Meeting Procedures and Quasi-Judicial Hearing Training- Randy Mora, Esq.

Mr. Mora gave a detailed presentation on public meetings and Quasi-Judicial hearings to members of the Historic Preservation Board, Board of Adjustment and Planning Board. He spoke on ethics, Sunshine Law, public meetings, public comment, and types of hearings. Mr. Mora answered questions from Board members regarding meeting notice requirements, recusals, public comment going off-topic, recused Board members speaking on agenda items, and Board members deviating from criteria.

Mr. Mora explained a voting conflict, a voting conflict test and how to handle voting conflicts. Mr. Mora spoke about parliamentary procedure and the presiding officer at a public meeting. He noted the rules and procedures provide shared expectations and open communication.  Mr. Mora said in the Quasi-Judicial hearings the Board members are acting in a judicial capacity and are to be an impartial fact-finder. He recommended the Board members make a decision on evidence that is presented instead of ex-parte communications.  Mr. Mora reviewed the standards of proof and stated competent substantial evidence is objective information such as a traffic study, appraisal or market study. He noted that hypothetical, speculative, fear and emotion is not competent substantial evidence. Mr. Mora said to be an impartial fact-finder the Board members need to articulate the basis for their decision and the decisions cannot be based on prejudice.

Mr. Mora ended the presentation with the Appellate Review. He said the court is looking for due process, adequate notice, opportunity to be heard, and part of impartial process. He said the competent substantial evidence the court is looking for is some recommendations by professional staff, testimony, photographs, traffic study or appraisals by a qualified professional.