Laserfiche WebLink
Clearly, the Legislature intended that this application be viewed under different <br />standards and that this Court would play a different role than pre-216 cases. During the <br />hearings on SB 216 wherein the Board's role was discussed, Senator Perlmutter <br />explained that a"rebuttable presumption is stronger than an advisory suggestion" by the <br />CWCB. (Senator Perlmutter, p. 3, Exhibit B). The CWCB determinations would be <br />"taken by the courts as true and accurate and appropriate, somebody then comes in, has <br />the burden, the burden then is on anybody else to try to overturn what the CWCB has <br />said." Id. "So you made it harder, so it is not advisory, you made it harder for the <br />objectors to complain about the CWCB suggestions or decisions." Id. "This is not an <br />advisory kind of report given by the CWCB, but it is, it has a lot of evidentiary weight <br />that the court will take as true and accurate unless even greater evidence comes by the <br />other folks." Id. <br />This Court should not overturn the CWCB's presumptively valid findings of the <br />CWCB, which are supported by the record because all the evidence showed the CWCB's <br />Findings and Recommendations were no in error, and thus, must be upheld. Unless there <br />is, at a minimum, a preponderance of the evidence (as argued by the Applicant) showing <br />that those Findings and Recommendation were in error beyond a reasonable doubt, and <br />any questions as to the correctness of that finding must be resolved in favor of the <br />CWCB. <br />The Applicant argues that the findings of fact .... <br />CONCLUSION <br />18