R455-11-9. Request for Review and Appeal Proceedings

(1) All proceedings under R455-11 with regard to the historic preservation tax credit are informal.

(2) The applicant or any interested person may seek review of the decision of the Office by filing a request for review with the Director. The request for review shall set forth in detail that portion of the decision of the Office for which review is sought, and on what basis the decision was inconsistent with the facts or "Standards". Copies of the request for review shall be sent to the applicant and to any other party who has expressed interest in the proceeding as appropriate. Any such request for review must be filed with the Director within 30 days of the decision of the Office.

(3) The applicant or any interested person may file with the Director a response to the request for review within fifteen days of notification.

(4) Review of the Office decision shall be made by the Director and shall be based on review of the project file, the request for review, and responses, if any. The Director may conduct an independent investigation and request further information from the Office staff, applicant, or any other party to the project. In addition, the Director may, at his/her sole discretion, conduct an informal hearing on the review.

(5) Within thirty days of receipt of the request for review, the Director shall issue his/her decision based on review of the project file and the information received at a hearing or from other sources, if any. The Director shall set forth in writing his/her decision concerning the request for review and forward it to the applicant and other interested parties.

(6) Judicial review of the decision of the Director may be obtained by filing a complaint in the Third Judicial District Court in Salt Lake County seeking review by a trial de novo. The issue in the district court is whether the decision of the Director constituted an abuse of his/her discretion. The person or entity seeking judicial review shall have the burden of proof that the decision of the Director constituted an abuse of his/her discretion.