Supplemental Testimony re PDT 17-1 - Submitted by Paul Conte <br />Description <br />File: _P3D72019.87G,pdf <br />Title: <br />Author: <br />Su hj ect: <br />Ke~%vo rd s: <br />Created: 2,`2&2,'1e.6:44:~1 AM <br />Modified: 2I2V2D19 5:29:31 PM <br />Some version of the staff report was also been posted on the city's website under "Land <br />Use Document Details for PDT 17-1" <br />http://pdd.eugene-or.gov/LandUse/DocumentDetails?file=PDT-17-0001 &id=2171749 <br />The webpage also displays "Entry Properties," which shows a "Document Date: <br />3/7/2018." See attached Exhibits C and D. <br />Obviously, the inconsistency calls into question which is the document for the record of <br />the proceedings. <br />In the March 21, 2018 e-mail from Tamara Richards, to which this document is attached, <br />the city staff states: <br />* * here is the link to the staff report that was placed before the Hearings Official <br />http://pdd.eugeneor.gov/LandUse/DocumentDetails?file=PDT-17-0001 &id=2171749 . <br />If what staff placed before the hearings official is, in fact, the one dated 3/7/2018, then <br />that document clearly could not have been "available at least seven days prior to the <br />hearing"; and the Hearings Official must therefore reject that document from the <br />record, or at least disregard it in her findings. <br />On the other hand, if the document created and modified on February 28, 2018 is the <br />document for the record, the document timestamps indicate it may have been made <br />available (i.e., posted and downloadable) prior to the deadline of 5:30 p.m. on February <br />28, 2018. If it were, in fact, made available as required by ORS 197.763(4)(b), then the <br />Hearings Official must rely on this version of the staff report for her findings. <br />File _03072018-870.pdf is attached, and it is also still available at the web address <br />provided above, if the Hearings Official wants to be sure she has the exact document <br />that the staff submitted as their report. The Hearings Official cannot rely solely on <br />assurance from staff that the March 7, 2018 version of the document is identical to the <br />February 28, 2018 version, especially since the February 28, 2018 version is readily <br />available. This is not a moot point, as the forwarded e-mail from city staff (to which this <br />March 21, 2018 <br />