Of Richard T. Suttle’s 79 unique cases, 62 have concluded — reached a Planning Commission or ZAP decision — and 61 of those ended in approval at their final hearing: 98.4%.
Postponement is a clock, not a verdict: of the 27 concluded cases postponed at least once, 26 still ended in approval (96.3%). At least 32 of these cases are confirmed adopted as Council ordinances (Council records run only through 2026-04-23, so this is a floor, not a rate).
Counted once per case, not once per hearing: a case postponed several times before approval would otherwise read as several losses and one win.
| Hearing date | Outcome | District | Firm |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-04-07 | Approved | D7 | Armbrust & Brown |
| 2026-03-17 | Postponed | D7 | Armbrust & Brown |
| 2026-03-10 | Postponed | D9 | Armbrust & Brown |
At the hearing level every appearance counts, so a case postponed N times adds N postponements and one decision. Hearing-level approval-of-decided is 33.6% (vs the field’s 46.1%) and postponement is 65.9% — both far from the case-level figure above, for exactly that reason. Two stages, two denominators: these are commission-stage outcomes (approve vs. postpone/deny at the Planning Commission or ZAP hearing), not the City Council vote. Once a Commission-recommended case reaches Council it is approved in the high-90s%, so a low commission-stage approval rate reflects strategic postponement, not defeat.