Laserfiche WebLink
contact listed on the pool building permit application. Is that <br /> standard procedure for the department to contact if they don't have <br /> all the information on file to go to the contact? Is that standard <br /> procedure? <br /> Mr. Gonzalez: Yes it is. <br /> Mr. Adams: And then on item eleven, it says that Mr. Emler prepared a notice <br /> of violation form with basic information of the nature of the <br /> violation in the event that it would be necessary to issue the <br /> property before actually meeting with the petitioner at the <br /> petitioner's home which turned out to be the site of the potential <br /> violation. Is that standard procedure for the department to prepare <br /> a notice of violation forms and bring them with them? They've <br /> done their investigation through the paperwork and whatever <br /> phone calls or email activities have taken place, but before they've <br /> actually gone and seen the site. Is it standard procedure for them <br /> to purveyor a notice of violation forms? <br /> Mr. Gonzalez: Yes it is. <br /> Mr. Adams: I would also note that you make the comment that it's been four <br /> years since this notice of violation was provided to them and that <br /> the petitioners were finally deciding to file this allegations. I <br /> would just note having gone through.... I'd be interested in the <br /> Counsel and our Counsel's comments on this if any. I don't <br /> believe we have a statute of limitations on allegations. I didn't see <br /> it in any of our items, so I didn't see it in our rules and I didn't see <br /> it in our code. <br /> Mr. Yoshimoto: I can check on that while we continue the discussion. <br /> Mr. Adams: Okay great. Those are the questions that I had. Thank you. <br /> Ms. Kahakalau: Any other questions? Okay. As this is an initial review, do I hear <br /> a motion to either take it to an informal hearing or to dismiss? <br /> Mr. Adams: Madame Chair I would move to dismiss the petition. The petition <br /> is intended to indicate that because there was lack of an <br /> investigation. Because it was a violation given before there was an <br /> investigation that that meant that the petitioners were treated in a <br /> manner that was not courteous, fair, and impartial in accordance <br /> with 2-83. And based on the information that have and the <br /> testimony that we've heard, I would move that we dismiss the <br /> petition. <br /> 14 <br />