<br />Hearings Official Decision (WG 19-2) 2 <br />FACTS <br /> The property is a 13.6-acre lot that is currently developed with Eugene School District 4J <br />administrative offices, maintenance facilities, and parking areas. The property is zoned Public <br />Land (PL) with a Water Resources Conservation Overlay (WR) and is in the Willamette River <br />Greenway. The Willamette River is directly north of the property. Properties to the east, west, <br />and south are a mix of other PL zoned land, low density residential land, and medium density <br />residential land. The proposal is to install a prefabricated classroom to serve as a high school for <br />125 students. <br />ANALYSIS <br />A. Preliminary Issues <br />Initially, opponent Paul Conte (Conte) apparently objects to the applicant’s representative, <br />Kristen Taylor’s (Taylor), participation in this case because she is on the Planning Commission. <br />Conte’s arguments are difficult to follow. First, Conte argues that Taylor has a conflict of interest <br />and must recuse herself and swear she has had no ex parte contacts.1 I do not see what if <br />anything this has to do with any proceeding before a Hearings Official. Neither Taylor nor the <br />Planning Commissioner is the decision maker in the current proceeding. The fact that Taylor is <br />on the Planning Commission does not preclude her from representing clients before a Hearings <br />Official. Taylor has not had any ex parte contacts with me. There is no reason for Taylor to <br />recuse herself or provide sworn documentation that she has not communicated with other <br />members of the Planning Commission. If my decision is appealed to the Planning Commission <br />then Conte is free to make any ex parte, bias, or conflict of interest arguments he likes. Conte’s <br />arguments, however, provide no basis for me to deny the application or for Taylor to take any <br />actions. <br />Conte also argues that Tylor has prejudged discretionary Willamette Greenway approval <br />criteria and therefore must be excluded from any Willamette Greenway deliberations before the <br />Planning Commission.2 Again, these arguments have nothing to do with a proceeding before a <br /> <br />1 Conte states: “Commissioner Kristen Taylor has an explicit and obvious conflict of interest in this application and <br />must provide a written statement that she is recusing herself from any participation as a Planning Commissioner and <br />swear that she has had no ex parte communication related to this application with any other commissioner.” <br />2 Conte states: “The fact that Taylor is arguing in this proceeding for specific interpretations of the Willamette <br />Greenway approval criteria inevitably means that she has prejudged how to interpret those discretionary criteria. <br />Thus, she would be inescapably prejudiced by her present conclusions should any future Willamette Greenway <br />permit application be appealed to the Planning Commission. Therefore, Commissioner Taylor must also recuse <br />herself from all future Willamette Greenway Permit deliberations.”