Comments on: Support Chronic Tacos In Its Planning Commission Appeal http://daggle.com/support-chronic-tacos-planning-commission-appeal-1402 Danny Sullivan's Personal Blog Thu, 09 Feb 2012 14:52:17 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: Gary Stock http://daggle.com/support-chronic-tacos-planning-commission-appeal-1402/comment-page-1#comment-6944 Gary Stock Sun, 20 Sep 2009 15:49:46 +0000 http://daggle.com/?p=1402#comment-6944 A bit of advice about having the greatest influence... For a number of years I've chaired a municipal Zoning Board of Appeals in Michigan. Statutes and case law differ in CA, but an appeal process still takes on a quasi-judicial character. See the wording of the notice: <cite>"If you challenge this project in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice or in written correspondence delivered to the City at, or prior to, the public hearing."</cite> In other words, you are beginning a judicial review, even though this hearing is held by an elected, legislative body. The decision on the appeal <B>should</b> be based solely on the record, and on documented policies of the municipality. Of course -- perhaps to your benefit -- some city council members may not grasp that, and may rule from their personal beliefs: judging without adjudicating. Others may be in the habit of reflecting constituents' desires, so emotional appeals (or threats to their re-election) may be very effective. However, if the council has counsel (hehe...) they may be quite explicit in describing what may or may not be considered as justification for a reversal. I strongly suggest reading the <a HREF="http://www.codepublishing.com/CA/NewportBeach/html/NewportBeach20/NewportBeach2095.html" rel="nofollow">relevant Newport Beach code</a>, and addressing some points there as literally as possible. For example, "20.95.010 Purpose. To avoid results that are inconsistent with the purposes of this code..." Look elsewhere in the <a HREF="http://www.codepublishing.com/CA/NewportBeach/" rel="nofollow">ordinance list</a>, for such purposes -- common purposes may include public health and safety, diversity, economic development, general welfare, and far more specific purposes in particular districts. If you can make a clear argument that, "The decision being appealed <B>is in fact inconsistent</b> with the purposes (intents, goals) of the code," you may be able to get the most technical participants on your side, and perhaps win the day. Best of luck! To avoid results that are inconsistent with the purposes of this code" A bit of advice about having the greatest influence… For a number of years I’ve chaired a municipal Zoning Board of Appeals in Michigan. Statutes and case law differ in CA, but an appeal process still takes on a quasi-judicial character. See the wording of the notice: “If you challenge this project in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice or in written correspondence delivered to the City at, or prior to, the public hearing.” In other words, you are beginning a judicial review, even though this hearing is held by an elected, legislative body. The decision on the appeal should be based solely on the record, and on documented policies of the municipality. Of course — perhaps to your benefit — some city council members may not grasp that, and may rule from their personal beliefs: judging without adjudicating. Others may be in the habit of reflecting constituents’ desires, so emotional appeals (or threats to their re-election) may be very effective. However, if the council has counsel (hehe…) they may be quite explicit in describing what may or may not be considered as justification for a reversal. I strongly suggest reading the relevant Newport Beach code, and addressing some points there as literally as possible. For example, “20.95.010 Purpose. To avoid results that are inconsistent with the purposes of this code…” Look elsewhere in the ordinance list, for such purposes — common purposes may include public health and safety, diversity, economic development, general welfare, and far more specific purposes in particular districts. If you can make a clear argument that, “The decision being appealed is in fact inconsistent with the purposes (intents, goals) of the code,” you may be able to get the most technical participants on your side, and perhaps win the day. Best of luck!

To avoid results that are inconsistent with the purposes of this code”

]]>