On Friday, November 27, 2004, I received a copy of the November 22, 2004, comments that DPZ had made about the FBCG site development plan application (SDP).
Based on that report, it appears the combined deception continues. How so? The process DPZ is using still does not conform to their own rules, laws, and procedures. Yet, DPZ is allowing FBCG to proceed with their (DPZ's) specific instructions to the church on how to succeed towards getting signature approval on their SDP to commence construction at their church.
FBCG had not timely returned a completed application to DPZ and it is still not properly completed. The procedures state that incomplete applications are, by law, to be rejected and the applicant (FBCG) is supposed to start over with the whole process. But, once again, DPZ has disregarded that part of the procedure, also.
My pending Circuit Court Administrative Appeal for Judicial Review is stayed pending action on my Court of Special Appeals case against DPZ and FBCG and both are proceeding on schedule.
Look for more to come on this matter.