Laserfiche WebLink
THIBADEAU:We had a proposal before us and we now have a change in that <br />proposal. My questions is, is it proper in the middle of a hearing to change the proposal <br />when you have a history of having had it cleared with everybody else and now we have a <br />different proposal which has not been cleared by anyone? I don’t quite understand how <br />we can act on something that has been changed right now. Or is there a different rule I’m <br />not aware of? I can understand why the applicant wants to change it. But isn’t the proper <br />thing to do is submit another modification, or a change, or whatever, whatever it is, and <br />then at the hearing in May we take action on that, so we can handle it properly as a <br />different proposal? To me it’s not the same thing. <br />YUEN:Because it’s a reduction in the number of units, and has not <br />changed the location of the site -. We’re not going to act on this today, at any rate. But I <br />would not say that you have to start over again and reapply. <br />THIBADEAU;Which one are they going to contest then? This one that’s on the <br />board or the new modification today? <br />DARROW:Could I interject? The original request is for this request here -. <br />THIBADEAU:That’s right. <br />DARROW:The three units. <br />THIBADEAU:Right. <br />DARROW:In the course of receiving comment letters from the different <br />agencies, we pretty much were informed that there’s only one water unit available for this <br />request. So, basically, Water Supply limits it to one unit. So, at this point, when that <br />happened, then the applicant had submitted a possible solution to that to allow a one unit. <br />Now, again, the contested cases would be based on the original proposal. Now if there <br />was a way to resolve this through having one unit then, at this time, we might be able to <br />resolve both the contested cases and the application. But, if not, then we need to proceed <br />with the original proposal of three units and work towards the contested case hearings. <br />But that is a possible solution that if, if the petitioners for standing -. You know, as <br />Mrs. Cazimero said that she was unaware that this new proposal for a one unit is coming <br />before us, then maybe that, if that’s a possible solution we can resolve this. If they’re in <br />agreement, then maybe we can proceed without the contested case hearings. But, if not, <br />then we need to proceed with the original proposed request. <br />GALDONES:Jeff, on those bases, if the amendment, amended form is being <br />introduced now, does that change the background report that is before us? <br />DARROW:At this point, this is just a, I wouldn’t say replacing this, it’s just a <br />possible option. If it’s something that could be agreed upon, then we might be able to <br />proceed. Oh -. <br />15 <br /> <br />