Laserfiche WebLink
DEC 111000 Book FAgE15v+ <br />meet with us and come to some resolution between them and us as <br />to what is appropriate for their lands so they then can proceed <br />on to the DCA to try to convince them that whatever resolution we <br />come to is appropriate under the Growth Management Act. <br />Commissioner Scurlock asked if we have any formal corre- <br />spondence from DCA indicating a shift in opinion on any of the <br />intervenors' issues before us today, and Attorney Collins advised <br />that the DCA has been copied on virtually everything the <br />intervenors have submitted, which is substantial. We have talked <br />to the DCA on the phone, and we have a general idea whether they <br />are responding favorably or not. <br />Commissioner Scurlock stated that he is getting "whip sawed" <br />on this. He has yet to see any document from DCA that indicates <br />they have changed their position in reference to any of the <br />intervenors, and, as one Commissioner, he does not want to rely <br />on "he said" or "they said," etc. <br />Attorney Collins stressed that this is just a hearing to <br />decide whether to transmit these documents to the DCA. <br />Commissioner Scurlock believed that transmittal implies you <br />favor what is being transmitted, but Attorney Collins pointed out <br />that you can reserve your right to change your mind based on the <br />comments you get back from DCA. <br />Commissioner Wheeler continued to question whether we can <br />still change our Plan (i.e., a line or boundary) if we want to <br />and submit it to DCA even though we have negotiated a position, <br />and then they have 90 days to say whether they agree with that. <br />Chairman Eggert noted that the next item on the agenda is to <br />adopt the remedial actions required by the DCA Compliance <br />Agreement, and she believed that to disagree with that now would <br />put us back into an administrative hearing. <br />Attorney Collins further explained that you can propose <br />changes to them, but changes that are inconsistent with the <br />remedial amendments they would not look favorably upon. If, for <br />example, we decided we wanted to allow one unit per 5 acres in <br />40 <br />