My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
COM 0045.034 2002-2004
ClerkCouncil
>
Council Records
>
Communications
>
2002-2004
>
COM 0045.034 2002-2004
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/23/2019 2:09:59 PM
Creation date
5/10/2008 12:50:00 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Communications
Communications - Type
COM
Communications - Council Term
2002-2004
Communication
0045
Point
034
Author
Susan Dursin
Communications - Referred To
PC
Comments
PC - Closed file - 1/4/05
Document Relationships
AGE PC 01/04/2005 2004-2006
(Related To)
Path:
\Council Records\Agendas\2004-2006\Planning Committee (PC)
BIL 163 Draft 01 2000-2002
(Related To)
Path:
\Council Records\Bills\2000-2002
COM 0045.000 2002-2004
(Related)
Path:
\Council Records\Communications\2002-2004
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
Page 1 of 1
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Il _i <br /> <br /> To: Councilman Leningrad Elarionoff ~~04 JUid 1? P(~~ 2 ? 0 <br /> c <br /> From: Susan Dursin ~ ' " ' <br /> P.O. box 746 <br /> Capt. Cook, HI 96704 <br /> Date: June 16, 2004 <br /> Re: Council Decisions relating to Bills 163 and 270 <br /> Many of us depend on the Council to help establish policy sup- <br /> porting wise land use rather than undisciplined development. <br /> We are quite concerned. as we look at what has happened with <br /> Bills 163 and 270. <br /> The argument that funding acquisition and preservation of land <br /> does not belong in the county charter is specious. As far as 1 am <br /> concerned, one of the Council's two or three major responsibil- <br /> ities is preserving land for public use. Had the public okayed <br /> 270, it would have become a firm priority. You and I both know <br /> that Leaving such funding and acquisition in ordinance would <br /> create a program open to manipulation and change. Where the <br /> will exists, programs like 1.70 have worked well. <br /> As to Bill 163, your argument that important ag land designation <br /> should be left to the state is also specious. In the face of state dere- <br /> liction, it's time for the Council to act. I'm sure the administration's <br /> concerns have been brought to you. Please reconsider them. I am <br /> uneasy about the vague and flexible language in the second draft; <br /> it also seems that you removed many of the specific policy recom- <br /> mendations that gave teeth to the plan. Do not let this become a <br /> reality we must live with for years to come. comm. Na. ~ •3`~ <br /> Ref. To: <br /> Raf. Uate <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.