HomeMy WebLinkAbout20040776 Page 396
1 would be able to have their day in court to speak
2 with this Board.
3 MR. MORRISON: Although the referral process
— 4 is a written process , not a verbal one, so if you
5 give them a new opportunity to do a referral --
6 COMMISSIONER GEILE : Okay. Well , then it
7 would be a written process would come back to the
8 Board.
9 MR . MORRISON: And then new issues then
— 10 would be fair game for anyone .
- 11 COMMISSIONER GEILE : Exactly. I think
12 that ' s where I am.
13 CHAIRMAN LONG: Commissioner Jerke .
14 COMMISSIONER JERKE : Could I ask counsel
15 here too to comment with respect to the quasi
16 judicial nature that we would have today and then how
- 17 that would be suspended into that next day that we
18 wind up having that .
19 In other words, what I 'm getting at is , it
— 20 doesn' t mean that if we ' re going to hear this at a
21 later time, I 'm hoping we ' re not going to be lobbied
22 day to day on this issue .
— 23 MR. MORRISON: Well , I hope -- off the
24 record and on the record I think there ' s been some
25 discussion - - actually until we know what the new
2004-0776
015-(0-pq 445
Page 397
1 issues are it ' s not even appropriate to be making -
2 contact, except for those that are entitled to make -
3 the written statement .
4 Once that happens new issues could be
5 addressed in writing, submitted preferably to clerk -
6 to the Board, not to the individual Commissioners .
7 If you do that ' s okay, but they' ll just hand it over
8 to the clerk to the Board. -
9 And attempts at personal contact has been
10 and still remains inappropriate . Individual contact
11 with the Commissioners in a quasi judicial process , -
12 just like it is with a jury, is not appropriate .
13 So you ' re free to put your thoughts in
14 writing, you know, on pictures and all these other -
15 things that we 've seen the effort made and get it
16 into the record and be prepared to testify at the
17 later hearing. _
18 But individual contacts are not appropriate
19 and that applies to staff other than legal counsel
20 where the issues are procedural , it applies to -
21 everyone . This is off the table for further
22 discussion by the Board until the next meeting. They
23 can review written materials but they shouldn ' t be -
24 discussing it with other people .
25 And I know the Board understands that
Page 398
1 because - -
2 CHAIRMAN LONG: We practice that .
3 MR. MORRISON: You practice that .
4 CHAIRMAN LONG: With that , any more
5 discussion? Motion?
6 COMMISSIONER JERKE : I would attempt one at
7 this point, Mr. Chairman, and counsel perhaps will
8 have to help me on it, but I will move that we carry
9 this forward, this case until July 9th with the idea
10 that proponents would have their changes , if any, in
11 writing into planning staff or clerk to the Board - -
12 MR . MORRISON: Clerk to the Board.
13 COMMISSIONER JERKE : Clerk to the Board by
14 June 30th in order to provide opponents an
15 opportunity to view that information.
16 MR. MORRISON: And the referrals would be
17 sent out so that they would be due on that date as
18 well with the normal time line?
19 COMMISSIONER JERKE : Is that enough time to
— 20 get those referrals out , June 30th, or do we need to
21 go ahead and alter that and have it an earlier date?
22 MR. MORRISON: It ' s 20 some - - 20 days is
— 23 the normal referral time .
24 COMMISSIONER JERKE : Let ' s back it up then
25 some .
Page 399
1 MR. MORRISON: But those would be due back
2 June 30th. They can be sent out at any time . They -
3 would be due back by the same time as the applicant ' s
4 comments . That doesn ' t mean the referral entities
5 can' t then review those comments and provide further -
6 evidence on those new issues .
7 COMMISSIONER JERKE : That ' s a motion and I
8 make it . —
9 CHAIRMAN LONG: So let ' s hear the dates
10 specific .
11 COMMISSIONER JERKE : July 9th for the actual -
12 hearing and June 30th for referrals back in as well
13 as any information, any new information from the
14 applicant in as well . -
15 COMMISSIONER GEILE : Mr . Chairman --
16 CHAIRMAN LONG: Do you want to second that
17 for discussion?
18 COMMISSIONER GEILE : If it ' s all right with
19 you.
20 CHAIRMAN LONG: Sure . -
21 COMMISSIONER GEILE : Mr . Chairman, I would
22 like to second that motion.
23 CHAIRMAN LONG: I ' m trying to get this time -
24 sequence in my head. If the applicant has new
25 information to come in that wouldn ' t be entered until
Page 400
1 the 30th also, that ' s not time to get that new
2 information out to the referrals and then even back
3 again, if I 'm not visualizing this right .
— 4 MR . MORRISON: Well , that ' s true but those
5 entities would be able to comment at the hearing, if
6 there ' s new evidence that they didn ' t consider in
7 their referral . You may want to spread that date a
8 little bit further back so that there ' s more
9 opportunity.
10 You know, there ' s a chicken and egg . You ' ve
11 got to stop or start the ball at some point . You
12 can' t continually refer and re-refer . If you wanted
13 to back up another week, that might facilitate that .
— 14 COMMISSIONER JERKE : Another 10 days back
15 would be Friday, June 20th. I would amend my motion.
16 COMMISSIONER GEILE : I would accept that
— 17 amendment .
18 CHAIRMAN LONG: Do we want to list in here
19 specifically the items? Or we covered that in what
— 20 counsel said?
21 MR. MORRISON: Well , actually we ' re not
22 trying to require items . We ' re just saying that
— 23 those issues that the applicant may wish to address
24 that are oil and gas , height and setbacks, and then
25 anything the referral entities choose to raise, but I
Page 401
1 don ' t think it ' s mandatory. I think it ' s more of a
2 -- there ' s an opportunity to work on that .
3 CHAIRMAN LONG: Okay. Any further - -
4 COMMISSIONER GEILE : I want to make sure the
5 motion then would be - - the dates again, would you -
6 give me those?
7 CHAIRMAN LONG: That would be June 20th for
8 the return of the referrals and July 9th would be the
9 actual hearing date .
10 COMMISSIONER GEILE : Okay, that ' s fine .
11 CHAIRMAN LONG: Planning staff , Kim, had a
12 comment?
13 MR. OGLE : Just a minute .
14 CHAIRMAN LONG: Okay. -
15 MS . MIKA: Monica Mika, Department of
16 Planning Services . You are expecting and asking for
17 referrals to go out to all referral agencies or to -
18 just the municipal referral agencies?
19 MR. MORRISON: I understood it to be those
20 that there were issues and those would have been the -
21 three - -
22 CHAIRMAN LONG : I would say the municipal is
23 what I 'm hearing. Commissioner Jerke . -
24 COMMISSIONER JERKE : Yes , referrals to them,
25 yes , but I think that they all ought to be notified
Page 402
1 with respect to this meeting so they would have the
2 opportunity to attend.
3 MS . MIKA: Right, that notification will go
4 out and also to the surrounding property owners too .
5 The other question I have is I 'm making the
6 assumption that the referral that you want to be sent
7 is the entire record up to this point, which is more
8 than an actual referral but is everything that ' s
9 happened up to this point . That ' s what will be given
10 to those communities --
11 CHAIRMAN LONG: I would assume so . Those
12 things have evolved in the process of evolution, so I
13 think it would be important for us to have those
14 numbers, the heights and the setbacks at least from
15 the east and property line where we ' re at on that so
16 everybody is on the same page to begin with. Because
_ 17 it seems like there was two or three different ones
18 out there .
19 MR. OGLE : Kim Ogle, Department of Planning
20 Services . Which set of numbers are we using since we
21 have three numbers on the table?
22 MR. MORRISON: You may have three being
— 23 discussed but the applicant is not entertaining - -
24 has not agreed, so the application is still those
25 that they modified as of this morning .
Page 403
1 MR. OGLE : However, if we send out all the
2 referrals to date Mr . Gries has a piece of paper that -
3 has different setback criteria .
4 MR. MORRISON: Well , that ' s Mr. Gries '
5 exhibit . I mean - -
6 CHAIRMAN LONG: That ' s not a part of what ' s
7 been accepted to this point within the application
8 itself .
9 MR. MORRISON: That ' s not in the
10 application. There ' s lots of things that the
11 applicant wouldn ' t agree with, I presume, in the _
12 record.
13 CHAIRMAN LONG: The input would be a part of
14 the record of past testimony and obviously an option _
15 for which the applicant can respond to at this
16 meeting time .
17 MR. MORRISON: Yeah, unless the referral -
18 entity expressly says , "Don' t send this to us, " I
19 think you should send everything that ' s been
20 developed. -
21 CHAIRMAN LONG: Does that clarify or make it
22 worse?
23 MS . MIKA: Just one thing to consider, and I -
24 don ' t know how valuable of a tool it is, but in order
25 to meet these deadlines we will not be sending
Page 404
1 minutes from today' s hearing, and just want to make
_ 2 sure that we ' re all under the same understanding
3 because we won' t be able to meet this deadline and
— 4 then give the clerk adequate time to finish the
5 minutes for today' s hearing . So that would be the
6 complete record of what ' s happened up to this point .
7 MR. MORRISON: Well , I 'm not seeing - - you
_ 8 would have to send your referral out by June 1st and
9 they would have 20 days to get it back . I don ' t
r
10 know - -
_ 11 MS . MIKA: No, that ' s not correct . We would
12 have to send it out almost immediately to give them
13 21 working days to go through the process . I just
_ 14 brought it up just so --
15 COMMISSIONER GEILE : My question, wouldn' t
16 we have not moved past the Planning Commission ' s
17 resolution? Why couldn' t that be part of the packet ,
18 counsel?
.. 19 MR. MORRISON: Well , it is . It can be .
— 20 COMMISSIONER GEILE : Then why wouldn' t that
21 be sufficient?
22 MR. MORRISON: I ' m not suggesting it isn ' t .
— 23 COMMISSIONER GEILE : Oh. I didn' t hear what
24 you said.
25 MR. MORRISON: Well , I guess first of all I
Page 405
—
1 haven ' t heard from the clerk on the timing. Is the
2 referral 21 working days? It ' s 21 days, not 21 _
3 working days , which would mean it would need to go
-
4 out by the end of the month.
5 COMMISSIONER JERKE : Can you have the _
6 minutes in three weeks? I would think that that ' s
7 very possible to do but --
8 MS . HARDING: Carol Harding, deputy clerk to _
9 the Board. I think within a week we would have
10 minutes for the hearing today.
11 CHAIRMAN LONG: Okay. _
12 MS . HARDING: They might not be finalized
13 but they would at least be in a draft form that could
14 be utilized for people to realize what went on today. _
15 And I would like a little clarification on
16 the notice you would like us to send to make sure .
17 The way I heard it , you would like us to send a _
18 notice of the continuance to all the surrounding
19 property owners on the list , all of those in
20 attendance today that signed the attendance record, -
21 and all of the referral agencies , is that who you
22 want to cover?
23 COMMISSIONER GEILE : Pretty much covers it . -
24 CHAIRMAN LONG: Thank you. Any
25 clarification or more issues?
Page 406
'- 1 MS . MIKA: No.
2 CHAIRMAN LONG: I guess with that , I would
3 just like to make one comment I guess regarding kind
4 of today' s proceedings .
5 The Board really appreciates - - and I ' ll
6 speak on behalf of the Board if I may. The Board
7 really appreciates the input that we get from the
8 public, the municipalities in trying to rectify the
9 situation and from the referral agencies, because
10 this Board is always trying and striving to do the
11 right thing and we think part of the right thing
12 looking at the long term, at the short term is being
13 able to take the time to do these things
14 expeditiously and as prudently as possible .
15 So with that I think that we ' re taking the
16 step with everybody' s help to do the right thing, and
17 we hope this will come to a beneficial use of time,
18 not only today because it wasn' t a waste of time, we
19 evolved to this point , and we can go on from there .
— 20 Any further comments?
21 COMMISSIONER GEILE : Just an extension to
22 what you've said, Mr . Chairman, but when we talk
— 23 about quasi judicial responsibility we can ' t even
24 talk about this case among ourselves, and we don' t .
25 So there might have been a comment or two
Page 407
1 today that alluded to the fact that we had been
2 discussing this case and we would come up with _
3 certain ideas or thoughts about it, and I want to
4 make sure it ' s very clear because when you ' re dealing
5 with quasi judicial it ' s across the board and it has _
6 to relate to the jurisdiction who ' s making the
7 decision, and so that ' s just something I thought was
8 important to make sure everybody is aware of . _
9 CHAIRMAN LONG: Thank you, Commissioner
10 Geile . With that, all those in favor say aye .
11 (All voted affirmatively. ) -
12 CHAIRMAN LONG: All those opposed, same
13 sign. Motion carries unanimous . We are adjourned.
14 Drive carefully. -
15 (Hearing concluded at 9 : 22 p .m. )
16 * * * * *
17 -
18
19
20 -
21
22
23 -
24
25
408
REPORTER ' S CERTIFICATE
-- I , Cheryl A . Palmer, a Registered
Professional Reporter and Notary Public within the
State of Colorado, do hereby certify that the
foregoing public hearing was taken by me at 915 10th
Street , Greeley, Colorado, on May 7 , 2003 ; that the
proceedings were thereafter reduced to typewritten
form by means of computer-aided transcription; that
the foregoing is an accurate transcript of the
proceedings at that time .
I further certify that I am not related to
any party herein or their counsel and have no
interest in the result of this litigation .
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my
hand and affixed my Notarial Seal this 12th day of
November, 2003 .
7 CHERYL PALMER PLk:.L!C CHERYL A PALMER
S ATC to G:'.i','JO
�'^ s'"""�"""'"^"'""M•+.Yd>ry.Y Registered Professional Reporter
My commission expires October 23 , 2006 .
Hello