BOA agenda 061217 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

DRAFT 32 Andy Petesch: I’d like to ask Chris Brewer to come up and address the chestnuts, whereas Ms. 1 Brown asked about and believe that his testimony, at least from my questioning, should be only 2 two minutes. 3 4 LeAnn Brown: I think for… for due process purposes if the Board has indicated to me that it wished 5 for me to cease a line of questioning of a witness that it would be appropriate to not receive further 6 evidence that continues the, what Mr. Hughes referred to as, the walk down memory lane. 7 Otherwise, the appellant has been asked to not proceed with evidence that now the property owner 8 is allowed to proceed with. 9 10 Matt Hughes: I certainly agree with that. 11 12 Karen Barrows: I think we’ve heard Mr. Brewer, so. 13 14 Andy Petesch: Alright. Now I just would would ask the record to show that Mr. Brewer was 15 available and prepared to testify about update on chestnuts, I’ll leave it at that. Thank you. 16 17 Karen Barrows: Thank you. 18 19 Matt Hughes: Thank you. 20 21 Karen Barrows: So from here do you each tidy it up with a closing statement? 22 23 LeAnn Brown: Despite the fact that you’ve heard some additional evidence this evening this is 24 really not a hearing that’s about receiving more evidence. You made a decision before, which is 25 actually on appeal by Ms. Brewer. We’ve got an odd procedural part posture because Mr. Harvey’s 26 opinion was issued before you could even get an order done and start the clock ring for us to deal 27 with it. Be that as it may I’d like to turn to Mr. Harvey’s, ask you to turn to Mr. Harvey’s, November 28 7th 2016 opinion. And I want to go through with you what he decided and why that’s wrong. I want 29 to advise you as I begin this process that under 160a388 you are empowered to substitute your 30 judgment for Mr. Harvey’s. You are this evening the people who make the determination about the 31 legal meaning of the various statutes involved. I realize that most of you are not judges by training 32 during the day, the one who is had to recuse herself from this hearing. Just as Mr. Harvey is not an 33 attorney and not a judge either, but you are tasked with deciding whether this is correct and you 34 are free to substitute your judgment for him, which means just as it meant at our last hearing you 35 could decide what this statute means and you can decide whether or not this property fits in it. And 36 so with that in mind I want to go through the process. I do want to raise for the record, I don’t want 37 to talk about it much, but I do want to raise for the record cause I am certain that we are going to 38 be elsewhere with this case before it’s over that I have serious due process concerns about the 39 fact that we have had members of the Orange County staff, including the legal staff, involved in 40 representing you and advising Michael twice and we have a situation where you’re being advised, 41 as my judges, as to procedure and I think to some degree as to what the law is while the County is 42 also advising in other ways and it’s giving me some heartburn and I want to raise it so that I have it 43 on appeal, and I’m through discussing that for tonight, that’s not your issue to decide. Moving on to 44 the opinion. The first question that Mr. Harvey addresses in his opinion is whether the property is a 45 bona fide farm. You have before you a copy of 153a-340b that Mr. Harvey introduced into 46 evidence. Chapter 153a section 340 is the grant of power of zoning. I say that to you because I 47