Eugene Planning Commission <br />August 16, 2015 <br />erroneous claim by Davies, even if it were true. This is clearly another case where Davies is improperly <br />attempting to use misleading statements of the law and an insinuation about the facts on the ground to tilt <br />the Planning Commission against considering the actual facts in the record. <br />The only relevant fact that the EPC can consider is that a substantial portion of Oakleigh Lane is outside <br />the public right-of-way - a fact which the Hearings Official either ignored or overlooked in the decision <br />that's being appealed. <br />Finally, even if Davies' purported fact were true, and it is not; as Davies has already explained to you, no <br />one can introduce new facts into the record unless the EPC re-opens the record to all parties. <br />Davies's poor attempt to slip a false, unsubstantiated "fact" into the commissioners' deliberations <br />prejudices my (and other opponents') substantial procedural rights and will ensure another remand unless <br />the EPC now re-opens the record for rebuttal by me and other parties so that you can learn the truth. <br />Respectfully submitted, <br />John Fenn <br />111 Oakleigh Lane <br />Eugene OR, 97404 <br />