<br />November 8, 2013 <br />Mr. Ken Helm <br />City of Eugene Hearings Officer <br />c/o Becky Taylor, Associate Planner <br />City of Eugene <br />th <br /> Avenue, <br />99 West 10 <br />Eugene, OR 97401 <br /> <br />Re: City File No. PDT 13-1; Oakleigh PUD <br /> Objection to impermissible evidence <br /> <br /> <br />Dear Mr. Helm: <br />On October 16, 2013, I submitted an objection to impermissible evidence that the applicant’s <br />representatives submitted earlier on the same day. <br />On October 23, 2013, the applicant’s attorney, Zack Mittge, submitted a letter asserting the <br />evidence in question was permissible. <br />On October 25, 2013 I submitted a letter further explaining why the evidence was <br />impermissible, particularly the over 100 pages of copies of legal documents and property <br />reports purporting to show right-of-way dedications on Oakleigh Lane that had heretofore <br />never been submitted to the record or even mentioned in any testimony. <br />On November 5, 2013, Becky Taylor provided me the Hearings Official’s order, dated the same <br />day, denying my request to exclude the applicant’s new evidence or re-open the record. <br />On November 6, 2013, Becky Taylor provided me a scanned copy of a letter from Mr. Mittge, <br />dated October 31, 2013, further arguing his position. Although the letter stated that it was <br />delivered “Via E-mail becky.g.taylor@ci.eugene.or.us and First Class Mail,” Ms. Taylor states <br />that she never received an e-mail copy, and she received the printed letter only on <br />November 6. <br />* * * * * <br />My present letter cites concrete evidence in the record to refute false claims by Mr. Mittge, and <br />challenges the Hearings Official’s misinterpretation of the statutory requirements. <br /> <br /> <br />