Summary of #81181 (AKA LCPIWB): LCPIWB got the shaft.
A long story short-ER:
My case WAS to be reviewed today, however Juergen(sp?) read a decision after a long closed session that my case was already heard September 2014.
I will post the WHOLE story in a separate thread sometime this week or weekend now that my case has reached a dead end, but will give you the highlights on how I feel I got the shaft. I will also post in a separate thread all my supporting documentation so others can potentially benefit from my supporting documentation.
So the highlight reel.
A Wollard 365er. Had informal review. Requested a formal review via certified letter twice, nothing. It is true that I received a letter from the board stating that they reviewed my case July 17, 2014 and I was not invited or notified until after...So here is where the story takes a turn. I began attending the HPRB meetings in June of this year and brought up to the Chairman and Ms. Street that I was never given an opportunity to present any evidence, nor do I know what evidence was presented to them by MSP which is completely one-side. Via email with Ms. Street, and verbally with the Chairman at the next meeting in June. "We have not record of us reviewing your case".
Me, "So that means it has not been heard and I am intitled to a review/hearing."
Ms. Street via email "You will be scheduled and in the line up."
Fast forward to 9/10/2015, email from the chairman, "Submit your supporting documentation by 9/14/2015".
More follow-up emails, "please confirm my documentation was received."
Eventual reply "You case is scheduled for 10/20"...
The end result. You heard it read by Juergen, and probably had no idea what was actually presented. It was presented as if my "supporting evidence" was arguing I deserved a hearing and they said no....
But the truth is I supplied 12 email attachments because I was lead to believe my case was going to be reviewed.
If I was not going to be given a review, why the **** you going to jerk my chain, say you are going to schedule me, and ask me to provide supporting documentation. Then say that your review was already held when they could find no evidence of a hearing/review being heard previously.
In short my supporting documentation was that I was entitled to a permit like the Disabled Veteran issued a permit via HPRB overturning MSP decision.
Like I said I will post all my supporting documentation and timeline of events in a separate post hopefully later this week.
I do plan on submitting another application, and hope that it is denied, and request a formal review skipping and informal review. But maybe my case was strategically pushed out the backdoor because I was using a HPRB decision as a justification for issuance of my permit. This is why it is important we monitor and record these decisions.
Keep in mind that the board met behind closed doors and Knaub was advising them on your case. I do not like the fact that MSP is allowed in the private meetings of board and able to discuss cases without the applicant present.