2008-07-10 TCAMPBELL - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

IWASHITA: Can she clarify, the intervention is what she objects to? WATANABE: She only objected to the description of being adjacent. But it’s not technically adjacent to the subject property, although it is adjacent to one of the properties she does own. But it’s still within 500 feet. IWASHITA: Right. So all I’m asking is if the applicant can be asked to clarify whether she actually, other than that noting the difference, whether, if she really objects to his intervention. WATANABE: Well, for the record then, would you, Ms. Campbell. CAMPBELL: Would I object? WATANABE: Yes. CAMPBELL: Yes, I would object. I don’t find that the submitted information in contesting my application is a reasonable contesting to not allow my operation. WATANABE: Okay. You’re answering a separate question though. CAMPBELL: Okay. WATANABE: Cause really what we’re looking for is whether you are objecting to granting him standing, Mr. Kaiser’s standing. CAMPBELL: No, I do not. Actually it’s the neighborly thing to talk about this issue, and I appreciate meeting my neighbors who haven’t approached me until this proceeding. WATANABE: Very well. Thank you. Okay, so the record is clear -. ALAMEDA: Mr. Chair? WATANABE: Yes, Mr. Alameda. ALAMEDA: Just on the whole objection thing. I mean, she can object but there are basic protocols, yeah, for someone to grant standing. So maybe the audience could benefit from it. Because she can object but, I mean, if he has the right, well, it doesn’t matter if she objects or not object. If the contester has a right to standing based on the criteria that nobody knows right now because we didn’t help them understand that -. So could you state the criteria for standing so that everybody knows, oh, you did already, just 500 feet? WATANABE: No, 500 feet is for notice. But basically standing is granted for people that have a special interest over and above the general public. And beyond that, it’s, I believe, fairly flexible. EXHIBIT B 4