Opinion ID: 2517971
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Overview of the Issues

Text: [¶ 11] Upon consideration of the parties' statements of the issues, we have separated them for purposes of review as procedural issues and substantive issues. The procedural issues are whether the Board's public hearings became de facto contested case trial-type proceedings; whether we have a sufficient administrative record for judicial review; and the effect, if any, of Gilbert's failure to appeal the Planning Coordinator's alleged decision in his July 2005 letter to Gilbert that he needed to request a variance to extend the expiration date of the LUC-59 designation. The substantive issues are whether the Board's decisions, contained in Resolution # 2007-72, that a variance was necessary and that the variance request was denied, are supported by substantial evidence and are not arbitrary and capricious.