Remarks by Gary Blake Ross
95 remarks on the record, newest first · Page 2 of 4
- Play at 2:28:06
“OK. In reverse order. anybody were to debate me on the amount of time landowners or developers have had to react to this, I would start the clock in March. And in September, end of September will be about seven months, 90 days after would be 10 months and 180 days after would be 13 months. If they couldn't put the spurs to the horses, the SUP process is being left wide open to them. Now then, on the vesting portion, What I'm going to say comes from the training I received at Virginia Commonwealth in their certified planning commissioner course and case law that I scrounged around on the…”
Planning Commission · Sep 9, 2026
- Play at 2:39:13
“You're not allowed to limit the amount of time I speak, but I will be brief. One minute. You are not allowed to limit the time I speak. And if we do this for one minute, I still will speak. OK. Brian, Commissioner Landrum brings up two points that need to be separated and thought of separately by us. One is the risk of a lawsuit. As I pointed out, the risk of a lawsuit exists no matter where we set Criterion 5's window. They just exist. Commissioner Carroll echoed that a minute ago. Separately from that, We ask ourselves, why would we vote to approve this zoning text amendment at all? Because…”
Planning Commission · Sep 9, 2026
- Play at 2:42:09
“I'd like to divide the question. Commissioner Landrum's motion affects two significantly different topics. One is the 500-foot setback, and the other is the extension window. And so I'd like to vote on those two items separately.”
Planning Commission · Sep 9, 2026
- Play at 2:43:24
“Chair, I would disagree with that analysis. And if Commissioner Landrum wants to guarantee that I oppose his amendment, he might stick with what he just said. But I think that there are two separate, definitely separate, useful topics in his motion and that the question should be divided. And I'm not sure, but I'll double check. We may have to vote on my request to divide the question.”
Planning Commission · Sep 9, 2026
- Play at 2:44:04
“I wasn't. No chair. I was not. I was, I was asking the body to agree to divide the question.”
Planning Commission · Sep 9, 2026
- Play at 2:45:09
“Point of order. Division of a question must be seconded, is not debatable, is amendable, and requires a majority vote. So we should not be debating this. We should call for a second. If one exists, we vote.”
Planning Commission · Sep 9, 2026
- Play at 2:46:20
“You can call the question. I'm calling the question. For the motion that is on the floor. The motion that is on the floor at the moment is Commissioner Landrum's most recent one.”
Planning Commission · Sep 9, 2026
- Play at 2:47:25
“They are. And let's see if the commission agrees with you or me. That's why it's not debatable and we vote. We just find out if the commission agrees.”
Planning Commission · Sep 9, 2026
- Play at 2:48:00
“Chair, I appeal your ruling. I would like for the commission to vote on your ruling. Point of order.”
Planning Commission · Sep 9, 2026
- Play at 2:48:10
“Chair, are you going to be guided by our parliamentary authority or are you going to ignore it?”
Planning Commission · Sep 9, 2026
- Play at 2:48:20
“Chair, are you going to abide by our parliamentary authority and be guided by it or are you going to ignore it? Commissioner Ross. You can talk to me in a calm voice as long as you want, but it will not change the fact that you are exceeding your. I am the chair and I am guiding this. I know what a chair does and is. Okay. And we have a parliamentary authority that also describes that. Okay. And you do not have the authority to do what you are trying to do.”
Planning Commission · Sep 9, 2026
- Play at 2:48:56
“This is being recorded, and I'm sure it's going to come up at some point in the future.”
Planning Commission · Sep 9, 2026
- Play at 2:50:03
“Is that correct? You called for the vote on the main motion, which is not what is on the floor at the moment.”
Planning Commission · Sep 9, 2026
- Play at 2:54:03
“Second. All right. But you can go quickly by saying... Without objection, you know, does the commission agree? And if no one objects, then boom. That's what makes it friendly is the lack of an objection from any commissioner.”
Planning Commission · Sep 9, 2026
- Play at 2:57:14
“Folks, I think there's a way out of this, which is we have acted... the heck out of this tonight we had a public hearing we had a robust debate we uh voted the recommendation can i mean the uh the report can now go to the board saying that the planning commission did not recommend approval i i would i don't do it four four time”
Planning Commission · Sep 9, 2026
- Play at 2:58:01
“I understand that interpretation, but the recommendation is different from actions.”
Planning Commission · Sep 9, 2026
- Play at 2:59:55
“Can I take a look at that? May I? Sure. Okay. As soon as I'm recognized.”
Planning Commission · Sep 9, 2026
- Play at 3:00:08
“Let me see if I can do this without becoming tongue-tied. I move that the Planning Commission report to the governing body that we recommend adopting the zoning text amendment as modified by the staff suggestions but we have been unable to reach agreement on whether or not Criterion 5 should have any, should apply beyond the date of the zoning text amendment's adoption. So I'm saying we like the core, idea here. And I'm trying to slip in sideways that we weren't able to reach agreement on Criterion 5.”
Planning Commission · Sep 9, 2026
- Play at 3:01:47
“But we are recommending adoption of the text amendment. I'm now looking for a second. If I get a second, we could discuss.”
Planning Commission · Sep 9, 2026
- Play at 3:02:14
“I tried to be silent on that topic, but we could... Vote to recommend the text amendment. I had a thought there for a minute.”
Planning Commission · Sep 9, 2026
- Play at 3:03:05
“My brain is grinding its gears, but I will just throw out that if we were to vote for an unmodified, except for the staff recommendation, ZTA, I would vote favorably. That would be the one that has 90 days, and that echoes what I said in July.”
Planning Commission · Sep 9, 2026
- Play at 3:04:21
“That's sort of where I was headed is rather than saying anything about that criterion five, just vote for the amendment and each one of us go back and talk to the supervisors and tell them that they should think about it because we thought and we did not reach agreement.”
Planning Commission · Sep 9, 2026
- Play at 3:07:39
“Yes. Okay. All right. Um, the scenario outlined, uh, by the other commissioners recently is too dire. The 90-day clock started when the matter became part of our workload. And we could have a special meeting at any time that satisfies advertising requirements and reconsider this. Failing to reach an agreement tonight does not just drop the ball guaranteed for 90 days. Um, we could still, uh, act much far quicker than that if we could negotiate a compromise in between now and that next event. Uh, so it's not quite as dire as it described.”
Planning Commission · Sep 9, 2026
- Play at 3:12:04
“Ask Mark. Let me check my written memory here. None, Chair.”
Planning Commission · Sep 9, 2026
- Play at 3:13:06
“Stick a fork in me. I'm done. Okay. I'm passing.”
Planning Commission · Sep 9, 2026