mr. teague doesn't like being in this position. it's extremely unfair especially when somebody has done everything right. this is their life on the line, but that's why we wanted to bring this to the board as quickly as possible. we've waived our brief, and the board can make a decision regarding this notice tonight. thank you. >> president swig: mr. sanchez, please, sir, just -- >> commissioner honda: hola. >> president swig: you know i always look to you for your guidance and your help. so two guys in the planning department are sitting next to each other, two separate desks, and they're looking at this, and one person makes the evaluation, because of the ambiguity, this is fine, of course. this type of business is included. and then, the other person looks at the ambiguity and goes of course, no, it's not included. and my biggest issue on this is the clarity of the law. you know that i've sat up here many, many times and says the law sucks, but we've got to go by the law even though somebody is clearly getting hurt by this. am i

mr. teague misinformed and erred in abuse because he didn't properly pay attention to the legislation that was passed or i'll cut him some slack, interpreted the -- the legislation based on some ambiguity that may be in the legislation, that there is no ambiguity, l.c.u.s are included in this legislation. so what are you talking about? >> so the zoning administrator is looking at the plain language. the restrictions only apply in n.c. districts, and this is not a n.c. district. speaking to our staff who went through the process, they stated that was not clearly part of the intent. that was their memory, that this should not be included. also looking at it itself, and the zoning administrator came to this conclusion. now i don't believe that the supervisors' comments were known to the zoning administrator at the time, but the zoning administrator kind of went with what's officially in the record and our conversations with staff. and you know this board, through its field process has the benefit of the public notice and hearing everyone's thoughts. that's not something that the zoning admini

mr. teague, but really, the error i think is the interpretation and also the error is the reversal on previous advice given to the applicant. so i -- i'm not going to add anything or ask you to change. i'm going to be in support. >> commissioner santacana: given the blend -- >> commissioner honda: is this his first motion? >> clerk: it's his first night here. >> commissioner santacana: i try to stay out of it. >> commissioner honda: yeah. >> commissioner santacana: i think i would amend the motion to add a second independent ground that the zoning administrator erred in his interpretation of the law based on the evidence given. >> president swig: i'm more comfortable with that. thank you very much. >> commissioner honda: and we are going to have a second bite at this. >> commissioner honda: you've got to call the motion. >> clerk: okay. please make sure i'm accurate. we have a motion from commissioner santacana to grant the appeal and overturn the suspension request on the basis that the z.a.erred in interpreting the planning code based on the interpretation by the planning code this evening.