Laserfiche WebLink
LAAC-29 Page 2 1 January 22, 2026 <br />granted under older ordinances no longer reflect present community needs and stated that she could <br />not support the measure. <br />Committee Member Holeka Goro Inaba gave a brief summary of a proposed amendment via <br />Communication No. 689.4, which removes the option for future time extensions. He explained that the <br />amendment would require the applicant to reapply should the project not proceed within the approved <br />timeframe, thereby preventing perpetual extensions. Mr. Fuke stated that the applicant was agreeable <br />to the amendment. <br />Bill 121 was amended by the contents of Communication No. 689.4, which was approved with eight <br />"ayes," and Mr. Kdneali`i-Kleinfelder absent. <br />Committee Member Michelle Galimba noted that while community concerns were valid, the project <br />has met all applicable planning requirements and involved substantial investment by the landowners, <br />and she expressed support based on those standards. <br />Committee Member Jenn Kagiwada shared reservations regarding the project's focus on high -end <br />housing and its limited contribution to addressing the County's housing crisis. She expressed <br />frustration with repeated time extensions but indicated conditional support due to the adopted <br />amendment and the significant expenditures already made by the applicant. <br />Additional discussion occurred regarding affordable housing compliance under Chapter 11, potential <br />future code amendments, and whether obligations would be determined under existing or amended <br />law. Ms. Campbell clarified that any affordable housing agreement must comply with the code in <br />effect at the time the agreement is executed and that absent an executed agreement, future amendments <br />could apply. <br />Further dialogue between Mr. Inaba, Mr. Darrow, and Mr. Fuke addressed fair share calculations, <br />prior payments made, and the likelihood that additional fair share contributions would be required <br />under a new plan approval. Mr. Inaba noted his continued concern regarding evolving requirements <br />and timelines and stated that while he recognizes the applicant's prior investments, he remained <br />conflicted on the measure. <br />Your Committee on Legislative Approvals and Acquisitions is in accord with the purpose and intent of <br />Bill No. 121, as amended to Draft 2, and recommends its passage on first reading. <br />dbk <br />AYES <br />NOES <br />ABS <br />EX <br />GALIMBA <br />X <br />HUSTACE <br />X <br />INABA <br />X <br />KAGIWADA <br />X <br />KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER <br />X <br />KIERKIEWICZ <br />X <br />KIMBALL <br />X <br />ONISHI <br />X <br />VILLEGAS <br />X <br />Respectfully submitted, <br />COMMITTEE ON LEGISLATIVE <br />APPROVALS AND ACQUISITIONS <br />EATHER L. K MBALL, CHAIR <br />LAAC REPORT NO.: 29 <br />ADOPTED: FEB 0 Q2026 <br />