Do the board of zoning appeals's choices reflect on those who put them there

Five people decide whether a wind farm, a solar field, your neighbor's new building or something larger can get around Blackford County's zoning rules. Those five people, no one elected them.

They sit on the Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA). Not every decision they make has a negative impact on the county. In fact, many of their decisions have helped bring new revenue and income to the county and the residents within it. But when the board makes a decision, no council or commission can overturn it. A resident or company who disagrees has to go to court.

That is a lot of power for five people who never appear on a ballot. Every one of them, however, was put there by someone who does.

Who put them there

• Daniel Schriver, board chair, appointed by the County Commissioners

• Lori Kingery, appointed by Hartford City Mayor Dan Eckstein

• Bill Smith, appointed by Montpelier Mayor Brad Neff

• Kelly Earle, representing Shamrock Lakes

• Kerra Armstrong, sent by the Area Plan Commission, where she was appointed by the County Council

All five terms end in December.

What the board did this year

Some of the board’s work this year went the way residents should expect. In January, it approved a resident’s request to build a pole barn after neighbors were notified and none objected. In March, it approved an in-home salon for a local business owner. Those everyday decisions rarely make the news, and the board handled them in the open.

Then the board went quiet. It did not meet from March 17 until September 15. Residents’ complaints about a solar project’s fencing sat unanswered for months.

When it came back, it took up a solar company that had built panels on land that was never technically part of its zoning approval. The company found the problem in 2024, kept building and told the county two years later. Board member Kelly Earle said he was “nervous about what else might pop up on us.” The board took action, approving the construction retroactively, on the item. They were told by the BZA lawyer that they didn't need to make public notice on this agenda item; no one in the public had any notice about this situation before it came to the board.

In October, the board heard neighbors’ appeal of the Lake Trout Solar project. It gave the public its time. About 15 people spoke, and letters were read into the record. Notably, citizens there that night made claims that the board members turned off their mics at times during deliberations.

Earle suggested postponing the vote so the board could gather more information. Chair Daniel Schriver replied that the decision would be challenged either way. The board voted that night and sided with the solar project 4-1. Armstrong cast the only vote for the neighbors.

Four of the five members voting had approved the same project in 2022. The board’s official explanation for its decision matched, nearly word for word, the findings written by the developer’s lawyer.

Where it lands

Board members do not campaign. They do not knock on doors, take calls from angry voters or face an election. The officials who appointed them do all three.

Appointing officials do not tell members how to vote on a case. They choose who sits in the seat. They choose whether that person stays. The person they choose is meant to be their independent representative on the BZA.

A resident who walks out of a hearing without feeling heard remembers a board member's name, but they also remember the county, the city and the people in charge. These interactions fall on the elected officials, whether they agree with the decisions made by the BZA or not.

Every appointment of a BZA member lends an official's name to the person in the seat. This year, those names were attached to a board that went quiet for months, approved work after it was built, voted on an item the public never saw and allegedly deliberated behind muted microphones at a public hearing.

The decision in front of them

In the next few weeks, five appointing authorities will decide who sits on the BZA in 2027. Residents do not get a vote on it. The choice belongs to the officials alone.

Before they decide, each official should ask a few simple questions. Does the public trust how this board does its work? Would residents say the board treats every applicant the same, from a homeowner to a large company? Does the board explain its decisions in its own words? Would I be comfortable defending this board’s year to the voters who elected me?

An official who reappoints a member after this year is putting their name on that member’s record. An official who makes a change is saying the record was not good enough.

Residents who want a say should tell their officials now, before the choice is made. Either way, the choice will carry the official’s name. It already does.