ten days.

(Ord. 2015-04, 11/10/2015; Ord. No. 2022-03, § 1(Exh. A), 2/22/2022; Ord. No. 2025-03, § 1 (Exh. A), 2/11/2025)

1.

The administrative law judge may hold meetings, as the appeal authority, according to Utah State Code, Title 52, Chapter 4, Open and Public Meetings, or any successor statute enacted in its place.

2.

The administrative law judge must be present in order to conduct any public meeting of the appeal authority or to hear items of business before the appeal authority.

3.

The administrative law judge will listen to the facts presented and will base his/her decision upon his/her understanding of that information.

4.

The administrative law judge may develop, adopt and maintain additional bylaws and/or rules of decorum and order to be followed during meetings of the appeal authority. All appeal authority hearings shall be conducted as quasi-judicial proceedings and in accordance with Utah State Code § 10-9a-701 et seq.

5.

Pursuant to Utah State Code § 10-9a-701, any adversely affected party being heard by the appeal authority shall be required to present to the appeal authority every theory of relief that they can raise in district court.

(Ord. 2015-04, 11/10/2015; Ord. No. 2022-03, § 1(Exh. A), 2/22/2022)

The powers and duties of the appeal authorities shall be as follows and as outlined in KMC 15.03.020:

1.

Hear and decide appeals from zoning decisions applying the zoning ordinance.

2.

Hear and decide variances from the terms of the zoning ordinance.

3.

Hear and decide on violations of codes and ordinances within Kamas City.

(Ord. 2015-04, 11/10/2015; Ord. No. 2022-03, § 1(Exh. A), 2/22/2022)

1.

a.

The applicant or any other person or entity adversely affected by a decision administering or interpreting a zoning ordinance may appeal that decision applying the zoning ordinance by alleging that there is error in any order, requirement, decision, or determination made by an official in the administration or interpretation of the zoning ordinance.

b.

Any person, including any officer, department or board of Kamas City affected by a decision administering or interpreting a zoning ordinance or affected by the grant or refusal of a building permit or by any other final decision of the planning commission in the administration or interpretation of the zoning ordinance may appeal such decision to the appeal authority. An appeal must be made within ten calendar days from the date of such decision by filing with the city recorder a written notice of appeal specifying the grounds thereof. When an appeal is taken from a decision of the planning commission, the city planner shall forthwith transmit to the appeal authority all papers, if any, constituting the record upon which the action appealed from was taken.

c.

An appeal filed in accordance with this section stays all proceedings in the appeal action, unless the officer from whom the appeal is taken certifies to the appeal authority that by reason of facts stated in the certificate, the stay would in his/her opinion cause imminent peril to life or property. In such cases, proceedings shall not be stayed otherwise than by restraining order which may be granted by the appeal authority or by the district court on application and notice and on due cause shown.

d.

The appeal authority shall fix the time for hearing any appeal within a reasonable timeframe from the date of filing such appeal with the city recorder and shall give public notice thereof in accordance with the Utah Open and Public Meetings Act, as well as notice to the parties in interest.

e.

Proceedings and hearings before the appeal authority shall be had pursuant to rules adopted by the appeal authority and in conformance with general principles of due process. Any party in interest may appear at such hearing in person, by agent, or by an attorney of his/her choice.

f.

The person or entity making the appeal has the burden of proving that an error has been made.

g.

Only decisions applying to the zoning ordinance may be appealed to the administrative law judge.

h.

A person may not appeal, and the administrative law judge may not consider, any zoning ordinance amendments.

i.

The city council shall hear and decide appeals of planning commission decisions.

2.

Appeals may not be used to waive or modify the terms or requirements of the zoning ordinance.

(Ord. 2015-04, 11/10/2015; Ord. No. 2022-03, § 1(Exh. A), 2/22/2022)

Any person or entity desiring a waiver or modification of the requirements of the zoning ordinance as applied to a parcel of property that he/she owns, leases, or in which he/she holds some other beneficial interest may apply to the administrative law judge for a variance from the terms of the zoning ordinance.

1.

The administrative law judge may grant a variance only if each of the following conditions are met:

a.

Literal enforcement of the zoning ordinance would cause an unreasonable hardship for the applicant that is not necessary to carry out the general purpose of the zoning ordinance.

b.

There are special circumstances attached to the property that do not generally apply to other properties in the same district.

c.

Granting the variance is essential to the enjoyment of a substantial property right possessed by other property in the same district.

d.

The variance will not substantially affect the general plan and will not be contrary to the public interest.

e.

The spirit of the zoning ordinance is observed and substantial justice is done.

2.

In determining whether or not enforcement of the zoning ordinance would cause unreasonable hardship under this section, the administrative law judge may not find an unreasonable hardship unless the alleged hardship:

a.

Is located on or associated with the property for which the variance is sought; and

b.

Comes from circumstances peculiar to the property, not from conditions that are general to the neighborhood.

3.

In determining whether or not enforcement of the zoning ordinance would cause unreasonable hardship under this section, the administrative law judge may not find an unreasonable hardship if the hardship is self-imposed or economic.

4.

In determining whether or not there are special circumstances attached to the property under this section, the administrative law judge may find that special circumstances exist only if the special circumstances:

a.

Relate to the hardship complained of; and

b.

Deprive the property of privileges granted to other properties in the same district.

5.

The applicant shall bear the burden of proving all of the conditions justifying a variance have been met.

6.

Variances run with the land.

7.

The administrative law judge may not grant use variances.

8.

In granting a variance, the administrative law judge may impose additional requirements on the applicant that will:

a.

Mitigate any harmful affects of the variance; or

b.

Serve the purpose of the standard or requirement that is waived or modified.

(Ord. 2015-04, 11/10/2015; Ord. No. 2022-03, § 1(Exh. A), 2/22/2022; Ord. No. 2025-03, § 1 (Exh. A), 2/11/2025)

Before any application for a variance or building permit is heard by the administrative law judge, the administrative law judge shall give Kamas City at least 15 days notice of any hearing to consider the application.

(Ord. 2015-04, 11/10/2015)

Where a zone boundary line divides a lot in a single ownership at the time of the passage of this chapter, the administrative law judge may permit a use authorized on either portion of such lot to extend not more than 50 feet into the other portion of the lot.

(Ord. 2015-04, 11/10/2015)

In exercising the above-mentioned powers the administrative law judge may affirm, wholly or partly, or may modify the order, requirement, decision or determination of the zoning official.

(Ord. 2015-04, 11/10/2015)

1.

Any person adversely affected by any decision of the administrative law judge may petition the district court for a review of the decision.

2.

In the petition, the plaintiff may only allege that the administrative law judge's decision was arbitrary, capricious; or illegal.

3.

a.

The petition is barred unless it is filed within 30 days after the administrative law judge's decision is final.

b.

i.

The time under this section to file a petition is tolled from the date a property owner files a request for arbitration of a constitutional taking issue with the private property ombudsman under Utah Code Annotated 63-34-13 until 30 days after:

(1)

the arbitrator issues a final award, or

(2)

The private property ombudsman issues a written statement under Utah Code Annotated 63-34-13(4)(b) declining to arbitrate or to appoint an arbitrator.

ii.

A tolling under this section operates only as to the specific constitutional taking issues that are the subject of the request for arbitration filed with the private property ombudsman by a property owner.

iii.

A request for arbitration filed with the private property ombudsman after the time under this section to file a petition has expired does not affect the time to file a petition.

4.

a.

The administrative law judge shall transmit to the district court the record of its proceedings including its minutes, findings, orders and, if available, a true and correct transcript of its proceedings.

b.

If the proceeding was taped, a transcript of that tape recording is a true and correct transcript for purposes of this section.

5.

a.

If there is a record, the district court's review is limited to the record provided by the administrative law judge. The court may not accept or consider any evidence outside the record from the administrative law judge hearing unless that evidence was offered to the administrative law judge and the court determines that it was improperly excluded by the administrative law judge.

b.

If there is no record, the court may call witnesses and take evidence.

6.

The court shall affirm the decision of the administrative law judge if the decision is supported by substantial evidence in the record.

7.

a.

The filing of a petition does not stay the decision of the administrative law judge.

i.

Before filing a petition under this section or a request for mediation or arbitration of a constitutional taking issue under Utah Code Annotated 63-34-24, the aggrieved party may petition the administrative law judge to stay his/her decision.

ii.

Upon receipt of a petition to stay, the administrative law judge may order his/her decision stayed pending district court review if the administrative law judge finds it to be in the best interest of Kamas City.

iii.

After a petition is filed under this section or a request for mediation or arbitration of a constitutional taking issue is filed under Utah Code Annotated 63-34-13, the petitioner may seek an injunction from the district court staying the administrative law judge's decision.

(Ord. 2015-04, 11/10/2015)