Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
75 <br /> DRAFT <br /> 386 <br /> 387 Michael Harvey: This was drafted after a 45-minute discussion between Mr. Bryan and myself to address concerns of <br /> 388 legal sufficiency. <br /> 389 <br /> 390 Craig Benedict: I like the brochure idea or something that explains how we implement this. If we cannot put it as a <br /> 391 definition with an elaboration of it,which isn't being suggested, then the language as it is would be useable with a <br /> 392 brochure. This would explain what we are trying to achieve. <br /> 393 <br /> 394 Michael Harvey: Are you going to come up with a brochure? <br /> 395 <br /> 396 Lydia Wegman:The brochure also isn't the standard of court with review. It could be helpful to applicants, but it won't <br /> 397 address the question if it were challenged. The brochure wouldn't be admissible. <br /> 398 <br /> 399 Craig Benedict: The brochure would be a help to the customer. <br /> 400 <br /> 401 Lydia Wegman: It's a good idea but doesn't address our comfort with UDO language. <br /> 402 <br /> 403 Craig Benedict: I agree. <br /> 404 <br /> 405 Randy Marshall: Before we vote, I am going to say anything with the burden of persuasion language I'm voting against. <br /> 406 I'm not persuaded that we have to have it because Durham had it. We've never had it in here and it's never been a <br /> 407 problem. <br /> 408 <br /> 409 Paul Guthrie: Has any court of competent jurisdiction defined what we're now saying seems to be a problem? <br /> 410 <br /> 411 James Bryan: I haven't looked. It's pretty well settled law because the statute is explicit about competent material and <br /> 412 substantial evidence. What is substantial has been litigated extensively but questioning the very foundation has not. <br /> 413 Franklin vs. Byrd is how this came up. There is always a chance that the foundation gets torn up, but this is how it's <br /> 414 been going for a long time. <br /> 415 <br /> 416 Paul Guthrie: What worries me is the turmoil that might occur over trying to justify and accept these definitions. You <br /> 417 may find that the rulings will take on and destroy further protections than we have and not just those under the court's <br /> 418 view at that time. It seems like an issue that is one of those that can't be solved simply and depending on the case that <br /> 419 comes forward that case may be awarded for the wrong part of information but set the precedent for all the rest. Is <br /> 420 there any way to avoid that and still maintain the standard that Michael is trying to justify? <br /> 421 <br /> 422 James Bryan: I don't think that there's any way to fully avoid it. The law is an evolving thing. You can be conservative <br /> 423 in your approach by seeing what the common approach is and what is most legally defensible. <br /> 424 <br /> 425 Lydia Wegman: If we take a vote, can we vote on whether we approve or disapprove this language? I think several of <br /> 426 us are uncomfortable with the second sentence, but not the first. If we were to vote on that, can this go forward to the <br /> 427 Board of County Commissioners? <br /> 428 <br /> 429 Craig Benedict: You can vote with both sentences or one; it's your recommendation. The Commissioners will see your <br /> 430 recommendation and vote for or against it. <br /> 431 <br /> 432 Lydia Wegman: I'm trying to say I think we can take a vote and move on beyond us to the Board of County <br /> 433 Commissioners. <br /> 434 <br /> 435 Michael Harvey: I think the Board just needs to take action as it sees fit. <br /> 436 <br /> 437 MOTION by Hunter Spitzer to approve the Statement of Consistency as contained in Attachment 2 and to approve <br /> 438 revised UDO text amendment package in contained in Attachment 3 and refer the Board of County Commissioners to <br /> 439 our concerns with the language under the sections discussed this evening and on March 6, 2019 but to approve the <br /> 440 document as it stands. Seconded by Kim Piracci <br />