2005-09-02 TMALASEKO2 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

IWASHITA:Sure. TORIGOE:Well, again, treating this as a contested case basically any relevant testimony you can consider. And so if you want to further probe into the extent to which the Planning Director has actual experience that relate to that, well, you can do that. I think it probably goes to the weight of the evidence rather than to its admissibility. And in a matter like this, I think the Planning Director basically, again, would be a party; and so you can treat him as such. GALDONES:Commissioner -. YUEN:If I could just say one thing on that. The role of the Department in providing factual information, or even opinion, is different than the role of the Commissioners. We,ineveryapplicationwewillprovidefactualinformationthatsometimesmaynotberight. But thats what we do. And so when we talk about the Commissioners not interjecting information that is not broadly known into the proceedings, theres a difference between the role of the Department as staff or as party to a contested case and the Commissioners as the decision makers. GALDONES:Commissioner Iwashita? IWASHITA:Thank you, Mr. Chair. Im going to venture into, maybe, quicksand because now Im going to put on my sort of lawyer training here. The rule we have to follow is Rule 14. And I have some concerns about the rule with regard to how staff and the Director are factored into the implementation of the rule. And Ive gone through the eight pages that constitute my copy of the rule provided to me and I find nothing in these eight pages on staffs or the Directors participation in this process, nothing. All references are to the Commission and to the adjuster. Okay? So if, and I agree with counsel that this is a contested case type of matter that, the result of which may be appealed by the applicant. And so we if want to dot our is and cross our ts and make sure we peel only the right bananas, if the Director, or staff, or otherwise wants to make a record, a proper record, in this contested case matter then it should be done the way its usually done, by sworn testimony before the body. Otherwise it doesnt appear to me that we as a Commission under Rule 14 can take anything other than the report of the adjuster and whatever is actually placed on the record before us under oath into consideration in reaching whatever decision we come to reach in this matter. GALDONES:Mr. Yuen. YUEN:Two things: first on the authority of the Director to make recommendations on this matter comes from the County Charter which says that the Director advises the Planning Commission on matters within their responsibility. Second, on the point of whether matters should be submitted, matters like a background report, we would be happy to be under oath for such matters. That has not been the general practice for the Departments 13