My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
MIN CHC 1999-09-08
PublicDocuments
>
County Clerk - Council
>
County Clerk
>
Charter Commission
>
2000
>
Minutes
>
MIN CHC 1999-09-08
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/9/2018 12:30:06 PM
Creation date
3/6/2018 3:12:45 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
AGE/MIN (Charter Comm.)
Agency
Charter Commission
Year
1999
Meeting date
9/8/1999
Type
MIN
Document Relationships
AGE CHC 1999-09-08 SP MTG
(Related)
Path:
\County Clerk - Council\County Clerk\Charter Commission\2000\Agendas
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
71
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
split in the same way, and maybe more so, than the way we were feeling in terms of our <br />department being split, and let me explain that. Rodney is staffed to Planning <br />Department. Rodney also has functions that go beyond being staffed to the Board of <br />Appeals, and the Board of Appeals hears appeals on my decision. He's stuck, in some <br />respects, and so there was a perceived kind of conflict for them, and also to have a <br />Board under the Planning Department, when they hear the appeals of the Planning <br />Director, we also felt that there might be some of that kind of conflict. So that was one <br />of the reasons for trying to find some neutral place for the Board of Appeals. <br />Nevertheless, as an attorney, right now their staff - one, there's two who is attorney to <br />the Planning Department. There's Fred Giannini who is the attorney for Planning <br />Commission. Public Works has it own, quote, attorney, and likewise, the Board of <br />Appeals has an attorney, and they're all housed in the Corporation Counsel. So for <br />them, as an attorney, to have to serve all of those bodies, they also felt that it might be <br />very difficult for them to keep that conflict out of the picture. That's kind of like what <br />their position was, but if it came to that, they were willing to house the Board of <br />Appeals. <br />IRVINE: Virginia, it seems to me that there's going to be that conflict no <br />matter where we put them because they do hear appeals from both Planning and the <br />Public Works. <br />GOLDSTEIN: And the public essentially felt that it was not a big deal when they <br />voted for the changes. <br />RAY: Kevin. <br />BALOG: It tweaked me a little bit when they said appeals by the Director <br />and I got to thinking. It's true, no matter where you put them, they will hear appeals <br />from you. An example would be, correct me if I'm wrong, some type of structure that is <br />discretionary by the Director on ag land, a minor SMA permit perhaps, no? What else <br />besides something on ag land? <br />GOLDSTEIN: Minor SMA permits and, if it's, for example, special permits, those <br />get appealed to the Third Circuit, not to the Board of Appeals because the authority <br />for those come from a different place. The use permits are heard by Planning <br />Commission. The only thing that the Director, then, makes decisions on would be the <br />subdivisions basically, plan approvals and variances, and there we are suggesting go <br />to Public Works so there isn't anything left to - <br />BALOG: So there would be no - <br />GOLDSTEIN: I don't see it anyway and 1 haven't gone through that exhaustive list <br />yet. <br />21 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.