|
Size: 3453
Comment:
|
Size: 4607
Comment:
|
| Deletions are marked like this. | Additions are marked like this. |
| Line 2: | Line 2: |
''he following sections contain documents from the several administrative and legal stages. The sections are ordered from most to least recent, so that the most current items are near the top of the page, but the documents within a section are roughly in chronological order (so that it is easier to follow the individual stories).'' |
|
| Line 21: | Line 23: |
| 1. [[attachment:article-97-exhibits.pdf|Plaintiffs' additional exhibits and references relevant to Article 97 protection of the site]] | 1. [[attachment:article-97-exhibits.pdf|Plaintiffs' additional exhibits and references relevant to Article 97 protection of the site|&do=get]] |
| Line 29: | Line 31: |
| 1. [[oadr-appeal.pdf|Plaintiffs' initial challenge to the waterways (Chapter 91) license|&do=get]], starting the OADR process. 1. [[oadr-scheduling-order.pdf|OADR scheduling order|&do=get]] 1. [[bra-prehearing-statement.pdf|BRA's pre-hearing statement|&do=get]] 1. [[plaintiffs-pre-hearing-statement.pdf|Plaintiffs' pre-hearing statement|&do=get]] 1. [[oadr-pre-screening-conference-report.pdf|OADR presiding officer's conference report|&do=get]] 1. [[plaintiffs-oadr-brief.pdf|Plaintiffs' brief for the OADR process|&do=get]] 1. [[plaintiffs-oadr-proposed-findings.pdf|Plaintiffs' proposed findings of fact and law|&do=get]] 1. [[recommended-final-decision-oadr.pdf|OADR presiding officer's recommended final decision|&do=get]] |
1. [[attachment:oadr-appeal.pdf|Plaintiffs' initial challenge to the waterways (Chapter 91) license|&do=get]], starting the OADR process. 1. [[attachment:oadr-scheduling-order.pdf|OADR scheduling order|&do=get]] 1. [[attachment:bra-prehearing-statement.pdf|BRA's pre-hearing statement|&do=get]] 1. [[attachment:plaintiffs-pre-hearing-statement.pdf|Plaintiffs' pre-hearing statement|&do=get]] 1. [[attachment:oadr-pre-screening-conference-report.pdf|OADR presiding officer's conference report|&do=get]] 1. [[attachment:plaintiffs-oadr-brief.pdf|Plaintiffs' brief for the OADR process|&do=get]] 1. [[attachment:mahajan-testimony.pdf|Plaintiff Mahajan's pre-filed testimony|&do=get]] 1. [[attachment:mahajan-rebuttal-testimony.pdf|Plaintiff Mahajan's rebuttal testimony|&do=get]] 1. [[attachment:bra-brief-oadr.pdf|BRA's brief|&do=get]] 1. [[attachment:bra-testimony-oadr.pdf|BRA witnesses' pre-filed testimony|&do=get]] 1. [[attachment:dep-brief-oadr.pdf|DEP's brief|&do=get]] 1. [[attachment:dep-testimony-oadr.pdf|DEP witness's testimony|&do=get]] 1. [[attachment:plaintiffs-oadr-proposed-findings.pdf|Plaintiffs' proposed findings of fact and law|&do=get]] 1. [[attachment:recommended-final-decision-oadr.pdf|OADR presiding officer's recommended final decision|&do=get]] affirming the Chapter 91 license (allowing the BRA to lease the end of Long Wharf to a late-night restaurant and bar). |
| Line 40: | Line 48: |
| 1. [[dep-written-determination.pdf|DEP's written determination on the license application, stating that it would award the license if no appeals were filed within 21 days|&do=get]] | 1. [[secretarys-certificate-on-the-enf.pdf|EOEA Secretary's certificate on the Environmental Notification Form|&do=get]] 1. [[attachment:dep-written-determination.pdf|DEP's written determination on the license application, stating that it would award the license if no appeals were filed within 21 days|&do=get]] |
Documents from the legal and administrative proceedings
he following sections contain documents from the several administrative and legal stages. The sections are ordered from most to least recent, so that the most current items are near the top of the page, but the documents within a section are roughly in chronological order (so that it is easier to follow the individual stories).
Supreme Judicial Court
The Boston Redevelopment Authority appealed directly to the Supreme Judicial Court (the Mass. Supreme Court).
BRA brief: Brief of the Boston Redevelopment Authority arguing that land taken for urban renewal, including Long Wharf, is not subject to Article 97---thus, that it may be changed to a new, non-park use without legislative authorization.
DEP brief, DEP brief appendices: Brief of the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) arguing (in the main) that the license does not create an Article 97 land disposition, and thus that it was legal for DEP to issue the license to the BRA to convert part of Long Wharf to a restaurant.
Superior Court
After losing in the OADR (Office of Appeals and Dispute Resolution), the plaintiffs appealed to the Superior Court.
Complaint stating the issues and starting the Superior Court appeal.
BRA's additional response to plaintiffs' main brief/arguments
Plaintiffs' brief arguing that Long Wharf was taken for article 97 purposes
Plaintiffs' brief arguing that land taken for urban renewal can also be protected by Article 97
Plaintiffs' additional exhibits and references relevant to Article 97 protection of the site
Judgment by Judge Fahey, June 2011, voiding the waterways license because (1) Long Wharf is protected by Article 97, and (2) the license counted as an Article 97 disposition.
OADR
The route to challenging a waterways (Chapter 91) license is to file an appeal with the DEP's Office of Appeals and Dispute Resolution (OADR).
Plaintiffs' initial challenge to the waterways (Chapter 91) license, starting the OADR process.
OADR presiding officer's recommended final decision affirming the Chapter 91 license (allowing the BRA to lease the end of Long Wharf to a late-night restaurant and bar).