CC/RDA/CUA SPE MIN JAN 26 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

• 10 Additional minutes for rebuttal presentation • Swearing in of witnesses • Parties will make legal arguments and call witnesses • City staff will present its case first • Kalama cross examination • Kalama will present its case • City cross examination • Kalama questioning • City of Colton questioning • Public Testimony • Closing statement • Discussion and deliberation Deputy City Attorney Ballinger read into the record standard rules for administrative hearings as follows: "This hearing need not be conducted according to technical rules relating to evidence and witnesses. Any relevant evidence shall be admitted if it's the sort of evidence on which reasonable persons are custom to rely in the conduct of serious affairs, regardless of the existence of any common law or statutory rule that might make improper the admission of such evidence in civil actions. Hearsay evidence may be used for the purpose of supplementing or explaining other evidence but shall not be sufficient in of itself unless it will be admissible objection in civil actions. The rules of privilege shall be effective to the extent and irrelevant and unduly repetitious evidence will be excluded." Administration of oath to witnesses Deputy City Attorney Ballinger administered oaths to witnesses, Amanda Rhinehart, Andy Soto, and Jonathan Zane. City Staff Presentation Planning Manager Soto identified a correction to his staff report that Alan Burns was not staff counsel, Michael Montgomery, would be staff counsel. Mr. Soto provided a brief staff report for Council consideration and requested approval of staff's recommendation. Staff Counsel Montgomery, provided opening statement. Mr. Montgomery explained that staff will rest upon the report, that is been presented, the documents that have been recited, and the points of authority, and exhibit attached thereto, before turning the matter to the permittee for his approach Staff Counsel Montgomery clarified to the council that this not the time for argument and provided points to keep in mind. First two procedural points • Staff would have preferred an entire council • Objections - Attorney have to object because otherwise you can be tagged in court with something that shouldn't have been led in the record. 2009 JAN 26 SPC CC/RDA/CUA MEETING - 2 -