12.13.23 BOA Agenda Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

23 1 Jeff Scott: I'll second. 2 3 Beth Bronson: Okay. So my understanding of this logic that if Ms. Coronado had come up with Ms. Minton in the first place 4 and presented Ms. Minton as her expert witness we would have presumably established standing for that, Ms. Coronado? 5 And now you're saying, if I'm understanding the motion to deny, that this expert witness standing by themselves does not 6 have standing because they are not a homeowner within that 1,000 foot abut. 7 8 Adam Beeman: Because they won't suffer any damages. 9 10 Leon Meyers: I don't think this witness presented herself as an expert in property value. 11 12 Beth Bronson: No. She is a realtor. 13 14 Leon Meyers: Right. In order to claim special damages, prospective witnesses have to demonstrate that they would suffer a 15 diminution in property value. And it would require an expert or a competent, material and substantial evidence to 16 demonstrate that. Okay. Any other discussion on the motion to deny? All in favor, please say aye. 17 18 MOTION made by Nathan Robinson to deny standing. Seconded by Adam Beeman. 19 VOTE: 4-1 (Beth Bronson opposed) 20 21 Beth Bronson: I oppose on the finding that this is not something that is setting very good precedent for the public hearings 22 in the restrictions that we are placing on the public and not being upfront about those restrictions since October 18. If we 23 had proceeded to establish standing or if we had proceeded to move forward,something would have happened where this 24 would've come up earlier. And so in good conscious, I cannot even though I think it's proven that standing does not exist 25 unless you have a concrete evidence to present to the Board, that is proven for the diminution of property, I think that the 26 determination of standing is a judgment call by the Board and not a,this is a,we are not breaking the law by saying that 27 somebody who doesn't have an expert with them doesn't have standing. 28 29 Jeff Scott: I would say that when we make this decision,when it happens, regardless of which direction, it is legally binding, 30 1 believe, in which case the applicant or whoever has damages and interest in this case can then appeal to, I believe the 31 state supreme court, right? Superior court. So in that sense, it is very much legal. So we have a very strong vested 32 interest in making sure that we follow all these guidelines and rules regardless of how we feel about them because 33 ultimately we are bound by, you know,the legal process of this so. 34 35 Nathan Robinson:Again, I would personally love to hear everyone's opinion. I have no problem sitting here for hour after 36 hour and hour and listen to people's opinion and understanding from their perspective what their community's going to be 37 like. I have no problem with that. I really honestly appreciate the input. However,we're bound by GSI 160.10(D)you know 38 what, it defines who has standing to appeal. This isn't a new issue. This has been around for a while and we have to, 39 either we're following the rules or we're making it up. And I feel like that we're obligated to follow what the rules are 40 regardless of how we feel about it or how much I want to listen to everybody. 41 42 June Minton: I have a quick question because from my understanding from other lawyers is that an expert witness can 43 testify regarding to the standards that have to be met by the applicant. And one of the standards is character. And that's 44 very clear in the applicant process. 45 46 Leon Meyers: Ms. Minton, respectfully,we need to move on. 47 48 June Minton: Oh,fine,fine. I'm just wondering who's interpreting that law here because it's seems a little bit flawed to me. 49 50 Leon Meyers:That's the County Attorney. 51 52 Beth Bronson: I don't think we finished the motion. 53 54 Leon Meyers: I'm sorry. 55