Laserfiche WebLink
Planningand Zoning Commission <br />Minutes <br />June 14, 2022 <br />Usually, the Granting Orders are prettystraight forward. We can start to work on that the <br />moment we walk out of here. The volume of information, how important the testimony was. We <br />really wanted to wait for the minutes. The minutes took an appropriate amount of time.He said <br />if there are any issues,pleasedo not hesitate to reach out.He said refrain from discussingthis <br />because it is not done yet. <br />Mr. Stephen Wise asked when he thinks it will go to court. <br />Mr. Goldberg said we will come back in July,and hopefully we will have thatOrder ready for <br />the Boardto review and vote on. She will have 30 days to file inSuperior Court for an Appeal. <br />We will start moving on it pretty quickly. It is notdenovo,it is a review of your decision,so it is <br />a paperreview. They will have to do a lot of work on the front endtofind a reason why the <br />Board decision should not be upheld, based on the record presented. There should not be any <br />new evidence, testimony, a jury,or anything like that. It is a paper review. We are going to try to <br />keep that moving as quickly as humanly possible. <br />Mr. Charles Paxton asked what would lead to it coming back to the Board. <br />Mr. Goldberg said it can be a situation where if the Judge found that the decision was not <br />adequatelysupported.If they thought you did not consider certain evidence that was on the <br />record. If he looked at it and said well,this is a humongous defense right here and you did not <br />say a thing about it, whether it is in oral testimonyor some evidence of the record or if it were <br />theFindings of Fact. <br />He said the way to look at it is the Findings of Fact and Conclusion of theLaw are like the safe <br />guard. That isasif something was just completely skipped over, we can make sure that that is <br />considered,and made very clear that it was considered at one point. That is when they could kick <br />back and say okay, you should reconsider your decision based on,maybe a different ruling of the <br />lawperhaps. I think you read the Ordinance wrong, redoyour decision based on of my reading <br />of the Ordinance. Or it could be I do not think you considered these factsproperly. But all in all, <br />it would be highly differential toward, especially your fact finding, that will be questioned.The <br />Judge does have the ability to interpretthe law and tell you how to interpret the lawand you <br />havemay haveto adjust your decision based off of that.He said you can do that back and forth <br />ten times if it is necessary. <br />Mr. Koch said even if there is evidence to support both sides, which there was it in that case. The <br />Judge cannot substitute his judgment you had for the facts.If it something in the rule of law,they <br />can look at it differently,but notonthe facts. The facts have been decided by this Board. Just <br />because there might have been some fact that favored her, they cannot just decideto change on <br />that issue. <br />Mr. Goldberg said you were the onesinhere hearingthe testimonyand weighing the creditability <br />of the witnesses and evaluating the record. The Judgeis going to be highly differential, he has <br />28 <br /> <br />