Laserfiche WebLink
WATANABE: Well, yes, yes. You requested Thai lunch and, you know, God willing <br />we’ll have some Thai lunch. <br />ALAMEDA: Mr. Chair, I have a question along those lines. <br />WATANABE: Yes. <br />ALAMEDA: Who pays? Is it the County or the -? <br />WATANABE: The County pays, they do budget for that. I believe there is money in the <br />budget. But I think, it’s my interpretation the Planning Department is recommending that we <br />address this on our own because they feel that it’s something that is relatively simple. And with <br />that let me turn the floor over to Mr. Yuen. <br />YUEN: Yes. We are recommending, first, that this be done by the Planning <br />Commission and not by a hearings officer. Second that the Planning Commission, and this part <br />doesn’t, you can agree to the one without the second part. But the second part, that we go into <br />the contested case hearing and hold it today. And we’ve informed the parties that this is a <br />possibility. And we’ve talked about this, I don’t know if with all the Commissioners here, but <br />we’ve talked about this in the past, that a contested case hearing does not have to be a big <br />mysterious legalistic endeavor. And the basic differences between what we normally do and a <br />contested case hearing is, the parties still can present exhibits, all the witnesses can testify. What <br />is different is that they have the opportunity for cross-examination of the Department, of the <br />other person’s witnesses; and they have a right to a more formal written decision, which is in the <br />form of Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Decision and Order. The Department has <br />presented one. Our experience, so there are contested case hearings that involve a lot of disputes <br />on factual issues, like will nutrient levels in the ocean increase because of wastewater, that may <br />involve some kinds of technical issues. But many of the issues that come in front of you involve <br />situations where, like this one, the special permit is being requested, there is an issue of whether <br />it may cause some disturbance in the neighborhood due to traffic or noise and the like; and at the <br />end of the day it’s up to the Commission to make a judgment under the standards of the special <br />permit whether they consider this a reasonable or unusual use of the property or not. Our <br />experience in, when these have gone to hearings officers, hearings were held, parties then <br />comeback and the Commission has to take a vote, and very often the issues have largely been <br />argued in front of the Commission again. The same things that the people have said, if the <br />Commission had had a contested case hearing, are reargued in front of the Commission. So that <br />being the case we believe the parties can present what they have to say to the Commission either <br />today or at some other time rather than the hearings officer procedure which generally does, the <br />Department has to hire a hearings officer, we have to pay a hearings officer, it generally takes <br />several months to bring the matter back to the Planning Commission. <br />WATANABE: Okay, Mr. Woodward. <br />WOODWARD: Mr. Chairman, I would move that we handle this contested case hearing at <br />the Planning Commission; and if it’s acceptable to the applicant and the contestant that we do it <br />today. <br />WATANABE: Thank you. There’s a motion on the table. Do we have a second on that? <br /> EXHIBIT B <br />10 <br /> <br />