Eugene Planning Commission <br />August 15, 2015 <br />Page Two <br />Furthermore, there is no evidence in the record that even suggests how long the Oakleigh Lane <br />paving that lies on private property has been in place. So, as Davies well knows, the Planning <br />Commission could not lawfully use this erroneous claim by Davies, even if it were true. This is <br />clearly another case where Davies is improperly attempting to use misleading statements of the <br />law and an insinuation about the facts on the ground to tilt the Planning Commission against <br />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 <br />outside the public right-of-way - a fact which the Hearings Official either ignored or <br />overlooked in the decision that's being appealed. <br />Finally, even if Davies' purported fact were true, and it is not; as Davies has already explained <br />to you, no one can introduce new facts into the record unless the EPC re-opens the record to all <br />parties. <br />Davies's sleazy attempt to slip a false, unsubstantiated "fact" into the commissioners' <br />deliberations prejudices my (and other opponents') substantial procedural rights and will <br />ensure another remand unless the EPC now re-opens the record for rebuttal by me and other <br />parties so that you can learn the truth. <br />Respectfully submitted, <br />PeA,1,4 I eO* <br />Paul Conte <br />1461 W. 10tI, Ave. <br />Eugene, OR 97402 <br />