Laserfiche WebLink
. 7A <br /> Page 61 <br /> in writing and filed with the City Clerk within seven calendar days of the date of <br /> the City's `Official IVotice.' The Official Notice is the document which explains the <br /> City's decision and includes any findings and/or conditions of approval." <br /> Consisten#ly, Secfiion 48.2 of the Zoning Code provides that "[e]very appeal <br /> must be made in wri�ing and filed with the City Clerk within ... (7} days o#the final <br /> decision or determination of the body or official whose action is being appealed." <br /> The i�otice of 4fficiai Action for this project was reieased on i�lay �2n�'. T�i� <br /> final paragraph of the Notice states: "Please note that any or all of these <br /> decisions can be appea(ed fio fihe City Council within se�en days from the date of <br /> this notice."That date was May 29'�, and #he appeal was fiiled with the City Clerk <br /> on May 28t", six days after the release of the Notice of �f#iciai Action, It is t+mely. <br /> Vllhi(e the applicant now opines that the appeal is untimely because a <br /> Notice of 4fficiai Action is nof equivalent to a "final dec�sion or de#ermination" <br /> under the Zoning Code, its opinion is inconsistent with the �ity's longstanding <br /> practice and interpretation of its own ordinance, as re#Iected in the explicit appeal <br /> filing ins#ructions pro�ided to the public and ta Mr. Ponti. <br /> This is ail so clear that I would not have thought it warranted a response if I <br /> had not learned that the timeliness of the appeal is to be decided by the Councif. <br /> Regardless o# whether or not this Council agrees with its staff's longstanding <br /> interpretation and implemen�ation of its appeal procedures, and whether i� may <br /> now choose to change those procedures (as appears from the City website}, as a <br /> matter of fiairness and due process such change cannot be applied retroactively. <br /> ! am informed and appreciate that Mr. Passanisi has recent(y indicated <br /> staff's agreement that the appeal is timely and wiil so recommend. This is <br /> consistent wi�h the law and the facts. <br /> Finally, an another equitable point, I understand that the Council is <br /> discouraging contact wi�h appef lants on both sides pending the hearing next <br /> week. However, the#ile refilects that one or more members of the Council have <br /> already met individualiy with the applicant regarding this project. Contacts during <br /> the Initial Study process elicited the attention and concern of s�aff, as <br /> documented in the attached letter to tne applicant's attorney in January 2408. <br /> Respectfully, I ask that Councilmembers who have engaged in private meetings <br /> or conversat'sons with the applicant publicly disGlose the nature and content of <br />