Bias essentially means having one’s mind made up before hearing the evidence. Officials on boards and commissions should be disqualified to participate in a proceeding if they have prejudged the case or if they are prejudiced or conceal a personal ill will toward a party.
A critical element of due process in quasi-judicial proceedings is ensuring that board and commission decision-makers keep open minds and listen objectively to the facts as they are presented in the public hearing. They must not make up their minds regarding the facts or the outcome in advance or refuse to apply the standards found in the zoning ordinance if doing so will result in an outcome contrary to their wishes.
Ex parte contacts and conflicts of interest can result in bias on the part of a decision-maker. But bias can arise independently of such situations. Board and commission members should be appointed because of their knowledge of land development issues and their involvement in the community. Elected officials should seek to appoint board and commission members who represent a variety of interests: developers, business leaders, farmers, environmentalists, etc. As such, very few people come to these positions without harboring a particular viewpoint on some issues. It is perfectly acceptable to come to the job with opinions on land use matters generally, but if an opinion results in a blanket endorsement (or rejection) of certain types of development or projects presented by particular developers or individuals, then the board member is prejudicially biased. If a board member finds himself or herself to be predisposed to a particular outcome:
1. The board member must state on the record that he lacks the degree of impartiality needed to decide the case and describe with sufficient detail the facts and circumstances that have led him to that conclusion.
2. The board member then must recuse himself from participation in the proceedings.
Gary D. Taylor, Iowa State University
