Did the court fail to recognize a constitutional right to due process?

QUESTIONS FOR REVIEW . 1. Did the court fail a constitutional right to due process when the City: failed to honor previous , Historic Conservation Board (HCB) determinations; failed to adhere to the limited scope of the guidelines; and, failed to comply with their own rules of order? 2. Was the court a neutral arbiter, repeating conclusions based on ettonddis facts demonstrating a prima facie ‘congruence and proportionality’ approach disproportionate to their effects? | 3. Did the court fail to recognize the City caused a | violation of appellant beneficiaries’ civil rights by: erasing their participation; cancelling their wealthbuilding opportunity; and, disregarding communityderived social goals in favor of a regressive traditional preservation practice focused on achieving an engineered gentrification instead? 2 DIRECTLY RELATED COURT PROCEEDINGS Supreme Court of Ohio, Case No. 2020-0160, Walter Reinhaus v. Zoning Board of Appeals, City of Cincinnati, Entered Apr 14, 2020. Court of Appeals First Appellate District of Ohio, Case No. C-180616, Walter Reinhaus vs. Zoning Board of Appeals of the City of Cincinnati, Entered December 20, 2019. Court of Common Pleas Hamilton County, Ohio, Case No. A1801386, Walter Reinhaus v. Zoning Board of Appeals of the City of Cincinnati, et al, Entry on Objection to Magistrate’s Decision, Entered October 30, 2018. Court of Common Pleas Hamilton County, Ohio, Case No. A1801386, Walter Reinhaus vs. Zoning Board of : Appeals of the City of Cincinnati, Magistrate’s : Decision, Entered July 27, 2018. 3