Laserfiche WebLink
Mr. Robinson: <br />Ms. Sumner -Mack: <br />Mr. Wiseman: <br />Mr. Yoshimoto: <br />Mr. Robinson: <br />Mr. Wiseman: <br />Mr. Robinson: <br />Mr. Wiseman: <br />Correct. <br />Is it fair to assume that we would make this our final decision. Or <br />is the subsequent meeting going to encourage comments and some <br />changes in the language. <br />What about the communication. I mean if we can go back and <br />forth with different comments in the email. I'm not talking on <br />making final but...other than just to the discussion. I mean we <br />definitely need more time. <br />Okay. So let me take a couple of steps back. So at the last <br />meeting on June 10th. The Board...on the issue of recusal...you <br />know the Board indicated that it was not going to address that <br />issue, so my concern is...is that, unless we have something like a <br />motion to reconsider our...the Board's decision...we're not able to <br />supplement the record so to speak. So if we want to do that, I <br />would suggest we reconsider the Board's findings. We need to re - <br />notice the parties. And then have further discussions on what the <br />Board wants to include in it's findings. Because if it's going to <br />change of deviate from what was decided upon June 10th, then I <br />think we need to make sure that everyone has their opportunity to <br />be heard. So it might take more than an additional meeting but I <br />think sounds like the Board wants to continue to address issues that <br />it did not on the June 10th meeting. And please correct me if I'm <br />misunderstanding. <br />So you mean. In essence, reconvene the hearing and...? <br />It's only if...it's Larry's concern that it should include recusal. I <br />don't agree with that. <br />Or is that something we could address with the Council when <br />we're there presenting our advisory opinion. <br />So to me the comments we made verbally in our decision as well <br />as what will be in writing so far in draft and maybe to be <br />strengthened. They definitely imply a recusal option. A recusal <br />mandate. I mean it's impliedly stated. And not that I wouldn't <br />want it in there. But at the time, the effort, the expense of going to <br />another like you say...to have the right procedure to...put that in <br />there. We would have to go through a whole new procedure and <br />I'm not in favor of that. <br />Mr. Heintz: My concern was toward the end of our last meeting. David <br />indicated that he had comments he wanted to make to address. Mr. <br />7 <br />