Laserfiche WebLink
Testimony of <br /> Michael J. Matsukawa <br /> Attorney at Law <br /> 75-5722 Kuakini Highway, Room 201 Xtc.ervc~ <br /> Kailua-Kona, Hawaii 96740 a~ iN Y--- <br /> Telephone329-1385 *3`A`~ <br /> :'~>n„tv r'.,~nrn <br /> In Opposition to <br /> Bill No. 163, Draft 2 (General Plan Revision) <br /> Members of the Planning Committee <br /> and County Council, County of Hawaii <br /> I OPPOSE Bill No. 163, Draft 2 because it is based on the <br /> erroneous assumption that the General Plan, which serves as the <br /> County's long-range comprehensive ;?Ian; can and should be <br /> hortatory and without the force of law. <br /> First, under Section 226-58, HRS, a county's general plan must <br /> include "Implementation priorities and actions to carry out policies to <br /> include but not be limited to land use maps programs, projects, <br /> regulatory measures, standards and principles, and interagency <br /> coordination provisions." Bill No. 163, Draft 2 intentionally omits <br /> these items. <br /> Second, if the general plan were to be non-regulatory measure, <br /> then it would be just an idealized statement of principles without <br /> sanctions to buttress the same. Molokai Homesteaders Cooperative <br /> <br /> Association v. Cobb, 63 Haw. 453, 462 (1981). <br /> Third, the long-range comprehensive plan referred to in Section <br /> 46-4, HRS, and Charter Section 3-16 is a regulatory measure that <br /> has the force of law, not a hortatory idealized statement. <br /> Fourth, many land use regulations, including rules for special <br /> permits and SMA permits and approvals under the county zoning and <br /> <br /> subdivision codes, adopt and utilize the general plan as a decision- <br /> Comm. Na.~„S.~f3 _ <br /> Ref. To: P!esea <br /> Ref. Uate <br /> <br />