Charles County Planning Commission members aggressively moved up the comprehensive plan update process Monday, requiring on a 4-3 vote that the 2012 comprehensive plan be before the county commissioners for their consideration no later than July 31.

Commission Vice Chairman Joe Richard and members Lou Grasso, Bob Mitchell and Joan Jones voted for the motion. Commission Chairman Courtney Edmonds and members Steve Bunker and Joe Tieger voted against the motion.

Members who voted for the motion argued that it was time for the planning commission to take responsibility for the comprehensive plan.

Mitchell said that all information should be given to the planning commission to meet Feb. 15 to begin drafting the comprehensive plan.

“It is time for our task,” Mitchell added.

Bunker objected to the sped-up process, saying that the commission already is planning to meet twice with the county commissioners in February to see if additional studies need to be made.

“They won’t necessarily be done by [July 31],” Bunker said.

Bunker added that several people, including Southern Maryland Association of Realtors President Paul Fenton, requested an economic impact study and others requested environmental services studies.

“Based on the schedule, we are short-circuiting the process,” Bunker said.

The county’s original schedule for the comprehensive plan update estimates that consultants and staff would begin to draft the comprehensive plan at the end of last year and have a draft ready in spring 2012.

Following the drafting process, state law requires a 60-day process where state agencies and local jurisdictions have an opportunity to comment on the comprehensive plan.

If the planning commission voted to have staff and consultants draft the 2012 comprehensive plan Feb. 27, then the earliest that the planning commission could have a public hearing on the plan is July 27, assuming public notice has been made.

Usually, public comment periods are extended beyond the hearing date, meaning that based on that schedule, the planning commission could not have the plan to the county commissioners to consider the plan by July 31.

Richard said, “The planning commission has been a bystander to the [update] process,” but he later retracted the word “bystander.”

“It is time to turn over to the people who have the responsibility of writing the comprehensive plan,” according to Article 66B, the state law governing planning powers, Grasso said.

Edmonds said he agreed that the planning commission oversees the process, but found the four member’s speedup “hard to believe.”

“It has been said you don’t understand legalese. The comprehensive plan is a policy document ... yet we are putting pen to paper within one month. I find that hard to believe,” Edmonds said.

Edmonds criticized a “voting bloc” of commission members consisting of Richard, Grasso, Jones and Mitchell for disregarding legal advice, agreements and valid constraints during the meeting.

“This vote in my opinion is to derail the public process ... these are the people who want to take the plan by the horns,” he said.

“I think the [county commissioners] are making a good faith effort to reach out to the planning commission for all the information needed to make a decision on behalf of the county,” Edmonds added, noting that the board of county commissioners provides funding for such studies.

Public comments on the current “merged scenario” closed Jan. 20.

pwarner@somdnews.com