Laserfiche WebLink
<br />1 CHAIRMAN DANIELSON: All I am saying, <br />2 the Board is not acquain ted with this issue. We <br />3 don't have the documents before us. I guess it will <br />4 be submitted as part of the record here, but we <br />5 haven't seen it. We're not prepared to rule on it <br />6 yet. So -- yes. <br />7 MS. SCHMITT: The only recommer..datior. <br />8 I would have, just for clarification, is that the <br />9 violation information be heard and decided on, if <br />10 possible, before the hearing to determine the <br />11 application so that you don't get into a Catch 22 <br />12 situation like you have gotten into today. <br />13 CHAIRMAN DANIELSON: Again, that's <br />14 something the division will determine. The Board <br />15 isn't going to set the agenda for the next meeting <br />16 today. I assume you have to talk to to M-. Santa or <br />17 3ohnson about that. Anything further? <br />18 MP.. JOHNSON: Just want to follovr up <br />19 on Mr. Nussbaum's comment and clarify. Is the Hoard <br />20 saying, then, at the next meeti^.g t::is ?ssue of <br />21 off-site impact due to rock slides relates to past <br />22 actions znd that the whole -- all of the evidence o^ <br />2~ current violations will only be heard in the hearing <br />24 on the violation, won't be a -- there will be no <br />25 evide.^.ce o` cnrreat violations tha*_ are mot of`-site <br />s5 <br />~,nrlJvrTm ecoOP.TING $coVT~r <br />(3031 t24-221? <br />