[0:04] all right welcome everybody this is the
[0:06] call to order of the chesp beach board
[0:07] of appeals November 13
[0:10] 2024 um we are here today to receive
[0:13] public comments on case
[0:16] 20233 um and we will begin with a roll
[0:19] call as normal I'll go around please
[0:20] announce if you're present um and do we
[0:23] have we don't have Richard right oh
[0:25] Richard um so we expect him
[0:28] later oh well I'll pause for a
[0:37] second just about to do roll call
[0:42] Mr if you would please announce that you
[0:45] are present uh Mr Richard Burch present
[0:48] Mr Paul dhy present Amy Everett present
[0:51] Mr stepen Sharp present and I am Mr jod
[0:54] honar we have a quorum um we normally do
[0:57] meeting minute approval but I think
[0:59] there were some discussions we were
[1:00] still having so we'll hold on that um
[1:04] Sharon has nicely compiled a list of
[1:07] public comments we've received in the
[1:09] case uh the names and dates for the
[1:12] receipt of comments submitted to the
[1:13] board are as follows uh Laura
[1:16] Blackwelder on 919 and 9:25 Cheryl Emory
[1:20] on 10:30 Laura Blackwelder on
[1:24] 126 uh Dan Duval Kathleen baral Laura
[1:27] Blackwater on 14 Lori Hester on 424 Dan
[1:32] Duval 531 Dan Duval 8819 and
[1:38] Rita Hayes on
[1:39] 912 I believe we have one more pending
[1:43] comment and aside from those are there
[1:48] any other comments that uh you're aware
[1:49] of
[1:50] Sharon you uh okay yeah I think you want
[1:54] to St them into the record um in that
[1:58] case uh need to make a motion for
[2:01] that okay in that case this packet of
[2:04] public
[2:05] comments um is accepted into the record
[2:09] there should be nothing new other than
[2:10] the title
[2:12] sheet okay
[2:15] yeah I wasn't planning on it but okay
[2:19] it's just if you if in subsequent
[2:21] proceedings you need to make reference
[2:23] to something it helps to I was I think
[2:26] we can reference it by the date name and
[2:28] date submitted since it's already there but we do have a packet
[2:31] for so yeah uh okay announcements uh
[2:34] we'll be doing two hours again tonight
[2:36] so uh normal normal
[2:39] stuff um following the order of
[2:41] presentation is documented in the board
[2:43] of appeals rules of procedure uh the
[2:45] next few steps we'll be doing here are
[2:48] uh today is testimony and evidence by
[2:50] the persons or entities whose rights are
[2:52] impacted by the appeal this would be any
[2:54] members of the public who would like to
[2:56] speak um once this is done uh and not
[2:59] today we won't be doing this today we'll
[3:01] follow with summary statements closing
[3:03] of the public hearing and deliberations
[3:05] and we'll talk about all those a little
[3:07] bit later when the time's right uh
[3:09] moving on um so we are on the board of
[3:12] appeals continuation for case 20233 Rod
[3:15] re Incorporated Donovan Estates LLC to
[3:17] consider an application from Rod reil
[3:19] Incorporated Donovan Estates LLC of 4
[3:21] 4160 MIRS Avenue ches Beach for decision
[3:24] on uh on interpretation or alleged error
[3:26] article 6 section 29023 2931 A1 and A6
[3:31] of the chesap beach zoning ordinance in
[3:32] section C309 c310 and c311 of the chesap
[3:37] beach down chter uh applicant requests
[3:39] the Chesapeake Beach uh zoning board of
[3:41] appeals to quote order the zoning
[3:43] administrator and planning and zoning
[3:44] commission to immediately commence and
[3:46] prioritize the processing and review of
[3:48] the relevant site plan submitted by the
[3:49] Roden Incorporated Donovan Estates LLC
[3:52] and that the zoning administrator and
[3:53] planning and zoning commission be
[3:54] ordered to apply the zoning ordinances
[3:56] in effect as of January 29 2021
[4:00] uh when the applications were submitted
[4:01] and for such other and further relief as
[4:03] the nature of their calls
[4:04] requires at this time we will hear any
[4:07] member of the public who would like to
[4:09] speak to the board concerning this case
[4:12] um step to the Lecter uh write your
[4:14] information down and announce your name
[4:16] or who you represent you already got
[4:19] mine you want me to write it down again
[4:21] um if it's already there yeah I think
[4:23] it's not here on this one but I have
[4:25] attended other ones write your name
[4:28] again okay add R would you mind doing
[4:30] the honors of blanket swearing in
[4:32] everybody who's about to
[4:34] speak if you intend on speaking tonight
[4:37] please uh raise your right hand do you
[4:40] somly affirm uh that the testimony that
[4:43] you are about to give will be the truth
[4:45] the whole truth and nothing but the
[4:47] truth I do I thank you
[5:10] Randy getman 3248 AA
[5:15] Chase I'm I'm going to read part of this
[5:17] and and then I'll actually give you a
[5:19] hard
[5:21] copy one of the two main points made by
[5:25] the applicant and this Planning and
[5:27] Zoning commission uh I'm sorry is that
[5:29] the Planning and Zoning commission and
[5:31] the Planning and Zoning administrator
[5:33] did not carry out their duties in the
[5:35] time frame specified by the town
[5:38] code this point mainly focuses on duties
[5:41] relating to the update of town
[5:43] comprehensive plan and the review
[5:46] approval of category one site plan
[5:49] submissions the applicant pointed out
[5:51] that the code requires Planning and
[5:53] Zoning to do whatever it takes to get
[5:56] the task done let us remember
[6:00] that members of the Planning and Zoning
[6:02] are volunteers they do not get paid
[6:06] they're appointed by the mayor approved
[6:07] by Town Council they are not elected
[6:10] officials the members of the Planning
[6:12] and Zoning appear to have devoted a good
[6:15] deal of their time thought energy
[6:19] dedication and perseverance toward
[6:21] updating the comprehensive plan since at
[6:24] least
[6:25] 2018 probably
[6:27] longer perhaps they felt a bit
[6:29] overwhelmed when a submission of five
[6:32] new category one site plans uh came in
[6:35] while still working diligently on the
[6:37] comprehensive plan I'm not surprised
[6:41] that they asked the Town Council for
[6:44] Relief the second main point made by the
[6:48] applicant is that the Town Council used
[6:50] an incorrect method process for
[6:53] approving the meor
[6:55] moratorium I'm neither a lawyer nor a
[6:57] judge so I'll leave that one alone
[7:00] however I feel their job as elected
[7:03] officials is to do what is best for the
[7:05] town and its citizens I got the
[7:08] impression that each member of the Town
[7:10] Council took the proposal of the
[7:12] moratorium very seriously they sought
[7:15] public input on the issue from both
[7:18] sides and after due diligence and
[7:20] careful consideration to what was in the
[7:22] best interest of the town and its
[7:25] citizens each member of the council
[7:27] voted their conscience
[7:36] the real question in my mind is during
[7:39] this their six-hour
[7:41] presentation why did rod and reel not
[7:44] present
[7:45] arguments on why the findings in the now
[7:48] completed comprehensive plan were wrong
[7:51] or
[7:52] incorrect why did rod and reel not
[7:54] challenge that the new ordinance changes
[7:57] that now prevent their projects from
[8:00] being built were based on incorrect
[8:03] information I believe it is because the
[8:05] information is correct and the Planning
[8:08] and Zoning did an excellent job of
[8:10] identifying and planning for future
[8:12] issues I think that is why the rotten
[8:14] reel spent six hours focusing on
[8:17] planning zoning not carrying out their
[8:19] duties in time frames specified by the
[8:21] town code or that the moratorium was not
[8:24] approved
[8:25] correctly I think they tried to take our
[8:27] Focus away from the truth that the
[8:30] planning and zoning and planning and
[8:31] zoning administrator and the Town
[8:33] Council all carried out their assigned
[8:36] duties with due diligence and dedication
[8:39] to identify what was in the best
[8:40] interest of our town they did their
[8:45] job in
[8:46] conclusion it would have been
[8:48] inappropriate for the town to demand
[8:50] that volunteers do whatever it takes to
[8:53] get the task done we should not treat
[8:56] these energetic and dedicated Volunteers
[8:58] in that matter
[9:00] I feel that when they felt the workload
[9:03] was too much it was very appropriate for
[9:06] them to ask for relief from the town's
[9:08] elected officials I.E the Town
[9:12] Council I believe both our planning and
[9:14] zoning and Our Town Council took
[9:16] appropriate action in the execution of
[9:18] their duties and that the applicant's
[9:21] request should be
[9:23] denied in
[9:25] closing I would like to offer my
[9:27] personal thanks
[9:29] to each member of the Planning and
[9:31] Zoning to the Planning and Zoning
[9:33] administrator to the mayor and each
[9:36] member of Town Council to each member of
[9:39] the board of
[9:40] appeals and to each member of the Town
[9:43] staff for their perseverance honesty and
[9:47] extreme dedication towards the town and
[9:49] its
[9:49] citizens thanks for a job well done
[9:53] that's all thank you
[10:09] but you'll see it all in there
[10:48] ball before you get started is uh is
[10:49] what you're about to say the same
[10:52] comment as you submitted to Sharon
[10:53] before the meeting some of it okay some of it is um
[11:02] good evening Mr chair
[11:06] board all sides of down um quick
[11:10] question I was listening last time and
[11:13] uh Mr pounds said that he was willing to
[11:16] uh hear questions and address them in a
[11:19] manner uh tonight is that offer still
[11:23] stand
[11:24] [Music]
[11:27] um he he's asking whether he can still
[11:29] ask he had offered I was asking if that
[11:32] offer had Stood Still
[11:35] St Mr
[11:40] pounding
[11:42] tonight
[11:46] to it's in connection it's in connection
[11:50] with my public
[11:53] comment um are
[11:57] you are you still willing to answer
[11:59] questions posed by Mr Duval as Todd
[12:01] pounds I am but the problem is as an
[12:04] attorney with everything that's going on
[12:07] I have no instruction from my client as
[12:09] to what I'm doing here or anything so um
[12:13] as Todd pound is more than happy to
[12:16] answer any questions unfortunately Todd
[12:17] pound's the lawyer I've got no
[12:20] instructions so I I don't even know how
[12:21] to answer the question uh I'm inclined
[12:25] to ask you to not question because we
[12:28] we'd prefer if he could answer in his
[12:30] role that's no problem I'd just like to
[12:32] say okay if there's something I'd say
[12:35] that Mr pounds would like to speak on
[12:38] I'm more than welcome to okay to allow
[12:40] that okay there I'm not gonna
[12:45] say so just
[12:48] as I'm Daniel Deval 3610 chese Beach
[12:51] Road uh just as Randy was speaking I
[12:56] think there's a lot of misc confusion
[13:00] on exactly what we're all doing here and
[13:02] it
[13:04] takes a lot of work from the public from
[13:08] you the board from everyone to kind of
[13:11] sort this out a lot of times what I like
[13:14] to do is try to sort of go factchecking
[13:17] and upon my factchecking I've
[13:20] realized that the arguments that we hear
[13:24] here in some ways you feel are arguments
[13:28] between
[13:30] opposing sides but as you read the
[13:32] document in front of us it's almost an
[13:34] argument with the judge in the order
[13:37] that was put in place to have this
[13:40] hearing itself
[13:43] and and I've been on both sides of of
[13:48] the the trying to figure this entire
[13:50] thing out just as everybody has
[13:56] um the documents I sent you uh there was
[14:00] three different
[14:01] emails consisting
[14:04] of approximately 45 pages or
[14:10] so page
[14:12] eight I'm going to go just read uh some
[14:15] of
[14:16] this on July 6 2022 Miss Holly K wall
[14:22] the Town Administrator returned the $500
[14:25] filing fee along with the refund a copy
[14:28] of the letter from the town's attorney
[14:31] Mr Todd R pounds was included informing
[14:34] the rod and reel about a moratorium that
[14:36] had been put in place suspending the
[14:38] review of all applications the
[14:41] court
[14:43] finds that as a matter of law this was
[14:47] in proper means by which to reject a
[14:52] petitioner's interpretation appeal
[15:01] page
[15:02] nine the current matter the appeal was
[15:06] never heard despite the various States
[15:10] and local Provisions which both
[15:14] instructed Pur pursued and procedures on
[15:18] an appeal are scheduled and held by the
[15:22] board no hearings were ever conducted
[15:25] without Reasons by the board and
[15:28] indirect VI violation of several
[15:31] provisions of chese code
[15:34] 29032 no proceedings were scheduled no
[15:38] decisions were rendered and no
[15:40] resolution was taken by the board
[15:44] instead through the Town Administrator
[15:47] Miss Holly K wall and Town Council Todd
[15:50] R pounds petitioner interpretive appeal
[15:54] was similar denied on the grounds that a
[15:56] moratorium had suspended all appeals C
[16:00] petitioners exhibit 1 page
[16:03] 57 the
[16:04] letter rejecting the appeal sent by Mr
[16:08] Todd pounds failed to indicate whom on
[16:12] the board if any agreed with Mr pound's
[16:15] decision or his legal interpretation of
[16:18] the moratorium in fact it is not
[16:22] entirely clear that the board of appeals
[16:24] discussed this the appeal the only
[16:27] indication that the board seemed
[16:28] seemingly took any stance on the filed
[16:32] appeal is through the assumption that Mr
[16:36] Todd R pounds was representing the board
[16:40] implicitly when he corresponded with the
[16:44] petitioner via the a a affirmed
[16:51] letter while this court makes no finding
[16:55] as to whether petitioner actually has
[16:57] vested property rights
[16:59] it does recognize the private interest
[17:02] at stake potential vested property
[17:05] rights is of great
[17:08] significance second the risk of an
[17:11] erroneous deprivation of this interest
[17:15] through the proceedings you procedures
[17:17] used by the government in the value if
[17:20] any of additional procedure safeguards
[17:23] the risk of erroneous deprivation of
[17:27] petitioners private interest through the
[17:29] procedur used is quite
[17:33] high as stated
[17:35] above there is very little detail
[17:38] indicating how the board of appealed
[17:39] reached this decisions to reject the
[17:42] petitioner's appeal all that was
[17:45] received by the petitioner was a
[17:46] refunded filing fee in a brief letter
[17:49] from Town Council there was no
[17:51] indication as to the reasoning behind
[17:53] the board's interpretation of the
[17:55] moratorium nor was there any signal as
[17:58] to to whom the board of appeals agreed
[18:00] with Mr pound's letter because this
[18:04] decision seemed to have been made
[18:06] without adherence to
[18:09] any imated standard the risk of
[18:14] erroneous deprivation is exceptionally
[18:17] High related to the value and additional
[18:21] proceding safeg guards is obviously
[18:27] substantial the last
[18:29] factor is the government's interest
[18:32] including the fiscal and administrative
[18:35] burdens that the additional of
[18:37] subordinate procedures would entail the
[18:40] board of appeals is just that a board
[18:44] that hears appeals this is codified
[18:47] within the code of the town of ches
[18:50] beach the procedures and burdens would
[18:53] be no different than any other appeal
[18:55] that has been heard before the
[18:57] represented board
[18:59] accordingly the methodology to hear the
[19:02] appeal has already been put is is
[19:04] already in place thus the government
[19:07] interest particularly its interest in
[19:11] responsible fiscal decision making and
[19:14] avoidance of additional burdens is
[19:16] practically
[19:19] nonexistent this court finds this this
[19:22] court finds that pursuant to the affir
[19:24] mention Maryland State Law the chese
[19:26] code and recognition of the value of the
[19:30] procedural due process the Chesapeake
[19:32] board of appeals was obligated to
[19:34] schedule on petitioners
[19:41] appeal this board and it's not speaking
[19:45] to you it's speaking to the procedures
[19:48] that had to have courts to hear it this
[19:52] board was obligated to hear arguments on
[19:54] the petitioners June 2022
[19:58] appeal in accordance with the appal
[20:01] provisions of Maryland anti Cod L juice
[20:05] 4-30 6 and chesp code
[20:08] 29032 however it failed to do so as
[20:11] stated above on July 6 2022 the board
[20:17] through the Town Administrator and Town
[20:20] Council procedurally ended and rejected
[20:23] partitioners interpretation appeal by
[20:26] letter the court is left with no
[20:28] apparent recourse to remedy error except
[20:31] through an issuance of a written
[20:34] mandress in
[20:36] compelling the board to consider and
[20:39] hear the petitioner's appeal
[20:40] consequently in writ of me mandis
[20:44] memoris although an except an
[20:47] extraordinary remedy is appropriate to
[20:50] compel the board to perform its
[20:53] statutory duty this coure makes no
[20:55] finding or decision as it relates to the
[20:58] merits
[20:59] of the underlying action and appeal at
[21:02] this
[21:04] time this was something that would have
[21:07] really put all the arguments in the
[21:09] context and I went to the Circuit Court
[21:12] myself and paid for and printed this out
[21:14] just because things just didn't sit
[21:16] right um
[21:19] consequently the risks and everything
[21:21] that that this is a the judge's writing
[21:23] that's the judge's order um
[21:26] consequently um after Mr fiser was here
[21:30] uh if yall remember
[21:32] that
[21:34] um the
[21:38] uh the uh there's a connected case
[21:43] that was served on Todd pounds and Holly
[21:48] K wall um in regards to iminent domain
[21:53] due process and and stuff the the items
[21:57] that I came across that were concerning that
[22:01] got me to go to court
[22:06] was in the uh court filings um the
[22:10] initial filings
[22:17] the there's a few check boxes and I'm
[22:21] sure that some of you guys that are
[22:24] attorneys know but on page two of it uh
[22:27] the applicant had
[22:29] checked for mediation arbitration
[22:31] settlement conference neutral evaluation
[22:34] and if new existing case relief on new
[22:38] it case relief there was nothing checked
[22:41] and on all these alternative dispute was
[22:45] no one everything and a trial date of
[22:47] more than three
[22:49] days and this was filed
[22:52] on July 8th 2024
[22:59] it was
[23:00] served on Todd pounds and Holly
[23:05] wall
[23:07] then
[23:17] October and for
[23:20] context
[23:21] um was an election myself Mr Sharp a few
[23:27] other people were running uh for Council
[23:30] and and you learn things and discuss
[23:32] things one of the things that I was
[23:33] learning about was legit it's our
[23:35] insurance company it's
[23:37] a
[23:40] it it's a uh I guess something that
[23:45] people have uh it's sort of people when
[23:48] you fill out your public disclosure
[23:50] there's protection there but the town
[23:51] itself for
[23:53] wrongdoing um so this is where
[23:59] I saw an entry a court
[24:02] appearance uh
[24:05] for Victoria M Sheeran uh eonon and wolf
[24:12] PC uh they're in Handover
[24:15] Marland a quarter mile from the jit's
[24:19] office
[24:21] um she filed a court appearance that she
[24:26] was going to be the attorney for this
[24:28] for for the the other related case on
[24:31] October
[24:33] 8th um and in her
[24:37] filing on that page
[24:41] two she had checked damages and
[24:44] compensated so she's already offering
[24:47] that a of Branch from what I'm
[24:48] interpreting just comparing factual
[24:51] printed
[24:52] documents and she's
[24:55] requested a mediation she's requested a
[24:58] settlement conference she's checked yes
[25:00] to both of them
[25:03] so as confusing as the entire town is in
[25:06] regards to this
[25:08] matter I I I go back to
[25:12] again miss Mary Lam had said it's about
[25:14] our rights it's more about the rights
[25:18] than anything and and the actions and
[25:19] the confusion and and everything the due
[25:22] processes judges orders all of these
[25:25] things I've submitted to you guys to
[25:28] kind of of
[25:32] provide maybe a
[25:35] reference and
[25:37] Clarity to everything that's at hand and
[25:40] note that it is not the next
[25:43] administration's whatever happens it's
[25:46] the previous ones it is nothing I
[25:48] believe that that
[25:52] the Planning and Zoning I think Planning
[25:56] and Zoning tried to do what it was but
[25:58] when you follow the guidance and advice
[26:01] of an attorney and if that attorney is
[26:04] not giving you sound advice for the
[26:07] protection of a town it's sort of what's
[26:09] put us in this
[26:11] very odd strange situation that
[26:15] hopefully we can wiggle oursel out of
[26:18] and but I don't know it's uh there's not
[26:23] another case I can really find that's
[26:25] such from Talking different people and administrative roles throughout our
[26:32] County and state thank you very
[26:34] much thank
[26:49] you Laura Blackwelder 3256 Canon K Court
[26:53] chesp
[26:57] Beach I I would like to thank this board
[26:59] for your time over the course of more
[27:02] than a year you have patiently sat for
[27:04] multiple hearing sessions and considered
[27:07] many pages of documents and letters
[27:09] using precious hours of time that you
[27:12] volunteered to give for
[27:14] free I have attended all but one of
[27:17] these hearings wrote letters and made
[27:19] myself a party of record as a private
[27:20] citizen to remind everyone that when it
[27:23] comes to large-scale development that is
[27:25] both physically and financially
[27:27] impactful to the Town residents like
[27:29] myself are stakeholders in the
[27:32] situation you already have four letters
[27:35] totaling 13 pages of public comment and
[27:37] legal argument from me which I will try
[27:40] to Briefly
[27:41] summarize there are over 6,000 residents
[27:44] in this town who all have a right to
[27:47] benefit from zoning regulations policies
[27:49] and practices that protect the health
[27:52] safety and general well welfare of the
[27:55] town the idea that a municipality should
[27:59] be forced to ignore the projected
[28:01] impacts of recently approved development
[28:04] and also disregard growing environmental
[28:07] concerns to allow a property owner to
[28:09] develop according to zoning regulations
[28:12] that do not address these realities is
[28:15] absurd the idea that a municipality
[28:18] should neglect to require adequate
[28:20] parking open space or supporting
[28:22] infrastructure for large-scale housing
[28:25] projects to make development less costly
[28:27] for for a developer is also
[28:31] inappropriate the Planning Commission
[28:34] and town leaders have determined that
[28:35] the best way for the town to move
[28:37] forward with development will be to
[28:39] require that development proceed
[28:42] according to the updated comprehensive
[28:44] plan and the updated zoning
[28:46] ordinance I believe that the applant
[28:49] should have respected those decisions
[28:52] rather than engaging with this
[28:55] appeal in any case it is time for C PE
[28:58] Beach to leave these expired site plans
[29:00] in the
[29:01] past please remember that the at the
[29:04] board of appeals the applant has the
[29:06] burden of
[29:07] proof I do not see how this burden can
[29:10] be met to adequately support the relief
[29:14] sought in the absence of key Witnesses
[29:18] particularly the town planner and Zoning
[29:20] administrator who recommended the
[29:25] moratorium or in the absence of proper
[29:28] handling of evidence of full
[29:32] litigation in the absence of proof that
[29:35] all five site plans were complete and in
[29:38] the absence of proof that the applant
[29:41] was
[29:51] vested it would be a disservice to the
[29:53] residents of this town who deserve
[29:56] protection of responsible development
[29:58] policies and their tax dollars if the
[30:01] board of appeals were to decide in favor
[30:04] of the
[30:07] applicant please deny this appeal and
[30:10] also refrain from commenting in a way
[30:13] that will complicate future litigation
[30:15] that could cost the taxpayers money
[30:19] thank
[30:20] you thank you
[30:41] okay uh any further people who' like to
[30:46] speak um okay uh I said we would not go
[30:51] this is a specific meeting dedicated to
[30:53] public comment and if that is all the
[30:55] public comment we have we will wrap this
[30:58] meeting up um before we do so um I'm
[31:02] going to announce the next meeting we
[31:03] have planned for December 2nd at 6:30
[31:07] pm
[31:09] um and at this time uh the board would
[31:14] like to move into summary
[31:16] statements um in discussing this with Mr
[31:20] susman we'd like to ask for any any some
[31:23] written summary statements submitted to
[31:25] Sharon preferbly by 11:27 that's two
[31:29] weeks from today um if you would like to
[31:33] include fact of findings and conclusions
[31:35] of law for our uh legal folks here that
[31:38] would be
[31:39] appreciated um Sharon once you receive
[31:42] these if you'd send them out to the
[31:43] board upon receipt um and during the
[31:46] next meeting we will do 15 minutes of
[31:50] oral presentations um that's uh however
[31:53] you'd like to do your closing
[31:56] um so yes submit and writing and we'll
[31:59] do 15 minutes of oral per of oral
[32:01] presentations closings per party um yeah
[32:05] and that will be at the beginning of the
[32:07] next session um Mr Mr chair I I have a
[32:10] hearing on the second second all
[32:13] right that was the only day that was
[32:16] going to work with the board so we will
[32:17] have to reann nowc a different date
[32:19] disregard uh disregard the date for the
[32:22] second uh feel free to in that case also
[32:25] the submission for for written closing
[32:29] is released you may submit that as
[32:31] you're able and we'll
[32:33] reann uh another date when we Mr
[32:36] chairman I think uh to avoid significant
[32:40] advertising issues we got to try and see
[32:43] if we can get a date
[32:45] nowbody has a
[32:55] calendar yeah this would be guess we'll
[32:58] be going into the new year what's the
[33:01] posting requirement it's how long does
[33:02] it have to be advertised just a couple
[33:05] of weeks we're still outside of that
[33:11] window okay okay that's why we need to
[33:14] announce the time plays
[33:17] here all
[33:18] right take a couple moments and figure
[33:21] it out
[33:22] [Music]
[33:45] is
[33:46] there reason that the board wants the
[33:49] 15minute oral presentations because if
[33:53] we didn't want to do that if you didn't
[33:55] do that and just had the uh um
[33:59] deadline
[34:01] you we would meet Mr pound's problem of
[34:04] not being able to come on the second and
[34:06] there wouldn't really be we would just
[34:07] do written submissions I don't I just
[34:10] don't know whether you wanted an oral
[34:13] presentation as well uh possibly to ask
[34:15] additional questions as you saw from the
[34:17] summations I'm not sure what you were
[34:19] anticipating so I'm just throwing out
[34:20] that if we don't need to have the oral
[34:25] presentations we could dispense with
[34:27] that and then that way you wouldn't need
[34:29] the
[34:32] date I'm just throwing it out
[34:36] there yeah I think the thinking behind
[34:40] oral was we don't know what we're going
[34:42] to see in written uh presentations uh we
[34:46] don't know if it's going to be
[34:48] self-explanatory going to be followup
[34:50] that the board is want to ask for
[34:52] counsels and uh thinking was if we get
[34:57] 10 pages of written I like to have you
[35:00] summarize it in 15
[35:03] minutes think that some of the thinking
[35:06] behind the world and that makes sense I
[35:09] just was throwing it out there as a
[35:11] possible solution but it does make
[35:18] sense then one other quick question is
[35:22] in your process you you didn't provide
[35:25] us the opportunity for rebuttal
[35:28] we've had arguments
[35:30] typically petitioner would get a chance
[35:33] to rebuttal we don't we can wave that
[35:35] it's
[35:36] just I don't want to wave it if new
[35:40] facts can be presented during any of the
[35:42] summaries summations I would hope that
[35:45] the rule would be in summation there no facts outside the record can be
[35:51] brought in that would be my hope and
[35:54] expectation this is summation closing
[35:57] argument
[35:58] of what has been being presented uh here
[36:01] in 12 13 nights since last September
[36:05] okay not an opportunity for introducing
[36:09] new evidence new
[36:13] testimony right okay I just want to make
[36:17] sure I don't want to wave our what I
[36:20] view is our right to rebuttal if if
[36:22] other facts can come in and then we
[36:24] can't have an opportunity but if if as
[36:27] long as that's the rule then we don't
[36:29] need
[36:38] Ruttle still looking at January
[36:40] now I'm open I'm just waiting for you oh any any days good well I don't have
[36:47] the um Town calendar but I can make it
[36:55] work what
[36:59] well yeah it can't be um third Thursday
[37:02] because that's the down council
[37:05] meeting other than
[37:07] Thursday and probably not the 22nd
[37:10] because I think you have a Planning and
[37:11] Zoning
[37:18] Zing only Tuesday is not good for
[37:23] me Monday try Monday I don't think
[37:26] Thursday's are good for Steve are they
[37:32] Steve say
[37:41] the that's GNA
[37:44] be
[37:49] little see let's try one more
[37:54] before about the 15
[38:00] say January
[38:01] 15 that's
[38:04] okay right Council that okay out in the
[38:07] panut
[38:09] gallery and you're setting that for 6 or
[38:12] 6:30 6:30 okay so scratch that previous
[38:19] announcement the next meeting will be
[38:21] Wednesday January 15 at 6:30 uh same as
[38:25] before blah blah blah
[38:28] um written summaries 15minute oral
[38:32] presentations at which point uh I'd like
[38:34] the board members to consider what legal
[38:37] questions they have for Mr susman here
[38:39] and to submit them in writing to him um
[38:42] if you have them in advance of closing
[38:44] great um if they come to you after
[38:46] closing so be it um please try and get
[38:50] those to Mr susman as you able um so
[38:53] during the next session we'll do closing
[38:55] and then I expect that we'll go straight
[38:58] into close session to discuss legal
[39:01] issues with Mr susman um which would
[39:04] mean that that's all that will happen
[39:05] during the next meeting we open up
[39:07] closing shut it down and everybody can
[39:09] go and the board will will go and
[39:11] promise not to do any additional
[39:13] business during that time on the
[39:15] 15th so can the deadline for the written
[39:19] be December 31st or something like that
[39:22] yeah just make it I'll say a week a week
[39:24] in advance oh okay the eth y that'll be
[39:31] fine that to Sharon if you
[39:36] would and is Sharon GNA distribute those
[39:39] to all the parties so that we don't
[39:42] we're just sending it to Sharon and she
[39:43] takes care of
[39:46] Y uh okay any additional business before
[39:50] the board
[39:52] tonight hearing none uh at this time
[39:55] I'll enter oh minutes we're going to
[39:57] discuss
[39:57] yes we were going to discuss the minutes
[39:59] I believe Amy had brought up an issue
[40:01] while she was reading it so we can just
[40:02] do that next
[40:04] time haven't approved the minutes from
[40:06] our last meeting and we will come in and
[40:07] do
[40:12] that uh at this time I'd entertain a
[40:16] motion to
[40:18] adjourn make a motion to adjourn do I
[40:21] have a second favor this meeting is
[40:24] adjourned thank you everybody uh see you
[40:26] on the 15th
[40:34] meeting we've ever
[40:37] done a great trip thank
[40:40] you
[40:43] I'm I have lots of pictures