04/24/2008 (2) - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Commissioner Flescher asked Attorney O'Haire whether there were any verbal or written communication regarding the process or any suggestion of objection. Attorney O'Haire did not think that Director Boling's focus was on the process, the procedure, or the rules. He perceived that the response was, they needed to talk to Tom King, and nothing was said about an appeal or anything procedural. Vice Chairman Davis wanted to clarify Attorney O'Haire's statement "that Judge Hawley is right, and that the Appeals Court said that Judge Hawley is right," and asked what exactly was Hawley right about. Attorney O'Haire said he was right about the fact that the Board alone had the power to decide what their jurisdiction is, and that the Board made that decision when it decided to hear it on the merits, and The Source filed a procedure to keep them from hearing it on the merits. Attorney Henderson did not think that response was correct and Vice Chairman Davis re -directed the question to him, asking whether he disputed the fact that the Appeals Court has said that Judge Hawley's decision is right. Attorney Henderson explained the Judge's ruling/decision. Attorney Collins gave his understanding of Attorney O'Haire's arguments, in particular, that the process of Notice applies only to applicants and not substantially affected parties. He noted that on its face, it applies to both. He thought the issue is therefore, if it does apply, it is not fair it applies to substantially affected parties, but giving them additional time based on when they received the actual notice, he thinks, brings fairness back into it, and not holding them to July 31" once they have noticed timeframes apply. And whether they knew the process or not, there were timeframes warning and there wasn't, in his opinion, a proper appeal form, place, time, fee -wise, but he understood their arguments. April 24, 2008 11 Special Call Meeting (The Source)