Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 04211987 - 3.1 THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Adopted this Order on April 21 , 1987 , by the following vote: AYES: Supervisors Powers, Torlakson, McPeak NOES: Supervisor Schroder ABSENT: Supervisor Fanden ABSTAIN: None -------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------- SUBJECT: Request for Reconsideration of Administrative Appeals Filed by the Contra Costa Building and Construction Trades Council The Board on April 7, 1987 , closed the public hearing on the administrative appeals of the Contra Costa Building and Construction Trades Council on the decision of the Director of the Community Development Department on the applicability of County Ordinance Code Chapter 84-63 and the decision of the Building Inspector on the issuance of permits to USS-POSCO relative to its modernization project. The vote on the appeal was tied; Supervisor Fanden had absented herself from the discussion and voting because of stock holdings in the applicant' s company. The Board received a letter (dated April 9, 1987) from Thomas R. Adams, attorney representing the Contra Costa Building and Construction Trades Council, advising of his desire to present new information and therefore requesting the Board to reconsider the above noted appeals. Chairman McPeak noted that several letters were received requesting reconsideration or resolution of this matter. Supervisor Fanden advised that she has received a reply to her inquiry from the Fair Political Practises Commission stating that she cannot vote to break a tie. Therefore, she absented herself from the discussion. In response to questions of the Chair, Harvey Bragdon, Director of Community Development, advised that his staff, Health Services staff, and Professor Morris have reviewed the letters and are of the opinion that no new information was submitted to change staff's recommendations. V. Westman, County Counsel, explained that the County Ordinance Code does not provide for reconsideration of non-planning admi- nistrative appeal decisions. Mr. Westman referred to his prelimi- nary opinion given following the tie vote, and advised that upon further review takes the position that in effect the appeal was denied. Tom Adams appeared and urged the Board to grant reconsideration to allow his client opportunity to present further testimony on the closed loop system of the cold reduction process and other related issues that he believed were not adequately addressed. Supervisor Powers moved to set April 28, 1987 for discussion on whether or not to hear arguments for reconsideration. Supervisor McPeak seconded the motion. Supervisor Torlakson advised that he would not be opposed to hearing presentations to justify a decision for granting recon- sideration. He noted that the new information alluded to in Mr. Adam' s letter has not been submitted to county staff. Supervisor Torlakson stated that he would not be in favor of calendaring this issue for discussion until the appellants submit in writing documen- tation to support their position with that information to be reviewed by staff. Therefore, Supervisor Torlakson offered a substitute motion and moved that staff of the Community Development Department review written documentation submitted by the appellants and report to the Board. Supervisor Powers agreed and seconded the substitute motion. Supervisor Schroder noted that prior to the hearing on April 7, 1987, all parties were asked to present all information to support their positions. Since he did not believe the Board' s instructions were followed, he advised that he would not support the motion. Supervisor McPeak requested that copies of all newly submitted information also be distributed to Board members. Therefore, IT IS BY THE BOARD ORDERED that the Director of the Community Development Department is INSTRUCTED to review all additional material submitted by the Contra Costa County Building and Construction Trades Council and to recommend to the Board if there is a basis for further consideration of this matter. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that staff is INSTRUCTED to distribute to all Board members copies of additional information submitted by the appellants. I hereby certify that this 13 a true and correct csopy of an action taken and entered on the knirswas jai tie Board of Supervisors on the dater shown. cc: Director, Community ATTESTED: i �-�— °Z 7 Development Department PHIL BATCHELOR, Clerk of the Board Health Services Director of Supervisors and County Administrator County Counsel County Administrator By, - ,_._ Deputy