1
00:00:00,040 --> 00:00:02,280
all

2
00:00:28,960 --> 00:00:31,960
right

3
00:01:29,159 --> 00:01:31,680
okay

4
00:01:30,400 --> 00:01:33,880
[Music]

5
00:01:31,680 --> 00:01:33,880
n

6
00:01:35,000 --> 00:01:39,439
o' uh hello everybody uh welcome this is

7
00:01:37,920 --> 00:01:43,960
the call to order for the chesap beach

8
00:01:39,439 --> 00:01:46,079
board of appeals um 7M January 4th 2024

9
00:01:43,960 --> 00:01:48,520
uh we start with a board roll call

10
00:01:46,079 --> 00:01:51,280
please announce that you are present uh

11
00:01:48,520 --> 00:01:55,759
Mr Paul dhy present Miss Amy Everett

12
00:01:51,280 --> 00:02:00,119
present Mr Sten sharp I am Jody honstar

13
00:01:55,759 --> 00:02:02,960
um we have a quorum um a note on uh

14
00:02:00,119 --> 00:02:05,520
public comments um we're going to start

15
00:02:02,960 --> 00:02:06,560
doing a new thing here where um at the

16
00:02:05,520 --> 00:02:08,879
beginning of each meeting we'll ask

17
00:02:06,560 --> 00:02:10,360
Sharon if there have been any public

18
00:02:08,879 --> 00:02:13,160
comments since the last time we got

19
00:02:10,360 --> 00:02:15,400
together um and so that's what this is

20
00:02:13,160 --> 00:02:17,800
so Sharon have we received any public

21
00:02:15,400 --> 00:02:20,760
comments to be entered into the record

22
00:02:17,800 --> 00:02:24,640
um concerning uh case

23
00:02:20,760 --> 00:02:26,800
20233 yes we've received six uh six

24
00:02:24,640 --> 00:02:28,720
comments okay uh we will do this every

25
00:02:26,800 --> 00:02:30,200
time uh the contents of the comments

26
00:02:28,720 --> 00:02:32,879
will not be addressed at this time time

27
00:02:30,200 --> 00:02:36,160
but they will be entered into the record

28
00:02:32,879 --> 00:02:38,200
um and addressed later um one notice

29
00:02:36,160 --> 00:02:40,519
about witness questions um people who

30
00:02:38,200 --> 00:02:42,120
have signed up as a party of record May

31
00:02:40,519 --> 00:02:44,400
uh ask questions of a witness at the

32
00:02:42,120 --> 00:02:45,599
conclusion of that witness's testimony

33
00:02:44,400 --> 00:02:47,560
just so you're

34
00:02:45,599 --> 00:02:51,319
aware

35
00:02:47,560 --> 00:02:53,720
um uh okay uh next item is the meeting

36
00:02:51,319 --> 00:02:57,640
minutes approval which were from we kind

37
00:02:53,720 --> 00:02:59,920
of punted on uh last go round um we have

38
00:02:57,640 --> 00:03:02,280
three minutes to approve uh three three

39
00:02:59,920 --> 00:03:06,480
sets of minutes uh for the meeting on

40
00:03:02,280 --> 00:03:08,519
November 8th 2023 November 14th 2023 and

41
00:03:06,480 --> 00:03:11,640
also November 14th for the board of

42
00:03:08,519 --> 00:03:14,720
appeals closed session um at this point

43
00:03:11,640 --> 00:03:17,840
in time I will entertain a motion by any

44
00:03:14,720 --> 00:03:21,920
board member to approve all of these

45
00:03:17,840 --> 00:03:24,879
minutes I will make that motion I have a

46
00:03:21,920 --> 00:03:28,680
second all in

47
00:03:24,879 --> 00:03:31,680
favor all right uh meeting minutes

48
00:03:28,680 --> 00:03:31,680
yes

49
00:03:34,680 --> 00:03:41,000
I have yours I have

50
00:03:38,000 --> 00:03:41,000
yours

51
00:03:42,560 --> 00:03:45,110
yeah okay can we make sure the copies

52
00:03:44,680 --> 00:03:47,400
are

53
00:03:45,110 --> 00:03:51,159
[Music]

54
00:03:47,400 --> 00:03:51,159
provided also a copy from

55
00:03:53,079 --> 00:03:59,720
me uh okay

56
00:03:56,360 --> 00:04:01,879
um see okay so the next bit is normal uh

57
00:03:59,720 --> 00:04:03,959
normal announcements uh tonight we'll be

58
00:04:01,879 --> 00:04:05,920
we be having a two-hour maximum length

59
00:04:03,959 --> 00:04:08,599
session we will end around

60
00:04:05,920 --> 00:04:11,439
900m unless the you know we need to end

61
00:04:08,599 --> 00:04:13,519
earlier for other reasons um for the

62
00:04:11,439 --> 00:04:15,760
public uh direct all comments and

63
00:04:13,519 --> 00:04:17,919
questions to the board uh chair myself

64
00:04:15,760 --> 00:04:19,919
or our legal counsel this applies to

65
00:04:17,919 --> 00:04:21,639
everybody um please do not ask the

66
00:04:19,919 --> 00:04:25,000
petitioner staff members uh any

67
00:04:21,639 --> 00:04:26,639
questions or make comments um we uh in

68
00:04:25,000 --> 00:04:28,800
the order of presentation here we are

69
00:04:26,639 --> 00:04:31,080
still uh considering Appel and testimony

70
00:04:28,800 --> 00:04:33,680
and Evans given by Mr Blitz once that's

71
00:04:31,080 --> 00:04:35,479
completed I will move to Mr pound M Mr

72
00:04:33,680 --> 00:04:38,440
pounds for his testimony and evidence

73
00:04:35,479 --> 00:04:40,039
from any staff um at which point in time

74
00:04:38,440 --> 00:04:43,440
after all that the public will get their

75
00:04:40,039 --> 00:04:45,520
chance to um be heard um once the public

76
00:04:43,440 --> 00:04:47,000
is done we'll move to summary statements

77
00:04:45,520 --> 00:04:49,400
um at which point we will close off and

78
00:04:47,000 --> 00:04:50,800
begin of deliberation so as normal if

79
00:04:49,400 --> 00:04:53,600
you came to have your voice heard it

80
00:04:50,800 --> 00:04:55,520
will probably not happen tonight uh we

81
00:04:53,600 --> 00:04:56,840
are accepting written comments at any

82
00:04:55,520 --> 00:04:58,440
time whether you'd like to leave them

83
00:04:56,840 --> 00:05:00,600
here with us in paper form or submit

84
00:04:58,440 --> 00:05:02,520
them via email to the Town staff members

85
00:05:00,600 --> 00:05:04,600
any of those are fine or you can hold

86
00:05:02,520 --> 00:05:07,479
them and give them verbally whenever it

87
00:05:04,600 --> 00:05:10,720
is time for um public

88
00:05:07,479 --> 00:05:12,560
statements uh okay

89
00:05:10,720 --> 00:05:15,280
um

90
00:05:12,560 --> 00:05:18,360
yes heard something I didn't fully

91
00:05:15,280 --> 00:05:20,960
understand yeah you you said that those

92
00:05:18,360 --> 00:05:24,520
that signed up as a party would be able

93
00:05:20,960 --> 00:05:26,479
to ask questions of a someone who

94
00:05:24,520 --> 00:05:28,880
testifies at the conclusion of their

95
00:05:26,479 --> 00:05:31,160
testimony yep at the conclusion of

96
00:05:28,880 --> 00:05:33,880
testimony of their testimony yes and and

97
00:05:31,160 --> 00:05:35,680
you and you uh you said that all

98
00:05:33,880 --> 00:05:37,919
questions had to be directed to the

99
00:05:35,680 --> 00:05:41,880
board so I wouldn't be asked yeah you

100
00:05:37,919 --> 00:05:44,520
you kind of um yes you could also said

101
00:05:41,880 --> 00:05:46,319
that public comment wouldn't be tonight

102
00:05:44,520 --> 00:05:48,240
but it sounds like if he ends his

103
00:05:46,319 --> 00:05:50,520
testimony yes public comment would be

104
00:05:48,240 --> 00:05:52,080
tonight it's not necessarily comment but

105
00:05:50,520 --> 00:05:55,520
it's questioning the questioning the

106
00:05:52,080 --> 00:05:58,479
witness is permitted yes questioning the

107
00:05:55,520 --> 00:06:01,479
W thank you questioning the witness

108
00:05:58,479 --> 00:06:06,000
about the witnesses testimony

109
00:06:01,479 --> 00:06:08,720
yes uh okay thank you yeah um so uh

110
00:06:06,000 --> 00:06:11,440
before we continue with this actual case

111
00:06:08,720 --> 00:06:13,800
we are still kind of in a holding

112
00:06:11,440 --> 00:06:16,599
pattern to address an objection that was

113
00:06:13,800 --> 00:06:19,039
raised by uh Mr pounds on November

114
00:06:16,599 --> 00:06:20,919
14th um at the conclusion of our last

115
00:06:19,039 --> 00:06:25,319
meeting we decided that we were going to

116
00:06:20,919 --> 00:06:31,759
pull up a video um from uh the sessions

117
00:06:25,319 --> 00:06:34,120
at which um Mr Blitz and others the oath

118
00:06:31,759 --> 00:06:35,720
um and we were going to review that

119
00:06:34,120 --> 00:06:37,039
video and then the board was going to

120
00:06:35,720 --> 00:06:39,960
discuss whether or not we thought there

121
00:06:37,039 --> 00:06:42,000
were any problems um whether or not Mr

122
00:06:39,960 --> 00:06:45,720
Mr blit Mr Blitz did or did not take the

123
00:06:42,000 --> 00:06:47,560
oath um to tell the whole truth and all

124
00:06:45,720 --> 00:06:50,840
that jazz so

125
00:06:47,560 --> 00:06:53,639
um we are going to pass it off to St uh

126
00:06:50,840 --> 00:06:56,080
Town staff to play a video that is as

127
00:06:53,639 --> 00:06:58,560
condensed as we could possibly make it

128
00:06:56,080 --> 00:07:00,479
concerning all relevant sections

129
00:06:58,560 --> 00:07:03,000
regarding

130
00:07:00,479 --> 00:07:06,440
uh the oath to Witnesses or to members

131
00:07:03,000 --> 00:07:09,080
in this room so uh let's start

132
00:07:06,440 --> 00:07:10,680
there just getting that into the record

133
00:07:09,080 --> 00:07:14,720
that's why I call them proforma these

134
00:07:10,680 --> 00:07:14,720
first three are just kind of need to

135
00:07:15,479 --> 00:07:23,080
be so I'm GNA begin um testimony

136
00:07:20,000 --> 00:07:25,280
um with uh Mr Paul Woodburn um Paul

137
00:07:23,080 --> 00:07:27,000
would you've come up to the lecturn to

138
00:07:25,280 --> 00:07:28,319
answer these questions so that you can

139
00:07:27,000 --> 00:07:31,319
be

140
00:07:28,319 --> 00:07:31,319
heard

141
00:07:32,560 --> 00:07:36,039
for anybody attending and the and

142
00:07:34,720 --> 00:07:37,479
speaking from the audience Please be

143
00:07:36,039 --> 00:07:40,680
aware that we're going to do a blanket

144
00:07:37,479 --> 00:07:42,759
swearing in right now okay um if you

145
00:07:40,680 --> 00:07:46,000
come and speak to the lect and please uh

146
00:07:42,759 --> 00:07:48,520
note your name down on uh any any sheet

147
00:07:46,000 --> 00:07:49,840
um along with your name address and uh

148
00:07:48,520 --> 00:07:52,800
who you represent or if you're speaking

149
00:07:49,840 --> 00:07:54,280
on your own behalf obviously witness um

150
00:07:52,800 --> 00:07:56,560
so as for the swearing in for anybody

151
00:07:54,280 --> 00:07:58,319
stepping to lean please know uh do you

152
00:07:56,560 --> 00:07:59,840
solemnly swear or affirm under the

153
00:07:58,319 --> 00:08:01,440
penalty of perjury that the testimony

154
00:07:59,840 --> 00:08:03,240
you're about to give and the responses

155
00:08:01,440 --> 00:08:04,479
and statements you're about to make be

156
00:08:03,240 --> 00:08:07,639
the whole truth and nothing but the

157
00:08:04,479 --> 00:08:07,639
truth I

158
00:08:07,879 --> 00:08:12,159
do thank

159
00:08:10,240 --> 00:08:17,280
you

160
00:08:12,159 --> 00:08:18,800
um Mr Woodburn um just if Mr W is G be

161
00:08:17,280 --> 00:08:20,560
testifying as a fact when this we can

162
00:08:18,800 --> 00:08:22,680
proceed forward but if he indeed is

163
00:08:20,560 --> 00:08:24,720
going to be expressing an opinion such

164
00:08:22,680 --> 00:08:26,879
as an expert witness obviously we're

165
00:08:24,720 --> 00:08:28,080
going to be you know objecting to that

166
00:08:26,879 --> 00:08:29,919
as well as the fact that I'm probably

167
00:08:28,080 --> 00:08:33,519
going to avoid the error uh

168
00:08:29,919 --> 00:08:35,479
uh on his request to issue any opinions

169
00:08:33,519 --> 00:08:37,919
are there any further questions aside

170
00:08:35,479 --> 00:08:40,120
from based upon his limited testimony of

171
00:08:37,919 --> 00:08:41,440
what he's gone so far nothing more

172
00:08:40,120 --> 00:08:43,240
obviously there will be more when he

173
00:08:41,440 --> 00:08:45,760
comes we'll have another chance when he

174
00:08:43,240 --> 00:08:50,040
adds a substantial

175
00:08:45,760 --> 00:08:51,200
commentary thank you Mr Woodburn um so

176
00:08:50,040 --> 00:08:53,800
the board's going to need to consider

177
00:08:51,200 --> 00:08:55,680
the legal context of what is happening

178
00:08:53,800 --> 00:08:58,200
in this case so I'll I'll start with an

179
00:08:55,680 --> 00:09:01,640
explanation of that

180
00:08:58,200 --> 00:09:03,720
um with are you testifying no I'm giving

181
00:09:01,640 --> 00:09:07,880
the pre I'm giving my

182
00:09:03,720 --> 00:09:11,920
presentation and my please let me speak

183
00:09:07,880 --> 00:09:14,480
Mr cannot give you legal opinions uh

184
00:09:11,920 --> 00:09:16,440
with regard to that as Mr susman but as

185
00:09:14,480 --> 00:09:18,480
far as him you know having legal

186
00:09:16,440 --> 00:09:20,760
opinions to the board that's that's

187
00:09:18,480 --> 00:09:24,279
completely improper I'm going to object

188
00:09:20,760 --> 00:09:26,480
right now to the entire process of of

189
00:09:24,279 --> 00:09:30,160
interrupting our case at every turn

190
00:09:26,480 --> 00:09:32,360
solely for the reason of interruption

191
00:09:30,160 --> 00:09:36,720
objection that's not I am presenting an

192
00:09:32,360 --> 00:09:36,720
argument can I please finish

193
00:09:36,880 --> 00:09:42,200
present I get to make a

194
00:09:39,480 --> 00:09:46,480
presentation as I bring in evidence I

195
00:09:42,200 --> 00:09:48,920
can explain the legal context of what we

196
00:09:46,480 --> 00:09:51,160
our cases about to make the legal

197
00:09:48,920 --> 00:09:53,079
argument so that you understand the

198
00:09:51,160 --> 00:09:56,279
context of all the evidence that will

199
00:09:53,079 --> 00:09:59,240
come in a big part of this case is a

200
00:09:56,279 --> 00:10:02,240
legal argument this is an appeal on

201
00:09:59,240 --> 00:10:04,399
alleged error so I need to explain to

202
00:10:02,240 --> 00:10:06,920
you as a board and I need to convince

203
00:10:04,399 --> 00:10:09,279
you if I'm going to be successful of the

204
00:10:06,920 --> 00:10:11,360
merits of those things we're going to be

205
00:10:09,279 --> 00:10:12,440
bringing a lot of legal arguments

206
00:10:11,360 --> 00:10:14,800
because that's what you're going to have

207
00:10:12,440 --> 00:10:16,480
to decide you're going to have to decide

208
00:10:14,800 --> 00:10:18,360
whether the Planning and Zoning

209
00:10:16,480 --> 00:10:20,200
commission and the zoning administrators

210
00:10:18,360 --> 00:10:23,519
failure to process site plans and the

211
00:10:20,200 --> 00:10:26,320
reasons for that were in error that's

212
00:10:23,519 --> 00:10:28,480
the case so I'm going to be talking a

213
00:10:26,320 --> 00:10:30,240
lot of Law and explaining what our

214
00:10:28,480 --> 00:10:33,320
position on the law is I'm not giving an

215
00:10:30,240 --> 00:10:35,880
opinion to you about the law Mr susman

216
00:10:33,320 --> 00:10:37,959
can always weigh in if you have

217
00:10:35,880 --> 00:10:39,880
questions about the law or questions

218
00:10:37,959 --> 00:10:42,120
about what I say but I get to present a

219
00:10:39,880 --> 00:10:44,760
case and it shouldn't be interrupted at

220
00:10:42,120 --> 00:10:48,200
every turn when all I'm doing is

221
00:10:44,760 --> 00:10:48,200
presenting basic

222
00:10:50,639 --> 00:10:56,519
case how you continue on this okay um

223
00:10:53,880 --> 00:10:59,560
before going uh back to where we left

224
00:10:56,519 --> 00:11:02,399
off um Mr pounds has requested

225
00:10:59,560 --> 00:11:04,279
uh to enter an objection before we begin

226
00:11:02,399 --> 00:11:07,399
thank you this is an objection I wanted

227
00:11:04,279 --> 00:11:09,639
to make for you know future purposes for

228
00:11:07,399 --> 00:11:13,079
uh appeal purposes and also for the

229
00:11:09,639 --> 00:11:14,760
status of the hearing itself so um uh Mr

230
00:11:13,079 --> 00:11:16,519
chair uh members of the council good

231
00:11:14,760 --> 00:11:18,959
evening my name is Todd pounds and I

232
00:11:16,519 --> 00:11:21,000
represent the town of chesp beach

233
00:11:18,959 --> 00:11:23,720
basically uh Mr chair members of the

234
00:11:21,000 --> 00:11:26,480
council this is a hearing uh you know as

235
00:11:23,720 --> 00:11:29,160
all of you know uh a hearing is designed

236
00:11:26,480 --> 00:11:31,480
to have testimony which is sworn which

237
00:11:29,160 --> 00:11:35,200
is presented which is uh given by

238
00:11:31,480 --> 00:11:37,399
individuals under oath uh in fact Mr

239
00:11:35,200 --> 00:11:39,519
susman raised it a couple of hearings

240
00:11:37,399 --> 00:11:41,600
ago asking Mr Blitz indeed if he was

241
00:11:39,519 --> 00:11:43,519
going to be having sworn testimony

242
00:11:41,600 --> 00:11:45,760
presented uh and also there's been

243
00:11:43,519 --> 00:11:47,560
members of the public who have also

244
00:11:45,760 --> 00:11:50,279
asked whether indeed testimony was going

245
00:11:47,560 --> 00:11:53,800
to be presented that hasn't happened uh

246
00:11:50,279 --> 00:11:56,040
basically we have been know listening to

247
00:11:53,800 --> 00:11:58,560
uh where we spent what is now multiple

248
00:11:56,040 --> 00:12:01,079
hours uh which is going to be more

249
00:11:58,560 --> 00:12:02,800
multiple couple hours tonight uh which

250
00:12:01,079 --> 00:12:06,279
I'm going to use the term droning on and

251
00:12:02,800 --> 00:12:09,120
on regarding n a non-sworn testimony

252
00:12:06,279 --> 00:12:11,639
with regard to um items which are

253
00:12:09,120 --> 00:12:14,360
basically his opinion uh this is this is

254
00:12:11,639 --> 00:12:18,120
not evidence uh as a result none of this

255
00:12:14,360 --> 00:12:20,279
is evidence uh going on and on uh does

256
00:12:18,120 --> 00:12:22,920
not present evidence especially when you

257
00:12:20,279 --> 00:12:26,480
know the individual giving this is not

258
00:12:22,920 --> 00:12:29,920
sworn and inde this is not evidence for

259
00:12:26,480 --> 00:12:32,800
you considering at all with regard to

260
00:12:29,920 --> 00:12:34,880
really any any typee of deliberation or

261
00:12:32,800 --> 00:12:36,440
any type of giving in opinions at all

262
00:12:34,880 --> 00:12:39,240
these are in essence arguments and

263
00:12:36,440 --> 00:12:41,240
opinions but it is not evidence um in

264
00:12:39,240 --> 00:12:43,519
fact any evidence which just been

265
00:12:41,240 --> 00:12:46,680
presented uh so far in the multiple

266
00:12:43,519 --> 00:12:48,800
hours is almost none uh because if you

267
00:12:46,680 --> 00:12:51,560
only look at what the sworn testimony

268
00:12:48,800 --> 00:12:53,639
would have been furthermore uh an

269
00:12:51,560 --> 00:12:57,079
exhibit book was presented uh which

270
00:12:53,639 --> 00:12:59,279
shows minutes uh of hearings before the

271
00:12:57,079 --> 00:13:01,040
Town Council uh and also before the

272
00:12:59,279 --> 00:13:03,240
board of uh before the Planning

273
00:13:01,040 --> 00:13:05,880
Commission well those minutes you know

274
00:13:03,240 --> 00:13:08,360
theoretically are here say uh because in

275
00:13:05,880 --> 00:13:11,199
essence they're uh they were developed

276
00:13:08,360 --> 00:13:15,360
and written by someone else who observed

277
00:13:11,199 --> 00:13:18,000
it but but and they are not in essence

278
00:13:15,360 --> 00:13:20,680
uh evidence in and of themselves so any

279
00:13:18,000 --> 00:13:23,639
of that should be also considered

280
00:13:20,680 --> 00:13:25,440
irrelevant uh the video which we saw

281
00:13:23,639 --> 00:13:28,560
which was a video of a council you know

282
00:13:25,440 --> 00:13:31,120
meeting goes on to state that indeed

283
00:13:28,560 --> 00:13:32,720
what their opinions are and and what's

284
00:13:31,120 --> 00:13:36,279
opinions going on with regard to the

285
00:13:32,720 --> 00:13:38,240
council but indeed is not uh evidence

286
00:13:36,279 --> 00:13:40,120
unless in indeed it is for the

287
00:13:38,240 --> 00:13:42,839
considerations and ultimately what the

288
00:13:40,120 --> 00:13:46,639
decisions uh would would be so in

289
00:13:42,839 --> 00:13:49,760
essence we uh uh are have and we will

290
00:13:46,639 --> 00:13:51,720
continue to spend uh many hours uh

291
00:13:49,760 --> 00:13:54,839
listening to Mr Blitz basically go on

292
00:13:51,720 --> 00:13:56,880
and on about nothing more in his opinion

293
00:13:54,839 --> 00:13:58,880
uh in his in his belief that's not

294
00:13:56,880 --> 00:14:00,800
evidence that is not evidence for you to

295
00:13:58,880 --> 00:14:03,639
be considering that's not evidence for

296
00:14:00,800 --> 00:14:06,160
you know you to in any way be reviewing

297
00:14:03,639 --> 00:14:08,320
uh with regard to this case this is uh

298
00:14:06,160 --> 00:14:10,720
nothing but UNS sworen statements of

299
00:14:08,320 --> 00:14:12,240
someone who is not a party uh and there

300
00:14:10,720 --> 00:14:16,519
nothing more than expressing their

301
00:14:12,240 --> 00:14:18,399
opinion but worse what concerns me is

302
00:14:16,519 --> 00:14:20,360
half truth which is given with regard to

303
00:14:18,399 --> 00:14:23,320
these opinions you know we spent a half

304
00:14:20,360 --> 00:14:28,120
an hour last meeting talking about the

305
00:14:23,320 --> 00:14:30,639
referendum under C- 311 and how certain

306
00:14:28,120 --> 00:14:33,800
rights Mr Donovan were violated as a

307
00:14:30,639 --> 00:14:36,320
result of this him not being able to do

308
00:14:33,800 --> 00:14:38,959
certain things well under the you know

309
00:14:36,320 --> 00:14:42,800
and and the board you know let the

310
00:14:38,959 --> 00:14:44,800
testimony go on but in essence the H the

311
00:14:42,800 --> 00:14:48,240
Hal truth was the fact that he didn't

312
00:14:44,800 --> 00:14:49,959
have any rights under C11 okay basically

313
00:14:48,240 --> 00:14:51,920
in order for him to have a right any

314
00:14:49,959 --> 00:14:53,680
rights under the referendum Not only

315
00:14:51,920 --> 00:14:56,000
would have to he would have to be

316
00:14:53,680 --> 00:14:59,040
involved but also it would have to be at

317
00:14:56,000 --> 00:15:02,399
least 50% of the total number of Voters

318
00:14:59,040 --> 00:15:05,839
who voted in the last regular preceding

319
00:15:02,399 --> 00:15:07,320
regular Town election uh as such you

320
00:15:05,839 --> 00:15:08,800
know if if we're going to be making

321
00:15:07,320 --> 00:15:11,480
these statements and Broad statements

322
00:15:08,800 --> 00:15:14,480
going on expressing opinions which are

323
00:15:11,480 --> 00:15:16,519
un not sworn testimony you know we at

324
00:15:14,480 --> 00:15:18,320
least have to be tell telling the truth

325
00:15:16,519 --> 00:15:20,519
with regard to what's in the ordinance

326
00:15:18,320 --> 00:15:22,199
as opposed to in essence only picking

327
00:15:20,519 --> 00:15:27,199
and choosing things that he believes is

328
00:15:22,199 --> 00:15:27,199
his in his best interest um

329
00:15:27,600 --> 00:15:30,600
uh

330
00:15:32,480 --> 00:15:37,880
so again uh the fact that we are

331
00:15:34,560 --> 00:15:40,360
spending multiple hours with as limited

332
00:15:37,880 --> 00:15:43,120
to almost no evidence actual evidence

333
00:15:40,360 --> 00:15:45,519
being presented to the board other than

334
00:15:43,120 --> 00:15:47,240
uh unsworn testimony is simply not

335
00:15:45,519 --> 00:15:50,680
proper and I'm making the objection uh

336
00:15:47,240 --> 00:15:52,480
with regard to that also you know uh uh

337
00:15:50,680 --> 00:15:55,680
various statements were made with regard

338
00:15:52,480 --> 00:15:58,839
to the book uh for the statutes and code

339
00:15:55,680 --> 00:16:01,360
and also uh sections were stated to the

340
00:15:58,839 --> 00:16:03,440
board that in essence you know for

341
00:16:01,360 --> 00:16:05,759
opinions by the court of appeals the

342
00:16:03,440 --> 00:16:06,959
court of appeals was the old Court in

343
00:16:05,759 --> 00:16:09,399
the highest court in the state of

344
00:16:06,959 --> 00:16:12,880
Maryland now called the Supreme Court uh

345
00:16:09,399 --> 00:16:14,800
in the cases that that were were and and

346
00:16:12,880 --> 00:16:18,000
and it was asked that indeed you make an

347
00:16:14,800 --> 00:16:19,920
interpretation as to the opinions of the

348
00:16:18,000 --> 00:16:21,720
highest court in the state of Maryland

349
00:16:19,920 --> 00:16:24,399
well ladies and gentlemen if you're a

350
00:16:21,720 --> 00:16:26,199
judge in the in the court you can't do

351
00:16:24,399 --> 00:16:28,920
that okay you know you you're making

352
00:16:26,199 --> 00:16:32,319
interpretations as to what the highest

353
00:16:28,920 --> 00:16:35,040
the uh state says for a judge is

354
00:16:32,319 --> 00:16:37,000
improper especially even more improper

355
00:16:35,040 --> 00:16:39,880
would be that of an administrative board

356
00:16:37,000 --> 00:16:42,480
so there and even worse than that was

357
00:16:39,880 --> 00:16:46,120
the fact that and I wrote it down he

358
00:16:42,480 --> 00:16:49,959
said that in in essence you know if you

359
00:16:46,120 --> 00:16:51,319
uh uh look at I want to get the exact

360
00:16:49,959 --> 00:16:54,040
phrasing that was

361
00:16:51,319 --> 00:16:56,839
done it was asking you to follow the

362
00:16:54,040 --> 00:16:59,199
logic okay which says well the case

363
00:16:56,839 --> 00:17:00,360
isn't on point but I want to show to you

364
00:16:59,199 --> 00:17:02,079
and you should interpret what the

365
00:17:00,360 --> 00:17:03,800
highest court in this court is uh

366
00:17:02,079 --> 00:17:06,520
staying for an Essence for some

367
00:17:03,800 --> 00:17:09,880
particular purpose I me that is just

368
00:17:06,520 --> 00:17:12,439
absolutely completely uh improper to be

369
00:17:09,880 --> 00:17:16,199
doing any of that so basically you know

370
00:17:12,439 --> 00:17:18,839
what uh what in essence the applicant is

371
00:17:16,199 --> 00:17:21,000
ultimately ex asking you to do is to do

372
00:17:18,839 --> 00:17:22,319
things which are beyond your ability uh

373
00:17:21,000 --> 00:17:24,439
and the ability of an administrative

374
00:17:22,319 --> 00:17:27,839
board to review uh things that are not

375
00:17:24,439 --> 00:17:30,480
on point you know with regard to that uh

376
00:17:27,839 --> 00:17:32,679
that inter ration of that language so

377
00:17:30,480 --> 00:17:35,840
basically uh preliminarily I'm going to

378
00:17:32,679 --> 00:17:37,440
move that in essence all the testimony

379
00:17:35,840 --> 00:17:40,559
was stricken should be stricken from

380
00:17:37,440 --> 00:17:43,080
last meeting because it is nothing but

381
00:17:40,559 --> 00:17:46,080
expressions of opinion and statements of

382
00:17:43,080 --> 00:17:48,480
someone who's unsworn someone who is uh

383
00:17:46,080 --> 00:17:51,480
not a party to the case and someone who

384
00:17:48,480 --> 00:17:54,200
is just uh stating his opinions as to

385
00:17:51,480 --> 00:17:56,679
any testimony which which should be in

386
00:17:54,200 --> 00:18:01,240
the proper uh way that a hearing should

387
00:17:56,679 --> 00:18:01,240
be conducted thank you thank you one

388
00:18:08,600 --> 00:18:14,000
moment at the first hearing an oath was

389
00:18:11,919 --> 00:18:16,440
administered to people in

390
00:18:14,000 --> 00:18:20,200
attendance my recollection and please

391
00:18:16,440 --> 00:18:22,120
tell me if I'm wrong that you also uh SW

392
00:18:20,200 --> 00:18:24,840
it to

393
00:18:22,120 --> 00:18:27,039
that I recollection correct or wrong it

394
00:18:24,840 --> 00:18:27,039
is

395
00:18:27,320 --> 00:18:31,400
correct

396
00:18:29,039 --> 00:18:33,480
I'm going to be calling Mr Blitz as a

397
00:18:31,400 --> 00:18:34,640
witness I'm going to be calling Mr Blitz

398
00:18:33,480 --> 00:18:36,720
as a

399
00:18:34,640 --> 00:18:40,720
witness that's up to

400
00:18:36,720 --> 00:18:43,080
you um in my opinion this issue would

401
00:18:40,720 --> 00:18:45,760
not have occurred if a formal ordinance

402
00:18:43,080 --> 00:18:48,000
had been used rather than a simple

403
00:18:45,760 --> 00:18:49,760
resolution Mr Blitz is going to State

404
00:18:48,000 --> 00:18:51,880
his opinion we need to designate as an

405
00:18:49,760 --> 00:18:53,400
expert okay I'll be frank I'm sitting

406
00:18:51,880 --> 00:18:55,559
here wondering and I'm going to have the

407
00:18:53,400 --> 00:18:58,000
video going forward I don't remember him

408
00:18:55,559 --> 00:19:00,559
being sworn in at the beginning and if

409
00:18:58,000 --> 00:19:02,600
he and if he represented that he was and

410
00:19:00,559 --> 00:19:04,120
he wasn't we're going to we're going to

411
00:19:02,600 --> 00:19:05,400
be addressing that as another problem

412
00:19:04,120 --> 00:19:07,280
but if he's going to be expressing his

413
00:19:05,400 --> 00:19:10,080
opinion at this point he's gonna be

414
00:19:07,280 --> 00:19:12,679
designated as an expert and I I'll

415
00:19:10,080 --> 00:19:14,720
withdraw the opinion it's not

416
00:19:12,679 --> 00:19:17,880
critical and if you would like to swear

417
00:19:14,720 --> 00:19:20,280
me now we can do that start all over

418
00:19:17,880 --> 00:19:22,880
again with regard the T no I'm merely

419
00:19:20,280 --> 00:19:23,919
saying if you if you have if the board

420
00:19:22,880 --> 00:19:27,080
not you

421
00:19:23,919 --> 00:19:29,159
Mr if the board has questions I I'll

422
00:19:27,080 --> 00:19:31,640
clearly be sworn again if if that the

423
00:19:29,159 --> 00:19:33,600
board feels it's necessary and just so I

424
00:19:31,640 --> 00:19:36,320
have this right the opinion is withdrawn

425
00:19:33,600 --> 00:19:36,320
we're continuing

426
00:19:41,159 --> 00:19:49,559
on uh okay um so at this

427
00:19:45,440 --> 00:19:54,440
point um I think the board has a couple

428
00:19:49,559 --> 00:19:56,520
options um the first one I'm

429
00:19:54,440 --> 00:20:00,200
yeah

430
00:19:56,520 --> 00:20:02,480
okay first um I'm going to formally

431
00:20:00,200 --> 00:20:04,080
object to the playing of the video

432
00:20:02,480 --> 00:20:06,600
without including the clips that I

433
00:20:04,080 --> 00:20:11,120
requested be

434
00:20:06,600 --> 00:20:13,799
added uh one of those clips was

435
00:20:11,120 --> 00:20:13,799
testimony

436
00:20:14,440 --> 00:20:21,400
from I believe it was October 30th I've

437
00:20:18,559 --> 00:20:21,400
got it written down hold

438
00:20:26,360 --> 00:20:33,240
on where

439
00:20:29,720 --> 00:20:37,640
Mr pound I mean Mr suspen interrupted to

440
00:20:33,240 --> 00:20:38,440
ask whether I was offering evidence and

441
00:20:37,640 --> 00:20:41,440
I

442
00:20:38,440 --> 00:20:44,080
submitted uh to them at that time that I

443
00:20:41,440 --> 00:20:48,080
had been sworn

444
00:20:44,080 --> 00:20:51,280
and agreed to be uh sworn again that's

445
00:20:48,080 --> 00:20:54,880
not the clip that was there in

446
00:20:51,280 --> 00:20:58,480
addition he just had played the entire

447
00:20:54,880 --> 00:21:01,760
argument of Mr pounds on the motion

448
00:20:58,480 --> 00:21:04,120
without including my

449
00:21:01,760 --> 00:21:06,720
counterargument it's simply unfair for

450
00:21:04,120 --> 00:21:10,440
the board to sit there and listen

451
00:21:06,720 --> 00:21:13,159
to an argument that wasn't about the the

452
00:21:10,440 --> 00:21:16,840
swearing in but was all about the case

453
00:21:13,159 --> 00:21:19,039
and his opinion Mr pound's opinion that

454
00:21:16,840 --> 00:21:21,000
what I've been providing is not

455
00:21:19,039 --> 00:21:23,960
testimony if it wasn't testimony you

456
00:21:21,000 --> 00:21:26,679
wouldn't need to be sworn in I agree

457
00:21:23,960 --> 00:21:29,000
that 95% of what I've provided has not

458
00:21:26,679 --> 00:21:31,240
been testimony it has been legal

459
00:21:29,000 --> 00:21:33,360
argument that doesn't need to be sworn

460
00:21:31,240 --> 00:21:36,240
in

461
00:21:33,360 --> 00:21:39,559
so first I I make that objection with

462
00:21:36,240 --> 00:21:42,279
respect to the failure to provide the

463
00:21:39,559 --> 00:21:43,440
information that I asked to be included

464
00:21:42,279 --> 00:21:45,120
this

465
00:21:43,440 --> 00:21:48,360
morning

466
00:21:45,120 --> 00:21:50,679
um second I'd like to Mr pounds has made

467
00:21:48,360 --> 00:21:54,520
a motion to exclude

468
00:21:50,679 --> 00:21:57,559
evidence that's what this motion

469
00:21:54,520 --> 00:22:01,039
is um as the clip showed there was a

470
00:21:57,559 --> 00:22:03,360
blanket squaring in of everyone with no

471
00:22:01,039 --> 00:22:06,159
formality as to indicate who was being

472
00:22:03,360 --> 00:22:09,120
sworn in the only person that responded

473
00:22:06,159 --> 00:22:11,400
at that time was Mr Woodburn at the

474
00:22:09,120 --> 00:22:14,000
lectern but that blanking blanket

475
00:22:11,400 --> 00:22:16,240
swearing in included everyone who was to

476
00:22:14,000 --> 00:22:19,039
testify including members of the

477
00:22:16,240 --> 00:22:21,200
public there was no formality of verbal

478
00:22:19,039 --> 00:22:24,039
response standing or raising one's hand

479
00:22:21,200 --> 00:22:25,919
required of any of these parties but

480
00:22:24,039 --> 00:22:29,640
most important for the purp purposes of

481
00:22:25,919 --> 00:22:31,320
Mr pound's motion there was no formality

482
00:22:29,640 --> 00:22:33,400
as to the identity of those who were

483
00:22:31,320 --> 00:22:35,000
being sworn you had a bunch of people

484
00:22:33,400 --> 00:22:36,320
out in the public who were also being

485
00:22:35,000 --> 00:22:38,919
sworn at the same

486
00:22:36,320 --> 00:22:40,480
time do we have any practical way of

487
00:22:38,919 --> 00:22:42,799
testing whether members of the public

488
00:22:40,480 --> 00:22:45,520
were properly sworn in during that

489
00:22:42,799 --> 00:22:48,520
blanket swearing in other than their

490
00:22:45,520 --> 00:22:51,120
presence none of them said I do or make

491
00:22:48,520 --> 00:22:54,840
any other verbal indication that was

492
00:22:51,120 --> 00:22:57,400
demonstrated their oath as in that

493
00:22:54,840 --> 00:22:59,480
clip I believe I was sworn in with

494
00:22:57,400 --> 00:23:01,880
everybody else s in the blanket swearing

495
00:22:59,480 --> 00:23:04,159
in and the rod and Rio can't be

496
00:23:01,880 --> 00:23:06,880
prejudiced by the lack of formality that

497
00:23:04,159 --> 00:23:09,520
this board employed to exclude some

498
00:23:06,880 --> 00:23:11,960
witnesses over others or some testimony

499
00:23:09,520 --> 00:23:14,640
over others all of whom were subject to

500
00:23:11,960 --> 00:23:18,120
the same blanket swearing in

501
00:23:14,640 --> 00:23:20,120
process you will notice that Mr Donovan

502
00:23:18,120 --> 00:23:22,679
was also not standing or taking any

503
00:23:20,120 --> 00:23:25,600
demonstrable Act of formality with

504
00:23:22,679 --> 00:23:27,360
respect to the blanket swearing in yet

505
00:23:25,600 --> 00:23:29,240
he was allowed to testify on October

506
00:23:27,360 --> 00:23:32,320
30th here ing based upon the prior

507
00:23:29,240 --> 00:23:35,600
blanket swearing in of all the witnesses

508
00:23:32,320 --> 00:23:36,799
on September 19th the only standard was

509
00:23:35,600 --> 00:23:39,200
whether he was present during the

510
00:23:36,799 --> 00:23:41,279
blanket swearing in which Mr susman at

511
00:23:39,200 --> 00:23:44,159
that time confirmed prior to the start

512
00:23:41,279 --> 00:23:44,159
of Mr Donovan's

513
00:23:44,400 --> 00:23:50,880
testimony later during the presentation

514
00:23:48,000 --> 00:23:52,799
um in the hearing of September 19th Mr

515
00:23:50,880 --> 00:23:54,520
susman asked if I was going to be

516
00:23:52,799 --> 00:23:56,360
providing the evidence of a statement I

517
00:23:54,520 --> 00:23:57,919
just made about the lateness of the

518
00:23:56,360 --> 00:24:00,880
comprehensive plan that's the one I was

519
00:23:57,919 --> 00:24:03,400
referring to that I asked to be

520
00:24:00,880 --> 00:24:05,279
included this is where I made a mistake

521
00:24:03,400 --> 00:24:06,720
because I should have simply said yes we

522
00:24:05,279 --> 00:24:09,480
were going to introduce an ordinance and

523
00:24:06,720 --> 00:24:12,960
resolution that adopted the 2010 and

524
00:24:09,480 --> 00:24:15,200
2022 plan uh which were eventually

525
00:24:12,960 --> 00:24:19,120
introduced and admitted is exhibit 31

526
00:24:15,200 --> 00:24:21,480
that showed those dates um furthermore

527
00:24:19,120 --> 00:24:24,240
because it involved official actions of

528
00:24:21,480 --> 00:24:25,840
agencies of the town of chesek beach the

529
00:24:24,240 --> 00:24:28,200
board could simply have taken judicial

530
00:24:25,840 --> 00:24:30,600
notice of those instead of pointing that

531
00:24:28,200 --> 00:24:33,520
out I proferred that I believed I had

532
00:24:30,600 --> 00:24:35,960
been sworn in but offered to be reworn

533
00:24:33,520 --> 00:24:39,360
right then and there I raised my right

534
00:24:35,960 --> 00:24:42,919
hand I asked I even asked the board as

535
00:24:39,360 --> 00:24:44,559
they moved past that question whether we

536
00:24:42,919 --> 00:24:46,679
were okay with

537
00:24:44,559 --> 00:24:49,640
whether there was an issue of me being

538
00:24:46,679 --> 00:24:51,320
sworn before proceeding and the didn't

539
00:24:49,640 --> 00:24:52,760
get a response from the board primarily

540
00:24:51,320 --> 00:24:54,600
because Mr pounds continued with a

541
00:24:52,760 --> 00:24:56,240
different argument at the

542
00:24:54,600 --> 00:24:58,360
time

543
00:24:56,240 --> 00:25:00,559
um importantly

544
00:24:58,360 --> 00:25:03,960
Mr pounds did not raise the issue of me

545
00:25:00,559 --> 00:25:06,640
being sworn in then or the form of the

546
00:25:03,960 --> 00:25:08,240
swearing in when it was clearly time to

547
00:25:06,640 --> 00:25:10,720
do

548
00:25:08,240 --> 00:25:12,760
so there was a substantial degree of

549
00:25:10,720 --> 00:25:15,399
informality in the board's approach to

550
00:25:12,760 --> 00:25:17,240
squaring in and that's fine that H often

551
00:25:15,399 --> 00:25:20,000
happens in administrative hearing

552
00:25:17,240 --> 00:25:23,120
contexts where the rules of evidence and

553
00:25:20,000 --> 00:25:24,960
procedures for Testimony don't apply

554
00:25:23,120 --> 00:25:27,279
they're not the same as what what you

555
00:25:24,960 --> 00:25:30,760
would do in a court your own rule of

556
00:25:27,279 --> 00:25:32,960
procedure in section 14 subsection D

557
00:25:30,760 --> 00:25:34,080
notes that wide latitude that is given

558
00:25:32,960 --> 00:25:36,360
to

559
00:25:34,080 --> 00:25:38,360
Witnesses the rod and reel should not be

560
00:25:36,360 --> 00:25:40,799
prejudiced by the exclusion of evidence

561
00:25:38,360 --> 00:25:43,000
based upon that informality in the

562
00:25:40,799 --> 00:25:45,600
squaring in

563
00:25:43,000 --> 00:25:47,600
process Mr pounds also seeks the

564
00:25:45,600 --> 00:25:49,640
exclusion of all evidence up to the

565
00:25:47,600 --> 00:25:52,159
point in the previous hearing without

566
00:25:49,640 --> 00:25:54,679
distinguishing any of the evidence from

567
00:25:52,159 --> 00:25:57,960
that was offered in Prior hearings the

568
00:25:54,679 --> 00:25:59,919
over breath of his requested relief

569
00:25:57,960 --> 00:26:02,960
excluding all evidence in blanket form

570
00:25:59,919 --> 00:26:02,960
is telling for several

571
00:26:03,360 --> 00:26:08,440
reasons Mr Pal's argument makes to the

572
00:26:06,480 --> 00:26:09,919
asks the board to accept what I believe

573
00:26:08,440 --> 00:26:12,679
is a faulty

574
00:26:09,919 --> 00:26:15,960
premise from the very first hearing and

575
00:26:12,679 --> 00:26:20,640
now again uh not I shouldn't say now in

576
00:26:15,960 --> 00:26:24,559
the clip you just watched which was last

577
00:26:20,640 --> 00:26:27,000
hearing um he conflates the entirety of

578
00:26:24,559 --> 00:26:29,240
my presentation in an administrative

579
00:26:27,000 --> 00:26:31,880
hearing with testimony that would be

580
00:26:29,240 --> 00:26:34,240
need to be sworn it is not testimony to

581
00:26:31,880 --> 00:26:37,200
draw to the board's attention an

582
00:26:34,240 --> 00:26:38,679
ordinance a state statute or case law

583
00:26:37,200 --> 00:26:41,960
and to point out what parts of those

584
00:26:38,679 --> 00:26:43,760
sources of legal Authority uh apply or

585
00:26:41,960 --> 00:26:45,799
relevant to the issues in the case it's

586
00:26:43,760 --> 00:26:48,600
not testimony to explain the meaning of

587
00:26:45,799 --> 00:26:50,960
those legal authorities as the Roden

588
00:26:48,600 --> 00:26:52,919
Regal's position on that it is not

589
00:26:50,960 --> 00:26:54,679
testimony to explain the Roden reel

590
00:26:52,919 --> 00:26:59,799
position on the effect of an ordinance

591
00:26:54,679 --> 00:27:02,080
or statute um in the actions

592
00:26:59,799 --> 00:27:05,039
of administrative

593
00:27:02,080 --> 00:27:07,440
agencies that we are raising the appeal

594
00:27:05,039 --> 00:27:09,559
about it's merely the presentation of

595
00:27:07,440 --> 00:27:11,600
the elements of the argument that

596
00:27:09,559 --> 00:27:13,679
supports the rod reel's position that

597
00:27:11,600 --> 00:27:15,559
there was an administrative error that's

598
00:27:13,679 --> 00:27:18,120
a legal judgment with we're which we're

599
00:27:15,559 --> 00:27:19,720
asking this board to make it's not

600
00:27:18,120 --> 00:27:23,200
testimony when I submit government

601
00:27:19,720 --> 00:27:24,799
documents into evidence we now have 51

602
00:27:23,200 --> 00:27:27,159
exhibits all of which have been

603
00:27:24,799 --> 00:27:29,720
introduced some of which had objections

604
00:27:27,159 --> 00:27:32,799
and were ruled at that time I believe

605
00:27:29,720 --> 00:27:35,080
one or two were the objections were

606
00:27:32,799 --> 00:27:36,919
sustained uh including at the last

607
00:27:35,080 --> 00:27:41,000
hearing

608
00:27:36,919 --> 00:27:43,559
um but we have of all those exhibits

609
00:27:41,000 --> 00:27:45,840
most of them are minutes agendas reports

610
00:27:43,559 --> 00:27:48,120
of public officials to the Town Council

611
00:27:45,840 --> 00:27:50,679
and official correspondence received

612
00:27:48,120 --> 00:27:54,080
from the town you don't need a

613
00:27:50,679 --> 00:27:56,159
sponsoring witness for such documents in

614
00:27:54,080 --> 00:27:59,039
an administrative hearing like you would

615
00:27:56,159 --> 00:28:00,240
in a court case because hearsay isn't an

616
00:27:59,039 --> 00:28:01,640
issue the only reason you need a

617
00:28:00,240 --> 00:28:03,720
sponsoring witness is when there's

618
00:28:01,640 --> 00:28:07,279
hearsay

619
00:28:03,720 --> 00:28:09,080
rules you know typical court case those

620
00:28:07,279 --> 00:28:10,760
government documents can come in usually

621
00:28:09,080 --> 00:28:14,640
by stipulation but also can can be

622
00:28:10,760 --> 00:28:17,039
certified and it comes under a hearsay

623
00:28:14,640 --> 00:28:19,320
exception it's not testimony when I

624
00:28:17,039 --> 00:28:21,600
point out which parts of those documents

625
00:28:19,320 --> 00:28:24,880
I'm drawing the board's testimony to

626
00:28:21,600 --> 00:28:27,480
which is n just I'm just relying on your

627
00:28:24,880 --> 00:28:29,320
memory that's 90% of what I was doing

628
00:28:27,480 --> 00:28:31,799
showing you statutes pointing out what I

629
00:28:29,320 --> 00:28:33,519
think is relevant showing you minutes

630
00:28:31,799 --> 00:28:35,240
pointing out what I think is relevant

631
00:28:33,519 --> 00:28:38,080
those are legal arguments about the

632
00:28:35,240 --> 00:28:38,080
evidence that I just

633
00:28:38,720 --> 00:28:44,559
submitted it's not testimony when I

634
00:28:42,559 --> 00:28:47,799
explain why a document is important to

635
00:28:44,559 --> 00:28:49,080
our case um it's the presentation of the

636
00:28:47,799 --> 00:28:52,519
Ron rail's

637
00:28:49,080 --> 00:28:55,080
lawyer this as I will remind you again

638
00:28:52,519 --> 00:28:56,519
is a challenge the legality of the

639
00:28:55,080 --> 00:28:57,919
failure of the zoning administrator and

640
00:28:56,519 --> 00:29:00,640
planning and zoning Commission

641
00:28:57,919 --> 00:29:03,519
to undertake the required site plan

642
00:29:00,640 --> 00:29:06,200
review so it's not surprising that there

643
00:29:03,519 --> 00:29:09,080
would be a presentation of why various

644
00:29:06,200 --> 00:29:11,960
ordinances and statutes are relevant and

645
00:29:09,080 --> 00:29:11,960
how they impact the

646
00:29:17,799 --> 00:29:23,480
case I'd like to point out that Mr

647
00:29:20,880 --> 00:29:26,080
pound's argument is basically trying to

648
00:29:23,480 --> 00:29:29,159
relitigate the very same questions that

649
00:29:26,080 --> 00:29:31,480
the board has already ruled upon this

650
00:29:29,159 --> 00:29:33,360
was already raised that there were

651
00:29:31,480 --> 00:29:37,120
challenges in the very first

652
00:29:33,360 --> 00:29:37,120
hearing was I

653
00:29:37,200 --> 00:29:42,159
providing evidence should it be admitted

654
00:29:40,120 --> 00:29:45,120
and I made the argument no this is

655
00:29:42,159 --> 00:29:48,120
argument this is me pointing to

656
00:29:45,120 --> 00:29:51,000
obviously the exhibits are evidence my

657
00:29:48,120 --> 00:29:54,399
arguments about those documents are not

658
00:29:51,000 --> 00:29:54,399
testimony they're the

659
00:29:55,760 --> 00:30:00,720
arguments the conse quence of any

660
00:29:58,000 --> 00:30:02,600
failure to properly be sworn had to be

661
00:30:00,720 --> 00:30:04,840
raised at the time I was offering the

662
00:30:02,600 --> 00:30:05,640
evidence to make a motion to exclude

663
00:30:04,840 --> 00:30:08,919
that

664
00:30:05,640 --> 00:30:12,760
evidence and as part of that

665
00:30:08,919 --> 00:30:15,960
objection becomes part of the record for

666
00:30:12,760 --> 00:30:18,480
which any subsequent review determines

667
00:30:15,960 --> 00:30:23,600
whether it should have whether that was

668
00:30:18,480 --> 00:30:23,600
material evidence allowed or not allowed

669
00:30:23,919 --> 00:30:28,640
um the board's own rules of procedure

670
00:30:26,679 --> 00:30:33,039
require the the objections be made in a

671
00:30:28,640 --> 00:30:36,120
timely manner in section 14 subsection e

672
00:30:33,039 --> 00:30:37,960
it reads objections to testimony must be

673
00:30:36,120 --> 00:30:41,000
made at the time the information is

674
00:30:37,960 --> 00:30:43,679
presented or they will be considered

675
00:30:41,000 --> 00:30:45,320
waved Mr pound say now many hearings

676
00:30:43,679 --> 00:30:48,120
later seeking to object to all that

677
00:30:45,320 --> 00:30:50,720
evidence previously admitted without

678
00:30:48,120 --> 00:30:53,240
distinguishing between what needs

679
00:30:50,720 --> 00:30:55,200
testimony and what does not and ignoring

680
00:30:53,240 --> 00:30:58,320
the obligation to raise that objection

681
00:30:55,200 --> 00:31:02,720
at the time and I would as I said he did

682
00:30:58,320 --> 00:31:02,720
raise the objection and was

683
00:31:11,519 --> 00:31:18,919
overruled Hound's also tries to convert

684
00:31:15,159 --> 00:31:20,799
my arguments about case law as legal

685
00:31:18,919 --> 00:31:22,919
opinions as though I'm giving you an

686
00:31:20,799 --> 00:31:26,480
opinion I'm making an

687
00:31:22,919 --> 00:31:28,080
argument the case that he referenced

688
00:31:26,480 --> 00:31:30,080
well he didn't reference the case but

689
00:31:28,080 --> 00:31:31,919
that he was talking to me about talking

690
00:31:30,080 --> 00:31:36,880
about my arguments

691
00:31:31,919 --> 00:31:38,200
about was one that said that the length

692
00:31:36,880 --> 00:31:41,559
of the

693
00:31:38,200 --> 00:31:45,200
moratorium required the full context to

694
00:31:41,559 --> 00:31:47,600
be considered all I was saying was that

695
00:31:45,200 --> 00:31:49,000
in this case for you to consider the

696
00:31:47,600 --> 00:31:51,639
context

697
00:31:49,000 --> 00:31:54,000
of

698
00:31:51,639 --> 00:31:56,480
the all the evidence that we were

699
00:31:54,000 --> 00:32:00,399
providing to determine whether that

700
00:31:56,480 --> 00:32:03,600
duration of the moratorium was that

701
00:32:00,399 --> 00:32:06,159
issue Mr pounds continues to try to

702
00:32:03,600 --> 00:32:09,120
convert this administrative proceeding

703
00:32:06,159 --> 00:32:10,320
into a trial and it's just not set up to

704
00:32:09,120 --> 00:32:12,760
for such a

705
00:32:10,320 --> 00:32:14,320
proceeding even in a variance or special

706
00:32:12,760 --> 00:32:16,679
exception case that you would typically

707
00:32:14,320 --> 00:32:19,480
handle the board would hear from the

708
00:32:16,679 --> 00:32:22,559
applicant about the impact of various

709
00:32:19,480 --> 00:32:24,760
ordinances or case law that are to be

710
00:32:22,559 --> 00:32:27,120
applied and that occurs throughout the

711
00:32:24,760 --> 00:32:30,000
presentation it's not some form of

712
00:32:27,120 --> 00:32:32,320
formal closing where you're do what like

713
00:32:30,000 --> 00:32:35,159
you would do in a court where there's a

714
00:32:32,320 --> 00:32:37,639
clear bifurcation between between EV the

715
00:32:35,159 --> 00:32:38,880
period of evidence and then thing it's

716
00:32:37,639 --> 00:32:41,120
done all at the same time in

717
00:32:38,880 --> 00:32:43,080
administrative proceedings you don't

718
00:32:41,120 --> 00:32:46,240
have a closing in administrative

719
00:32:43,080 --> 00:32:48,600
proceedings like a trial it's a

720
00:32:46,240 --> 00:32:50,639
summation your your rules of procedure

721
00:32:48,600 --> 00:32:53,480
even call it that that's what it is is

722
00:32:50,639 --> 00:32:55,159
is merely a summation but it's not all

723
00:32:53,480 --> 00:32:57,760
of the legal arguments you make those

724
00:32:55,159 --> 00:32:59,519
arguments throughout the proceeding

725
00:32:57,760 --> 00:33:01,000
and by making those arguments I'm not

726
00:32:59,519 --> 00:33:04,360
giving an

727
00:33:01,000 --> 00:33:06,159
opinion that would require expertise I'm

728
00:33:04,360 --> 00:33:09,639
making the legal arguments just like any

729
00:33:06,159 --> 00:33:12,559
lawyer would make in any

730
00:33:09,639 --> 00:33:15,679
case I want to make one final practical

731
00:33:12,559 --> 00:33:17,600
point about so much of the documentary

732
00:33:15,679 --> 00:33:22,360
evidence that has already been submitted

733
00:33:17,600 --> 00:33:25,320
so far um I designed the presentation to

734
00:33:22,360 --> 00:33:27,880
provide the context for each document as

735
00:33:25,320 --> 00:33:30,559
I sought to have them admitted

736
00:33:27,880 --> 00:33:32,960
I designed the order of presentation to

737
00:33:30,559 --> 00:33:35,639
either follow a timeline so the board

738
00:33:32,960 --> 00:33:38,200
could follow the events as they unfolded

739
00:33:35,639 --> 00:33:40,039
or to provide the legal context of why

740
00:33:38,200 --> 00:33:43,440
various statutes and ordinances that I

741
00:33:40,039 --> 00:33:46,760
was pointing to were relevant this is a

742
00:33:43,440 --> 00:33:48,639
reasonably complex case so I thought

743
00:33:46,760 --> 00:33:50,279
this was the best way to present the

744
00:33:48,639 --> 00:33:52,880
information in a manner that you could

745
00:33:50,279 --> 00:33:54,600
digest the documentary evidence as it

746
00:33:52,880 --> 00:33:57,600
was

747
00:33:54,600 --> 00:33:59,880
presented the Practical alternative

748
00:33:57,600 --> 00:34:02,760
is to just submit exhibit after exhibit

749
00:33:59,880 --> 00:34:04,080
or all the exhibits on Moss to which

750
00:34:02,760 --> 00:34:06,480
there would no doubt have been

751
00:34:04,080 --> 00:34:08,280
objections as to the relevance so I

752
00:34:06,480 --> 00:34:11,200
would have literally been making all the

753
00:34:08,280 --> 00:34:13,000
same points yet be doing so in the

754
00:34:11,200 --> 00:34:15,560
context of

755
00:34:13,000 --> 00:34:18,159
objections and you don't have to do that

756
00:34:15,560 --> 00:34:20,679
in an administrative

757
00:34:18,159 --> 00:34:23,280
proceeding you can you get to integrate

758
00:34:20,679 --> 00:34:25,879
argument with the thing and

759
00:34:23,280 --> 00:34:28,040
therefore I would say that Mr P pound's

760
00:34:25,879 --> 00:34:29,720
motion to exclude evidence should be

761
00:34:28,040 --> 00:34:33,320
denied as

762
00:34:29,720 --> 00:34:37,639
untimely and over Brad uh the exclusion

763
00:34:33,320 --> 00:34:39,839
of all evidence is way over broad at the

764
00:34:37,639 --> 00:34:42,720
at the very least his motion should have

765
00:34:39,839 --> 00:34:44,879
identified the particular evidence that

766
00:34:42,720 --> 00:34:47,960
he

767
00:34:44,879 --> 00:34:51,079
thought needed to be sworn testimony and

768
00:34:47,960 --> 00:34:54,520
that I had given

769
00:34:51,079 --> 00:34:58,280
um and that hasn't been

770
00:34:54,520 --> 00:35:00,720
done um so I'll conclude there thanks

771
00:34:58,280 --> 00:35:03,079
okay um before you before you start um

772
00:35:00,720 --> 00:35:05,720
we are about two objections deep so far

773
00:35:03,079 --> 00:35:07,920
so top level objection is was to the

774
00:35:05,720 --> 00:35:09,839
swearing in of Mr Blitz which is the

775
00:35:07,920 --> 00:35:12,320
initial the blocker right now at the top

776
00:35:09,839 --> 00:35:15,400
level we then had a follow-up objection

777
00:35:12,320 --> 00:35:18,359
U by Mr Blitz as to the contents of the

778
00:35:15,400 --> 00:35:21,200
video um which I am going to overrule

779
00:35:18,359 --> 00:35:23,760
but also advise the board to take his

780
00:35:21,200 --> 00:35:27,440
comments into consideration um that was

781
00:35:23,760 --> 00:35:30,560
a bit of an objection with extra in

782
00:35:27,440 --> 00:35:32,280
there so do please take uh take Mr blit

783
00:35:30,560 --> 00:35:35,240
the contents of Mr blitz's objection

784
00:35:32,280 --> 00:35:37,720
into account um with that I would like

785
00:35:35,240 --> 00:35:42,280
to get back to the first objection of as

786
00:35:37,720 --> 00:35:44,400
to whether or not um to the swearing in

787
00:35:42,280 --> 00:35:48,720
but given all that's happened I'm going

788
00:35:44,400 --> 00:35:50,640
to stop and ask a question of Mr pounds

789
00:35:48,720 --> 00:35:52,000
briefly without the context of

790
00:35:50,640 --> 00:35:53,960
objections is there anything else you

791
00:35:52,000 --> 00:35:55,599
would like to add at this point and then

792
00:35:53,960 --> 00:35:57,720
I would really like to hear from the

793
00:35:55,599 --> 00:35:59,839
rest of the board so you have a couple

794
00:35:57,720 --> 00:36:03,480
minutes uh

795
00:35:59,839 --> 00:36:05,040
oh okay so basically okay is there any

796
00:36:03,480 --> 00:36:06,520
is there any additional information

797
00:36:05,040 --> 00:36:08,359
aside from we heard most of your

798
00:36:06,520 --> 00:36:10,520
original objection we've heard a bit of

799
00:36:08,359 --> 00:36:12,280
counter from uh Mr Blitz is there

800
00:36:10,520 --> 00:36:15,160
anything you would like to add to that

801
00:36:12,280 --> 00:36:17,880
briefly at this time and I will be brief

802
00:36:15,160 --> 00:36:19,720
basically uh I like to present to the

803
00:36:17,880 --> 00:36:21,960
board and state what does it mean to

804
00:36:19,720 --> 00:36:24,319
swear in I mean what what does that mean

805
00:36:21,960 --> 00:36:26,520
and is there any rules of law that uh

806
00:36:24,319 --> 00:36:27,359
require as far as swearing it in and the

807
00:36:26,520 --> 00:36:29,839
law

808
00:36:27,359 --> 00:36:31,839
under the Maryland General Provisions

809
00:36:29,839 --> 00:36:35,079
1-33 because that's the only thing

810
00:36:31,839 --> 00:36:37,680
really addresses what swearing in means

811
00:36:35,079 --> 00:36:40,560
the person making an oath shall solemnly

812
00:36:37,680 --> 00:36:42,920
swear or affirm it doesn't say you can

813
00:36:40,560 --> 00:36:44,720
just stay stay quiet it doesn't say that

814
00:36:42,920 --> 00:36:47,599
you can just accept it you have to

815
00:36:44,720 --> 00:36:50,880
affirmatively do something to say yes as

816
00:36:47,599 --> 00:36:52,680
Mr Woodburn did he said yes uh he's

817
00:36:50,880 --> 00:36:54,599
going to swear to tell the truth what's

818
00:36:52,680 --> 00:36:58,000
interesting is he didn't raise his right

819
00:36:54,599 --> 00:36:59,800
hand which is a custom that we have in

820
00:36:58,000 --> 00:37:02,319
in the United States and I did do some

821
00:36:59,800 --> 00:37:04,440
research to find out if that is part of

822
00:37:02,319 --> 00:37:06,520
the law and I have found that it is part

823
00:37:04,440 --> 00:37:08,599
of the law but it is a custom that we

824
00:37:06,520 --> 00:37:10,839
have in the United States so I can't say

825
00:37:08,599 --> 00:37:13,119
that that was a violation but I've never

826
00:37:10,839 --> 00:37:15,680
seen it done in which you don't raise

827
00:37:13,119 --> 00:37:18,160
your right hand but at least Mr wurn did

828
00:37:15,680 --> 00:37:20,440
say yes he will tell the truth I think

829
00:37:18,160 --> 00:37:23,079
we all saw the video Mr Blitz did not

830
00:37:20,440 --> 00:37:26,800
say that at all okay with regard to any

831
00:37:23,079 --> 00:37:29,960
type of testimony at all and um so again

832
00:37:26,800 --> 00:37:32,680
law as far as the rules the person

833
00:37:29,960 --> 00:37:34,839
making a nose shall solemnly swear or

834
00:37:32,680 --> 00:37:37,000
affirm it doesn't mean you can just sit

835
00:37:34,839 --> 00:37:39,599
there and stay quiet and then somehow

836
00:37:37,000 --> 00:37:43,680
accept that as being a blanket U

837
00:37:39,599 --> 00:37:45,800
swearing yourself in now also you know

838
00:37:43,680 --> 00:37:47,960
and and Mr Blitz has said it a number of

839
00:37:45,800 --> 00:37:51,079
times you know I'm trying to create that

840
00:37:47,960 --> 00:37:52,599
I'm trying to create some type of trial

841
00:37:51,079 --> 00:37:53,680
uh in this now I'm trying to set up a

842
00:37:52,599 --> 00:37:56,880
mechanism to make sure everybody's

843
00:37:53,680 --> 00:37:59,200
telling the truth okay that is it uh and

844
00:37:56,880 --> 00:38:01,760
the fact that you know we've gone on and

845
00:37:59,200 --> 00:38:04,560
on with these dissertations in which

846
00:38:01,760 --> 00:38:09,680
you're not sworn uh you just can't have

847
00:38:04,560 --> 00:38:12,800
that and one of the things that um um

848
00:38:09,680 --> 00:38:14,880
uh you know is and and what's

849
00:38:12,800 --> 00:38:17,640
interesting is is and I've said it a few

850
00:38:14,880 --> 00:38:19,839
times is these little twists with regard

851
00:38:17,640 --> 00:38:21,760
to the you know trying to compare

852
00:38:19,839 --> 00:38:23,200
testimony that he that supposedly

853
00:38:21,760 --> 00:38:26,599
testimony he given with regard to the

854
00:38:23,200 --> 00:38:27,839
books those documents are in evidence

855
00:38:26,599 --> 00:38:29,720
those are in evidence those those

856
00:38:27,839 --> 00:38:32,280
documents are done they're in evidence

857
00:38:29,720 --> 00:38:34,000
you can certainly review those do

858
00:38:32,280 --> 00:38:36,160
whatever whatever you want to do with

859
00:38:34,000 --> 00:38:38,000
them those have those been accepted

860
00:38:36,160 --> 00:38:39,839
question is all these other statements

861
00:38:38,000 --> 00:38:42,560
that have been made by Mr Blitz on and

862
00:38:39,839 --> 00:38:44,000
on and on and I think on the testimony I

863
00:38:42,560 --> 00:38:46,240
said just the last hearing this should

864
00:38:44,000 --> 00:38:48,480
go back for this his entire hearing okay

865
00:38:46,240 --> 00:38:49,920
with everything he has said so basically

866
00:38:48,480 --> 00:38:52,680
we have evidence and then we have

867
00:38:49,920 --> 00:38:54,599
basically his dissertations as to you

868
00:38:52,680 --> 00:38:55,920
know what they were simply are not

869
00:38:54,599 --> 00:38:58,599
evidence for you to consider and that's

870
00:38:55,920 --> 00:39:01,440
what this is okay basically in making

871
00:38:58,599 --> 00:39:03,760
your uh decisions you are to review

872
00:39:01,440 --> 00:39:07,280
evidence not any types of dissertations

873
00:39:03,760 --> 00:39:10,280
that he's going to be making at all

874
00:39:07,280 --> 00:39:12,680
um and and so basically and there's the

875
00:39:10,280 --> 00:39:14,079
comments about you know way you can't

876
00:39:12,680 --> 00:39:15,839
have a waiver with regard to telling the

877
00:39:14,079 --> 00:39:17,440
truth okay you can't say oh well you

878
00:39:15,839 --> 00:39:19,160
didn't catch it at the beginning and

879
00:39:17,440 --> 00:39:21,440
therefore it's a waiver no you can't do

880
00:39:19,160 --> 00:39:24,680
that especially the fact that stud on

881
00:39:21,440 --> 00:39:26,000
the video even Mr susman brought it up

882
00:39:24,680 --> 00:39:28,720
and brought up the fact that are you

883
00:39:26,000 --> 00:39:30,680
testifying here and he said yes well we

884
00:39:28,720 --> 00:39:33,079
have a problem because now he has made a

885
00:39:30,680 --> 00:39:37,000
formal statement an admission to the

886
00:39:33,079 --> 00:39:40,240
board which is absolutely untrue and

887
00:39:37,000 --> 00:39:42,200
that is a problem okay I'm not going to

888
00:39:40,240 --> 00:39:44,280
say you know any type of things but the

889
00:39:42,200 --> 00:39:46,319
fact that that in essence with regard to

890
00:39:44,280 --> 00:39:48,599
the testimony that's being said supposed

891
00:39:46,319 --> 00:39:50,960
testimony and then making an affirmative

892
00:39:48,599 --> 00:39:54,960
statement also to the board is

893
00:39:50,960 --> 00:39:56,920
absolutely a problem and not valid um uh

894
00:39:54,960 --> 00:39:59,720
so in in essence

895
00:39:56,920 --> 00:40:02,960
what was interesting is that that

896
00:39:59,720 --> 00:40:06,079
objection that I made that Mr susman

897
00:40:02,960 --> 00:40:08,480
indicated that I seem to have remembered

898
00:40:06,079 --> 00:40:10,720
okay and that's fine uh but he

899
00:40:08,480 --> 00:40:12,480
definitively asked Mr Blitz if he made

900
00:40:10,720 --> 00:40:16,280
that statement and Mr Blitz indeed said

901
00:40:12,480 --> 00:40:19,720
it was so uh you know that's what you're

902
00:40:16,280 --> 00:40:21,359
trying to do here is just just so we all

903
00:40:19,720 --> 00:40:22,960
are on the same page and that everybody

904
00:40:21,359 --> 00:40:25,040
and I can tell you this as far as

905
00:40:22,960 --> 00:40:26,680
anybody coming up here that I call

906
00:40:25,040 --> 00:40:30,000
they're going to get sworn at okay

907
00:40:26,680 --> 00:40:32,760
that's I mean that's a given um uh you

908
00:40:30,000 --> 00:40:34,079
know as far as some blanket and I can

909
00:40:32,760 --> 00:40:36,160
appreciate the fact blanket if you it's

910
00:40:34,079 --> 00:40:38,880
a small hearing but a large hearing like

911
00:40:36,160 --> 00:40:40,640
this for multiple times going on you

912
00:40:38,880 --> 00:40:42,560
know people are coming and going people

913
00:40:40,640 --> 00:40:44,160
may be here one night not here another

914
00:40:42,560 --> 00:40:45,440
night if they're coming up and their

915
00:40:44,160 --> 00:40:47,960
names on the list they're going to get

916
00:40:45,440 --> 00:40:52,200
sworn it again thank you Mr chair thank

917
00:40:47,960 --> 00:40:55,319
you um board has heard a lot on this um

918
00:40:52,200 --> 00:40:57,720
the first question for the board is do

919
00:40:55,319 --> 00:41:01,280
we feel like we want to go into a brief

920
00:40:57,720 --> 00:41:04,480
Clos session to discuss discuss legal

921
00:41:01,280 --> 00:41:09,599
options with Council or do we feel well

922
00:41:04,480 --> 00:41:12,599
informed enough to deliberate as we

923
00:41:09,599 --> 00:41:12,599
sit

924
00:41:13,240 --> 00:41:17,680
opinions I I do not feel the need to go

925
00:41:16,079 --> 00:41:20,280
in a closed

926
00:41:17,680 --> 00:41:22,000
session we can deliberate and that we

927
00:41:20,280 --> 00:41:22,960
might have to go into a closed session

928
00:41:22,000 --> 00:41:25,520
based

929
00:41:22,960 --> 00:41:26,839
onate for the next move but I think we

930
00:41:25,520 --> 00:41:28,880
can continue

931
00:41:26,839 --> 00:41:31,400
yeah I think we

932
00:41:28,880 --> 00:41:36,040
continue um okay

933
00:41:31,400 --> 00:41:40,160
so um I guess where to start

934
00:41:36,040 --> 00:41:42,800
um initially this seemed to be whether

935
00:41:40,160 --> 00:41:45,040
the the question right here seem to be

936
00:41:42,800 --> 00:41:46,520
whether or not we could determine if Mr

937
00:41:45,040 --> 00:41:48,440
Blitz clearly took the oath clearly

938
00:41:46,520 --> 00:41:52,720
didn't take the oath or kind of no

939
00:41:48,440 --> 00:41:56,680
evidence either way um from there we can

940
00:41:52,720 --> 00:42:00,359
move on to questions of is the informal

941
00:41:56,680 --> 00:42:03,000
blanket oath enough or are there you

942
00:42:00,359 --> 00:42:04,960
know opinions

943
00:42:03,000 --> 00:42:07,240
thoughts I'm not going to start this one

944
00:42:04,960 --> 00:42:08,599
I don't overwhelm everybody so feel free

945
00:42:07,240 --> 00:42:11,640
to

946
00:42:08,599 --> 00:42:13,160
uh like strong opinion I think I'm

947
00:42:11,640 --> 00:42:18,640
confident in my opinion want me to start

948
00:42:13,160 --> 00:42:20,680
yeah h on um so it's my opinion if we're

949
00:42:18,640 --> 00:42:23,240
discussing whether he SP took the oath

950
00:42:20,680 --> 00:42:26,440
let took the oath it's my opinion that

951
00:42:23,240 --> 00:42:28,319
the video makes it clear that he did not

952
00:42:26,440 --> 00:42:30,480
and by his own admission right now he

953
00:42:28,319 --> 00:42:33,599
said nobody else except for Mr Woodburn

954
00:42:30,480 --> 00:42:35,680
did implying that he did not um so I

955
00:42:33,599 --> 00:42:39,680
don't think he took

956
00:42:35,680 --> 00:42:43,680
de for that aspect that's my take

957
00:42:39,680 --> 00:42:48,319
on Mr Bliss pointed this out there was a

958
00:42:43,680 --> 00:42:50,880
point in on the September 19th

959
00:42:48,319 --> 00:42:53,720
meeting which was not in the

960
00:42:50,880 --> 00:42:57,200
clip where Mr Blitz

961
00:42:53,720 --> 00:42:59,079
was presenting some information

962
00:42:57,200 --> 00:43:02,559
and Mr susman asked him if he was

963
00:42:59,079 --> 00:43:05,599
testifying and if so did he uh take an

964
00:43:02,559 --> 00:43:07,480
oath is he willing to take an oath and

965
00:43:05,599 --> 00:43:10,119
Mr

966
00:43:07,480 --> 00:43:12,839
Blitz I heard him said raise his right

967
00:43:10,119 --> 00:43:16,359
hand I do affirm the facts or something

968
00:43:12,839 --> 00:43:18,640
to that effect and then things went P by

969
00:43:16,359 --> 00:43:20,960
past that very

970
00:43:18,640 --> 00:43:23,160
quickly it was very

971
00:43:20,960 --> 00:43:26,200
informal but that's how we've been

972
00:43:23,160 --> 00:43:28,319
operating I mean I would accept that

973
00:43:26,200 --> 00:43:31,880
Point as Mr

974
00:43:28,319 --> 00:43:31,880
Blitz taking an

975
00:43:33,640 --> 00:43:38,599
oath I'm just I'm going by that video

976
00:43:36,559 --> 00:43:40,200
because you can hear you can hear him

977
00:43:38,599 --> 00:43:41,920
while he's standing you can hear him

978
00:43:40,200 --> 00:43:44,760
when he's sitting and when oath was

979
00:43:41,920 --> 00:43:47,760
taken he turned to Donovan which looked

980
00:43:44,760 --> 00:43:50,440
like he was trying to tell him I I agree

981
00:43:47,760 --> 00:43:53,640
with that yeah I agree I say there was

982
00:43:50,440 --> 00:43:57,559
there was a point which was not in that

983
00:43:53,640 --> 00:43:59,839
clip where I would say Mr Blitz did take

984
00:43:57,559 --> 00:44:01,200
a oath although it was very for informal

985
00:43:59,839 --> 00:44:04,119
very

986
00:44:01,200 --> 00:44:08,079
quick you know and there's another

987
00:44:04,119 --> 00:44:10,520
statement I'll make you know a lot of uh

988
00:44:08,079 --> 00:44:13,200
a discussion about evidence whether this

989
00:44:10,520 --> 00:44:17,720
is evidence whether it's a

990
00:44:13,200 --> 00:44:17,720
narrative the the documents are

991
00:44:18,079 --> 00:44:23,240
evidence we

992
00:44:20,480 --> 00:44:25,000
can't accept those documents with

993
00:44:23,240 --> 00:44:27,079
without some sort of

994
00:44:25,000 --> 00:44:28,880
explanation

995
00:44:27,079 --> 00:44:33,240
and I in my

996
00:44:28,880 --> 00:44:36,119
opinion almost all of what Mr Blitz has

997
00:44:33,240 --> 00:44:38,119
been saying in these three or four

998
00:44:36,119 --> 00:44:41,240
meetings has been an

999
00:44:38,119 --> 00:44:45,200
explanation why these documents are

1000
00:44:41,240 --> 00:44:45,200
relevant I would not call it

1001
00:44:46,200 --> 00:44:50,880
testimony and therefore didn't formally

1002
00:44:48,680 --> 00:44:53,400
require an

1003
00:44:50,880 --> 00:44:56,520
oath there were a few times I think

1004
00:44:53,400 --> 00:44:59,880
where Mr Blitz stated an opinion which

1005
00:44:56,520 --> 00:45:02,000
you know cross that cross over into

1006
00:44:59,880 --> 00:45:05,319
testimony um but I don't think those

1007
00:45:02,000 --> 00:45:09,040
instances were were I I think they were

1008
00:45:05,319 --> 00:45:09,040
rare I don't think they were

1009
00:45:09,319 --> 00:45:16,599
significant but I would be willing to

1010
00:45:13,800 --> 00:45:19,319
accept everything that's presented been

1011
00:45:16,599 --> 00:45:19,319
presented so

1012
00:45:20,000 --> 00:45:24,280
far even did you say you started to say

1013
00:45:22,920 --> 00:45:27,280
something in that yeah I agree with Amy

1014
00:45:24,280 --> 00:45:29,680
um there was no swearing I

1015
00:45:27,280 --> 00:45:32,839
mean very impr

1016
00:45:29,680 --> 00:45:35,480
prompt video clearly shows it the video

1017
00:45:32,839 --> 00:45:37,200
clearly shows it there was no swearing

1018
00:45:35,480 --> 00:45:39,680
in if that's what we're discussing here

1019
00:45:37,200 --> 00:45:42,200
that's the main topic there was

1020
00:45:39,680 --> 00:45:47,440
not think what's left to be decided then

1021
00:45:42,200 --> 00:45:49,960
if there is missing video did it happen

1022
00:45:47,440 --> 00:45:54,680
after I mean if that's if that is the

1023
00:45:49,960 --> 00:45:57,880
case well I would say I would say that I

1024
00:45:54,680 --> 00:45:57,880
would also say that

1025
00:45:58,599 --> 00:46:04,040
Mr Blitz

1026
00:46:01,599 --> 00:46:06,720
as's

1027
00:46:04,040 --> 00:46:09,359
attorney does he need to be sworn in if

1028
00:46:06,720 --> 00:46:11,920
he's not presenting

1029
00:46:09,359 --> 00:46:14,760
testimony and and I don't believe the

1030
00:46:11,920 --> 00:46:16,800
majority of what Mr Blitz has said so

1031
00:46:14,760 --> 00:46:21,079
far has been

1032
00:46:16,800 --> 00:46:24,160
testimony just explaining these

1033
00:46:21,079 --> 00:46:28,359
exhibits that we've been

1034
00:46:24,160 --> 00:46:32,000
given the um what Mr Blitz said today

1035
00:46:28,359 --> 00:46:33,640
which I I think is apt is that up until

1036
00:46:32,000 --> 00:46:37,160
this point in time our board has

1037
00:46:33,640 --> 00:46:39,680
typically had one person Gallery um this

1038
00:46:37,160 --> 00:46:42,280
is by far the most formal and the most

1039
00:46:39,680 --> 00:46:44,720
attended of our meetings and we started

1040
00:46:42,280 --> 00:46:48,280
it off as if it were like all the others

1041
00:46:44,720 --> 00:46:51,760
which it quite clearly is not um if we

1042
00:46:48,280 --> 00:46:53,559
were to go back and say we did it wrong

1043
00:46:51,760 --> 00:46:56,480
and that this swearing in is

1044
00:46:53,559 --> 00:46:58,839
Meaningful and um we would effectively

1045
00:46:56,480 --> 00:47:02,920
be penalizing Mr Blitz for what he's

1046
00:46:58,839 --> 00:47:02,920
done uh so far due to our

1047
00:47:03,359 --> 00:47:08,839
informality so I kind of I hear there

1048
00:47:06,880 --> 00:47:11,319
was no AB there was absolutely no direct

1049
00:47:08,839 --> 00:47:16,480
swearing in but as we've seen

1050
00:47:11,319 --> 00:47:17,880
most didn't um with a rare exception of

1051
00:47:16,480 --> 00:47:21,280
people who stepped to the Le Lector

1052
00:47:17,880 --> 00:47:26,440
right when we admitted the oath um so

1053
00:47:21,280 --> 00:47:28,319
I'm hesitant to punish him for our lack

1054
00:47:26,440 --> 00:47:30,400
of um

1055
00:47:28,319 --> 00:47:34,160
rigor so

1056
00:47:30,400 --> 00:47:34,160
i' i'

1057
00:47:37,119 --> 00:47:43,280
yeah well as I as I said

1058
00:47:40,480 --> 00:47:44,400
earlier um I think there were only a

1059
00:47:43,280 --> 00:47:49,119
very few

1060
00:47:44,400 --> 00:47:53,000
times when Mr blitz's statement

1061
00:47:49,119 --> 00:47:56,040
statements crossed over as

1062
00:47:53,000 --> 00:47:57,800
testimony and so I don't think I don't

1063
00:47:56,040 --> 00:48:00,480
think it was

1064
00:47:57,800 --> 00:48:03,839
significant

1065
00:48:00,480 --> 00:48:07,440
um I would be willing to

1066
00:48:03,839 --> 00:48:08,760
accept and also again the September 19th

1067
00:48:07,440 --> 00:48:12,319
meeting there was a

1068
00:48:08,760 --> 00:48:14,599
point where Mr Blitz raised his hand

1069
00:48:12,319 --> 00:48:17,440
said I do

1070
00:48:14,599 --> 00:48:22,400
affirm don't remember the exact

1071
00:48:17,440 --> 00:48:23,359
words but that being said I'd be willing

1072
00:48:22,400 --> 00:48:26,240
to

1073
00:48:23,359 --> 00:48:27,599
accept uh some type of r ractive

1074
00:48:26,240 --> 00:48:29,960
swearing

1075
00:48:27,599 --> 00:48:33,680
in of Mr

1076
00:48:29,960 --> 00:48:33,680
Blitz to cover our

1077
00:48:34,920 --> 00:48:41,280
bases I have mixed feelings I think that

1078
00:48:38,599 --> 00:48:43,839
in the efficiency of time in this

1079
00:48:41,280 --> 00:48:46,079
specific instance it can make sense

1080
00:48:43,839 --> 00:48:49,200
because if we don't then we're going to

1081
00:48:46,079 --> 00:48:51,599
hear all this yes and we already have

1082
00:48:49,200 --> 00:48:53,839
significant time invested in this and

1083
00:48:51,599 --> 00:48:55,160
the community wants the response right

1084
00:48:53,839 --> 00:48:57,880
um but I also don't want to set a

1085
00:48:55,160 --> 00:49:00,680
precedence that this is okay um I think

1086
00:48:57,880 --> 00:49:03,000
the underlying thing that bothers me is

1087
00:49:00,680 --> 00:49:05,960
that we've heard from Mr Blitz multiple

1088
00:49:03,000 --> 00:49:08,359
times that he insists he did swear in

1089
00:49:05,960 --> 00:49:10,240
and at that time and he did not so it's

1090
00:49:08,359 --> 00:49:13,520
just it's sitting a little uneasy with

1091
00:49:10,240 --> 00:49:16,599
me simply because of that imbalance of

1092
00:49:13,520 --> 00:49:22,119
information um but I I do understand the

1093
00:49:16,599 --> 00:49:22,119
need to possibly retro okay

1094
00:49:22,760 --> 00:49:29,359
this if I may

1095
00:49:26,280 --> 00:49:31,520
in the note that I had that I made based

1096
00:49:29,359 --> 00:49:35,079
upon my review of the video various

1097
00:49:31,520 --> 00:49:38,200
videos in addition to this one I found

1098
00:49:35,079 --> 00:49:41,599
that on the uh 18th of

1099
00:49:38,200 --> 00:49:45,119
September there were two references to

1100
00:49:41,599 --> 00:49:49,640
swearing in the one that we have which

1101
00:49:45,119 --> 00:49:51,599
was at uh I think 30 minutes 20 seconds

1102
00:49:49,640 --> 00:49:55,240
that the blanket swearing

1103
00:49:51,599 --> 00:49:57,000
in and there was another one dialogue

1104
00:49:55,240 --> 00:50:02,280
from the with Mr

1105
00:49:57,000 --> 00:50:04,559
Bliss at an hour 9 minutes 16 seconds I

1106
00:50:02,280 --> 00:50:06,960
think that may be what Mr Bliss was

1107
00:50:04,559 --> 00:50:11,960
referring to and that's the same point

1108
00:50:06,960 --> 00:50:11,960
that I was referring to same point in

1109
00:50:15,960 --> 00:50:18,960
time

1110
00:50:24,440 --> 00:50:28,200
I

1111
00:50:26,200 --> 00:50:31,680
both our attorney and somebody else has

1112
00:50:28,200 --> 00:50:33,599
seen it I think it's I think it's

1113
00:50:31,680 --> 00:50:37,640
yeah

1114
00:50:33,599 --> 00:50:40,640
um I if the board is inclined to

1115
00:50:37,640 --> 00:50:43,880
administer another oath uh administer an

1116
00:50:40,640 --> 00:50:46,839
oath to Mr Blitz given the little bit of

1117
00:50:43,880 --> 00:50:47,680
ambiguity as to whether he did take and

1118
00:50:46,839 --> 00:50:51,000
those

1119
00:50:47,680 --> 00:50:52,599
previously uh I think the oath should be

1120
00:50:51,000 --> 00:50:56,119
retroactive and

1121
00:50:52,599 --> 00:50:58,760
prospective without commenting on what

1122
00:50:56,119 --> 00:51:00,440
he has said so far is really testimony

1123
00:50:58,760 --> 00:51:03,280
or what he may say in the future is

1124
00:51:00,440 --> 00:51:05,400
testimony as opposed to

1125
00:51:03,280 --> 00:51:09,240
uh arent of

1126
00:51:05,400 --> 00:51:13,720
council uh but it would cover certainly

1127
00:51:09,240 --> 00:51:17,880
any uh any testimony for which o might

1128
00:51:13,720 --> 00:51:20,640
argu arguably have been or be

1129
00:51:17,880 --> 00:51:22,680
required I can safely so from opinion

1130
00:51:20,640 --> 00:51:25,440
side I'm not overly happy as you are

1131
00:51:22,680 --> 00:51:26,920
with the retroactive I take Mr blitz's

1132
00:51:25,440 --> 00:51:29,119
statement that he believed he was under

1133
00:51:26,920 --> 00:51:33,400
oath and he was acting as if he did he

1134
00:51:29,119 --> 00:51:36,440
has not said otherwise um as enough for

1135
00:51:33,400 --> 00:51:40,599
me um that said if this is an

1136
00:51:36,440 --> 00:51:42,760
improvement over this this is an

1137
00:51:40,599 --> 00:51:45,720
uncomfortable thing that we all agree to

1138
00:51:42,760 --> 00:51:49,319
and doesn't no one's entirely happy then

1139
00:51:45,720 --> 00:51:49,319
so be it

1140
00:51:51,319 --> 00:51:56,400
right not going to dictate I mean if

1141
00:51:54,359 --> 00:51:58,839
there's

1142
00:51:56,400 --> 00:52:02,440
so yeah

1143
00:51:58,839 --> 00:52:04,720
um is it the sense of the board to uh

1144
00:52:02,440 --> 00:52:06,280
administer and not to Mr blitz so

1145
00:52:04,720 --> 00:52:08,520
there's no

1146
00:52:06,280 --> 00:52:10,319
ambiguity would that would that satisfy

1147
00:52:08,520 --> 00:52:12,119
you Stephen A

1148
00:52:10,319 --> 00:52:14,319
retroactive I mean how far back are we

1149
00:52:12,119 --> 00:52:16,119
going to go until until this the the

1150
00:52:14,319 --> 00:52:19,040
beginning of this case everything said

1151
00:52:16,119 --> 00:52:21,280
on video on record Mr Blitz is stating

1152
00:52:19,040 --> 00:52:24,119
that this was under oath he believed it

1153
00:52:21,280 --> 00:52:26,200
to be so and now we're adding paper work

1154
00:52:24,119 --> 00:52:27,599
to make it so now going forward

1155
00:52:26,200 --> 00:52:29,520
everything will be under everything will

1156
00:52:27,599 --> 00:52:33,079
be everything from now on will be by the

1157
00:52:29,520 --> 00:52:34,400
record this will you know it help to see

1158
00:52:33,079 --> 00:52:38,079
the

1159
00:52:34,400 --> 00:52:40,599
video yeah yeah you could get that for

1160
00:52:38,079 --> 00:52:40,599
us in the other

1161
00:52:41,520 --> 00:52:46,640
room are we able to do that in the

1162
00:52:44,040 --> 00:52:48,760
conference room to watch that clip at 1

1163
00:52:46,640 --> 00:52:53,160
hour 9 minutes and 16 seconds for

1164
00:52:48,760 --> 00:52:55,440
Stephen me to if uh sta can provide it

1165
00:52:53,160 --> 00:52:58,599
yeah um okay and that so we will will go

1166
00:52:55,440 --> 00:53:02,079
into close session briefly review that

1167
00:52:58,599 --> 00:53:05,839
and no no just go

1168
00:53:02,079 --> 00:53:07,559
back can think Fred understands that you

1169
00:53:05,839 --> 00:53:09,920
intend on playing it outside of the

1170
00:53:07,559 --> 00:53:11,880
context of the record which okay I'll

1171
00:53:09,920 --> 00:53:13,640
let him make a comment about but you're

1172
00:53:11,880 --> 00:53:16,880
if you're GNA close a

1173
00:53:13,640 --> 00:53:19,079
meeting you can't take in

1174
00:53:16,880 --> 00:53:22,119
evidence you're not closing the meeting

1175
00:53:19,079 --> 00:53:24,559
to go back and look at a

1176
00:53:22,119 --> 00:53:26,200
video pardon never mind go ahead the

1177
00:53:24,559 --> 00:53:27,799
purpose of a close meeting would be to

1178
00:53:26,200 --> 00:53:29,799
consult with me about legal issues

1179
00:53:27,799 --> 00:53:31,440
associated with that if you want to

1180
00:53:29,799 --> 00:53:33,319
watch a video then that'll have to be

1181
00:53:31,440 --> 00:53:35,839
produced here so that's not something we

1182
00:53:33,319 --> 00:53:38,359
could do tonight if if to continue with

1183
00:53:35,839 --> 00:53:39,680
this we would be at ease to see this

1184
00:53:38,359 --> 00:53:40,799
video we would then need to do it at a

1185
00:53:39,680 --> 00:53:44,359
different

1186
00:53:40,799 --> 00:53:46,480
time it depends whether she can't put it

1187
00:53:44,359 --> 00:53:48,160
here Mr Blitz is saying we can't watch

1188
00:53:46,480 --> 00:53:49,599
it back there because it's evidence and

1189
00:53:48,160 --> 00:53:51,440
you're saying you can't show it to us

1190
00:53:49,599 --> 00:53:54,000
right now because we're

1191
00:53:51,440 --> 00:53:59,319
three can you play it on your

1192
00:53:54,000 --> 00:53:59,319
phone but is that okay for a public

1193
00:53:59,720 --> 00:54:04,520
setting do we have any options to view

1194
00:54:02,559 --> 00:54:05,920
it here whether be on our phone or

1195
00:54:04,520 --> 00:54:07,359
anything else and if it cannot be

1196
00:54:05,920 --> 00:54:10,000
displayed up there right now do we have

1197
00:54:07,359 --> 00:54:13,720
any other options to watch this video

1198
00:54:10,000 --> 00:54:13,720
that's a technological issue I don't

1199
00:54:13,960 --> 00:54:19,240
know right I think the public has the

1200
00:54:16,359 --> 00:54:23,160
right to uh view it as well right if

1201
00:54:19,240 --> 00:54:25,280
there's a way to have a laptop uh put

1202
00:54:23,160 --> 00:54:28,480
here and have everybody come up and

1203
00:54:25,280 --> 00:54:30,680
watch it at the same time that possible

1204
00:54:28,480 --> 00:54:33,440
but I think that'll be a little bit

1205
00:54:30,680 --> 00:54:37,720
unwieldy I don't think it necessarily be

1206
00:54:33,440 --> 00:54:42,480
proper for the uh board to be able to

1207
00:54:37,720 --> 00:54:42,480
see or watch the video and the public

1208
00:54:44,720 --> 00:54:52,599
not I mean this isn't the biggest screen

1209
00:54:48,319 --> 00:54:54,000
in the world but I can go like I don't

1210
00:54:52,599 --> 00:54:55,079
think you have Wi-Fi but I can go

1211
00:54:54,000 --> 00:54:58,079
through my phone for the internet

1212
00:54:55,079 --> 00:55:00,280
internet I have the link to the that I

1213
00:54:58,079 --> 00:55:01,480
sent this morning to that video so I

1214
00:55:00,280 --> 00:55:03,880
could play it on

1215
00:55:01,480 --> 00:55:06,359
this if you think if you think this is

1216
00:55:03,880 --> 00:55:09,359
big you know broad enough for people to

1217
00:55:06,359 --> 00:55:11,119
look at I don't know how we would show

1218
00:55:09,359 --> 00:55:12,960
both the board and the audience at the

1219
00:55:11,119 --> 00:55:16,160
same

1220
00:55:12,960 --> 00:55:19,640
time thumbs up from the

1221
00:55:16,160 --> 00:55:21,760
audience I don't know you can't share

1222
00:55:19,640 --> 00:55:21,760
the

1223
00:55:21,960 --> 00:55:26,760
screen it's that I can't stream a

1224
00:55:24,359 --> 00:55:29,079
YouTube video so I have to download it

1225
00:55:26,760 --> 00:55:31,400
and and I maybe if you want to take a

1226
00:55:29,079 --> 00:55:33,200
break can we can we pause a break pause

1227
00:55:31,400 --> 00:55:36,079
the meeting give you five minutes to do

1228
00:55:33,200 --> 00:55:38,640
that five 10

1229
00:55:36,079 --> 00:55:40,720
minutes all right we're

1230
00:55:38,640 --> 00:55:43,000
gonna all right we're gonna recess for

1231
00:55:40,720 --> 00:55:47,200
10 to 15 minutes here and try and get

1232
00:55:43,000 --> 00:55:47,200
this technological issue sorted out so

1233
00:55:54,000 --> 00:55:57,000
please

1234
01:03:24,039 --> 01:03:26,279
wel

1235
01:03:27,240 --> 01:03:31,599
all right everybody we'll uh get started

1236
01:03:28,640 --> 01:03:31,599
in a second here if you'll take your

1237
01:03:33,640 --> 01:03:38,680
seats uh okay at this time I believe

1238
01:03:36,279 --> 01:03:42,200
Town staff has pulled up the meeting

1239
01:03:38,680 --> 01:03:44,200
from 19th September at 1 hour and N

1240
01:03:42,200 --> 01:03:46,440
minutes more or less and we will see

1241
01:03:44,200 --> 01:03:46,440
that

1242
01:03:51,480 --> 01:03:58,640
now point in the

1243
01:03:54,839 --> 01:04:01,119
administrator's argument in his email is

1244
01:03:58,640 --> 01:04:03,640
at this point in time the town's

1245
01:04:01,119 --> 01:04:06,760
comprehensive plan and the implementing

1246
01:04:03,640 --> 01:04:09,480
zoning ordinance was already four years

1247
01:04:06,760 --> 01:04:13,440
late excuse me Mr blit are you going to

1248
01:04:09,480 --> 01:04:15,720
have a present evidence uh to uh

1249
01:04:13,440 --> 01:04:18,559
elucidate on these points that you're

1250
01:04:15,720 --> 01:04:22,200
making now or are you testifying uh I

1251
01:04:18,559 --> 01:04:24,319
will pres Pro well number one if you

1252
01:04:22,200 --> 01:04:27,359
want to testify raise your right hand

1253
01:04:24,319 --> 01:04:30,079
and take the oath okay or if you already

1254
01:04:27,359 --> 01:04:34,079
took the oath so it can be clear what

1255
01:04:30,079 --> 01:04:35,680
you're I do include to include any facts

1256
01:04:34,079 --> 01:04:39,760
that I

1257
01:04:35,680 --> 01:04:41,760
offer that's fine is that okay you

1258
01:04:39,760 --> 01:04:44,880
you're accept accepting that I mean we

1259
01:04:41,760 --> 01:04:46,559
are moving towards closing through a lot

1260
01:04:44,880 --> 01:04:48,880
of what he's talking about this is not a

1261
01:04:46,559 --> 01:04:50,760
testimony it's not we wav beond where we

1262
01:04:48,880 --> 01:04:56,160
started with it's this is definitely

1263
01:04:50,760 --> 01:04:56,160
like a closing type argument but

1264
01:04:56,240 --> 01:05:00,039
this is you know where this is right now

1265
01:04:58,240 --> 01:05:03,359
not making a closing argument I'm making

1266
01:05:00,039 --> 01:05:06,319
the explanation of why

1267
01:05:03,359 --> 01:05:08,079
we I think that's good enough

1268
01:05:06,319 --> 01:05:11,200
um how do

1269
01:05:08,079 --> 01:05:13,400
we how do we feel what we've what did we

1270
01:05:11,200 --> 01:05:16,039
learn that was new and did that

1271
01:05:13,400 --> 01:05:20,000
change can I ask Mr Blitz is that what

1272
01:05:16,039 --> 01:05:20,000
you wanted us to see this morning

1273
01:05:21,279 --> 01:05:29,359
okay continue on oh no I mean it's it's

1274
01:05:24,200 --> 01:05:33,119
open floor um I think in terms of um

1275
01:05:29,359 --> 01:05:36,319
moving forward I personally am fine I

1276
01:05:33,119 --> 01:05:38,640
that was good enough for me the meeting

1277
01:05:36,319 --> 01:05:41,079
is informal and I believe Mr Blitz has

1278
01:05:38,640 --> 01:05:43,319
been presenting and speaking as if he

1279
01:05:41,079 --> 01:05:47,440
was under oath and it appears that he

1280
01:05:43,319 --> 01:05:49,319
believed so too um I have no need to do

1281
01:05:47,440 --> 01:05:52,640
a retroactive but if it is something

1282
01:05:49,319 --> 01:05:55,000
that the board wishes to do I'm entirely

1283
01:05:52,640 --> 01:05:56,599
supportive of that

1284
01:05:55,000 --> 01:05:59,240
uh I would be in favor of doing

1285
01:05:56,599 --> 01:06:01,760
retroactive just to be

1286
01:05:59,240 --> 01:06:05,400
safe we're not dictating so if you have

1287
01:06:01,760 --> 01:06:07,359
if you don't this is with you um it's

1288
01:06:05,400 --> 01:06:09,119
not something I'm happy about I think

1289
01:06:07,359 --> 01:06:15,279
it's you

1290
01:06:09,119 --> 01:06:18,279
know do things but um it also seems like

1291
01:06:15,279 --> 01:06:18,279
logical

1292
01:06:23,000 --> 01:06:26,000
movement

1293
01:06:41,359 --> 01:06:46,319
anything you'd like to add at this time

1294
01:06:42,880 --> 01:06:50,839
Fred um okay in that

1295
01:06:46,319 --> 01:06:55,039
case um guess we can uh vote on it we'll

1296
01:06:50,839 --> 01:06:58,279
vote on um a retroactive oath

1297
01:06:55,039 --> 01:07:00,520
um that will be issued Mr Blitz to

1298
01:06:58,279 --> 01:07:03,039
retroactively over all testimony given

1299
01:07:00,520 --> 01:07:05,039
up to the beginning of this

1300
01:07:03,039 --> 01:07:10,799
case

1301
01:07:05,039 --> 01:07:13,920
um and going forward yes um okay so I

1302
01:07:10,799 --> 01:07:17,079
guess I'll just start uh Amy how do you

1303
01:07:13,920 --> 01:07:19,599
would you are you uh you approve um

1304
01:07:17,079 --> 01:07:21,359
issuing a new oath to Mr Blitz at this

1305
01:07:19,599 --> 01:07:25,359
time I

1306
01:07:21,359 --> 01:07:29,480
approve I approve I approve I also

1307
01:07:25,359 --> 01:07:32,200
approve um the board approves um a

1308
01:07:29,480 --> 01:07:35,279
motion I suppose for Mr susman to

1309
01:07:32,200 --> 01:07:37,400
reissue a oath to Mr Blitz that will

1310
01:07:35,279 --> 01:07:41,480
cover any testimony that has been given

1311
01:07:37,400 --> 01:07:41,480
in this case and all moving

1312
01:07:42,200 --> 01:07:48,920
forward I could just ask for a

1313
01:07:45,960 --> 01:07:51,640
clarification as I mentioned there's a

1314
01:07:48,920 --> 01:07:54,160
big argument as to what's testimony and

1315
01:07:51,640 --> 01:07:57,160
what is legal argument I'm certainly

1316
01:07:54,160 --> 01:08:01,119
willing to T to swear an oath I think I

1317
01:07:57,160 --> 01:08:04,119
already was sworn in about any testimony

1318
01:08:01,119 --> 01:08:07,079
I give because I just don't think I gave

1319
01:08:04,119 --> 01:08:09,920
testimony IE I I do remember one error

1320
01:08:07,079 --> 01:08:13,960
that I made which was I talked about

1321
01:08:09,920 --> 01:08:16,120
whether the town had previously adopted

1322
01:08:13,960 --> 01:08:18,319
all of the zoning ordinances in one

1323
01:08:16,120 --> 01:08:20,080
ordinance and I said that's the way the

1324
01:08:18,319 --> 01:08:21,880
town had done it in the past well that

1325
01:08:20,080 --> 01:08:24,359
you know that's technically a factual

1326
01:08:21,880 --> 01:08:27,080
statement but I just want to make it

1327
01:08:24,359 --> 01:08:29,159
clear that I'm swearing to testify only

1328
01:08:27,080 --> 01:08:31,319
to things that I'm are providing actual

1329
01:08:29,159 --> 01:08:34,120
testimony not my arguments or anything

1330
01:08:31,319 --> 01:08:37,719
like that I don't want that conflation

1331
01:08:34,120 --> 01:08:39,719
of the idea that there's testimony that

1332
01:08:37,719 --> 01:08:42,080
are facts and all my legal arguments

1333
01:08:39,719 --> 01:08:45,159
because that's not testimony I think

1334
01:08:42,080 --> 01:08:47,679
this oath is or this retroactive oath is

1335
01:08:45,159 --> 01:08:50,480
specifically targeted to address the

1336
01:08:47,679 --> 01:08:52,799
objection before the board right now um

1337
01:08:50,480 --> 01:08:56,080
we will assume

1338
01:08:52,799 --> 01:08:58,440
well raise your right hand please do you

1339
01:08:56,080 --> 01:09:01,080
solemnly swear or affirm under the

1340
01:08:58,440 --> 01:09:02,920
penalties of perjury that the testimony

1341
01:09:01,080 --> 01:09:05,880
that you have already given in these

1342
01:09:02,920 --> 01:09:07,960
proceedings and the testimony you are

1343
01:09:05,880 --> 01:09:09,839
about to give and will give through the

1344
01:09:07,960 --> 01:09:12,440
end of these proceedings and the

1345
01:09:09,839 --> 01:09:15,839
responses and statements that you have

1346
01:09:12,440 --> 01:09:17,359
made or are about to make have been and

1347
01:09:15,839 --> 01:09:20,679
will be the whole truth and nothing but

1348
01:09:17,359 --> 01:09:22,759
the truth I do with the

1349
01:09:20,679 --> 01:09:24,199
record uh one moment at at the

1350
01:09:22,759 --> 01:09:26,080
conclusion of this we are stating that

1351
01:09:24,199 --> 01:09:28,719
the initial objection is

1352
01:09:26,080 --> 01:09:31,080
overruled and basically I just wanted to

1353
01:09:28,719 --> 01:09:32,920
say that uh uh I wanted to give an

1354
01:09:31,080 --> 01:09:35,080
objection as to the the entire process

1355
01:09:32,920 --> 01:09:37,560
here uh because you know you can't sit

1356
01:09:35,080 --> 01:09:38,920
here and do retroactive uh swearing in I

1357
01:09:37,560 --> 01:09:40,799
mean it's nice and I understand the

1358
01:09:38,920 --> 01:09:42,679
timing understand you want to cut time

1359
01:09:40,799 --> 01:09:44,640
and everything else but the problem is

1360
01:09:42,679 --> 01:09:46,679
you can't unring the Bell you don't know

1361
01:09:44,640 --> 01:09:48,759
in essence what's what is happening here

1362
01:09:46,679 --> 01:09:51,000
or what's not happening here and even Mr

1363
01:09:48,759 --> 01:09:53,279
Blitz come back he just said that that

1364
01:09:51,000 --> 01:09:55,120
well some of it said was testimony some

1365
01:09:53,279 --> 01:09:57,120
of wasn't testimony and he's only being

1366
01:09:55,120 --> 01:10:00,440
sworn as to the testimony whatever that

1367
01:09:57,120 --> 01:10:02,199
may or may not be um so I mean and I

1368
01:10:00,440 --> 01:10:04,880
mean this is a big deal I mean it's a

1369
01:10:02,199 --> 01:10:06,920
big deal because you know in essence

1370
01:10:04,880 --> 01:10:09,560
what you are supposed to consider is

1371
01:10:06,920 --> 01:10:11,640
supposed to be evidence argument is not

1372
01:10:09,560 --> 01:10:13,719
okay but uh that that's what it is that

1373
01:10:11,640 --> 01:10:16,480
you're supposed to be doing and so you

1374
01:10:13,719 --> 01:10:19,640
know the idea that uh you know you were

1375
01:10:16,480 --> 01:10:22,080
having you know an retroactive swearing

1376
01:10:19,640 --> 01:10:24,560
in um I I've never even heard of it

1377
01:10:22,080 --> 01:10:27,840
before but uh uh but but I can tell you

1378
01:10:24,560 --> 01:10:30,239
the problem is is that now you are put

1379
01:10:27,840 --> 01:10:31,920
under a very difficult situation in that

1380
01:10:30,239 --> 01:10:33,640
you're thinking to yourself all this

1381
01:10:31,920 --> 01:10:35,880
testimony that you've heard how much of

1382
01:10:33,640 --> 01:10:39,360
it is testimony not testimony the truth

1383
01:10:35,880 --> 01:10:42,040
not the truth you can't do that so um in

1384
01:10:39,360 --> 01:10:44,080
essence it becomes an issue and I really

1385
01:10:42,040 --> 01:10:46,199
wanted to make sure that was protected

1386
01:10:44,080 --> 01:10:48,120
for the potential appeal purposes thank

1387
01:10:46,199 --> 01:10:51,560
you understood um the objection is

1388
01:10:48,120 --> 01:10:53,600
overruled we will continue uh with this

1389
01:10:51,560 --> 01:10:55,960
case U Mr Blitz are you prepared to

1390
01:10:53,600 --> 01:10:59,199
continue tonight and if so approximately

1391
01:10:55,960 --> 01:11:00,280
how much how much longer last time You'

1392
01:10:59,199 --> 01:11:01,719
mentioned you had approximately two

1393
01:11:00,280 --> 01:11:03,760
hours of time left is that still the

1394
01:11:01,719 --> 01:11:06,679
ball park it is so unfortunately we're

1395
01:11:03,760 --> 01:11:08,719
not going to get done tonight well how

1396
01:11:06,679 --> 01:11:11,120
much time do you have tonight half an

1397
01:11:08,719 --> 01:11:12,880
hour uh is does half an hour move your

1398
01:11:11,120 --> 01:11:15,159
move the ball forward at all or is that

1399
01:11:12,880 --> 01:11:19,199
more trouble than it's

1400
01:11:15,159 --> 01:11:19,199
worth if you could give me a

1401
01:11:22,560 --> 01:11:27,560
moment

1402
01:11:25,320 --> 01:11:27,560
my

1403
01:11:27,840 --> 01:11:34,600
concern is

1404
01:11:31,520 --> 01:11:38,320
that the summaries that I would be

1405
01:11:34,600 --> 01:11:42,159
giving of where we are set up the rest

1406
01:11:38,320 --> 01:11:43,760
of the testimony and we're going to get

1407
01:11:42,159 --> 01:11:46,440
we're just not going to get into that

1408
01:11:43,760 --> 01:11:48,400
testimony sufficiently okay so at this

1409
01:11:46,440 --> 01:11:51,719
point in time we've been here for an

1410
01:11:48,400 --> 01:11:56,199
hour and 10 of our normal 2hour session

1411
01:11:51,719 --> 01:12:01,239
um and we will not not resume case 20233

1412
01:11:56,199 --> 01:12:04,400
today the only thing we have done is um

1413
01:12:01,239 --> 01:12:07,880
ruled on an objection by Mr pounds

1414
01:12:04,400 --> 01:12:10,960
clearing the way to resume the case at

1415
01:12:07,880 --> 01:12:13,440
our next session um at this time I will

1416
01:12:10,960 --> 01:12:14,960
entertain a motion to adjourn this no no

1417
01:12:13,440 --> 01:12:19,440
not doing that have to tell when the

1418
01:12:14,960 --> 01:12:22,360
next session yes um the motion uh for

1419
01:12:19,440 --> 01:12:24,840
our next meeting will be January 25th at

1420
01:12:22,360 --> 01:12:27,040
7 pm and at this time I'll entertain a

1421
01:12:24,840 --> 01:12:30,360
motion to adjourn this meeting until

1422
01:12:27,040 --> 01:12:35,760
January 25th at 700 p.m. do I have a

1423
01:12:30,360 --> 01:12:38,880
second I will second that uh all in

1424
01:12:35,760 --> 01:12:44,159
favor all right we are adjourned

1425
01:12:38,880 --> 01:12:44,159
until January 25th at 7 pm

1426
01:12:49,719 --> 01:12:52,719
no