2005-09-02 TMALASEKO2 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

background report to be accompanied by an oath or other affirmation, nor we -. In typical contested cases involving intervenors with formal contested cases, documents are routinely accepted, written documents are routinely accepted without being sworn to. IWASHITA:I dont have any problem accepting advice from staff and the Director. Its just in the contested case process that were involved in, my point is that thats all it is, its advice. And its not something that the Commission can rely on as evidence as part of the record in reaching its decision. Because, for example, in the Directors last letter, the Director says the sale ended his rights to the property, including the right to earn income from fruit trees. Thats advice. If we, lets say thats advice. But thats not something that the Commission can rely on, you know, as a matter of fact in this case that thats how the rule is to be read. The decision on how the rule is to be read is to be made by the Commission. The decision on how the rule is to be applied is to be made by the Commission. The advice of the Director is welcomed and can be looked at it that way, but its advice. And its not controlling and cannot be controlling of this body. And,youknow,lookingatRule14and,again,theDirectorandthestaffreallyhavenorolein the rule directly to this bodys consideration and approval of, or deference to the adjusters recommendation. You know, that whole process, its adjuster makes recommendations, the Commission either accepts it, denies it or defers. Thats the process. There is nothing in the rule itself that says, you know, basically staff or the Director has input. And I acknowledge that under the Charter the Director is required to provide advice to the Commission. But, again, you know, were working under Rule 14 and, to me, we should, thats primarily what should control our process. GALDONES:Im going to have Mr. Torigoe make a statement and Im going to call for a short recess thereafter. TORIGOE:Okay. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Just with respect to the Directors role, you know, everybody acknowledges that the Charter says that the Director advises the Commission. We also acknowledge that this should be considered a contested case. And under your Contested Case Rule 4-7 it says that, In all proceedings where the Commissions action is directly appealable to Circuit Court, including this one, the applicant and the Planning Director will be designated parties to the action. So that is, you know, the Director is a party, the Director can participate as such and can testify as such. Now Commissioner Iwashita raises a good point in that if were going to be taking testimony then at some point it would be good to swear the people who are giving that testimony if its factual. And when we have formal contested case procedures, that certainly has been the practice to swear everybody in, and also to make sure that whatever documents are properly recognized as being in evidence. In times when you dont have a real formal adversarial contested procedure going weve tended not to be that formal. But it doesnt hurt at the end, you know, when you have all the evidence in to make sure that all the parties are satisfied, that whatever they want to present is in the record, and have that designated and, if you also want to, at some point, say, you know, we have been treating this as a fairly informal proceeding by apparent consensus of the Commission and parties. But if the parties want at the end to affirm 14