Laserfiche WebLink
Communication 662 <br /> <br /> Bill 175 <br /> <br /> Page 3 of 6 <br /> a tremendous amount of meetings that which take up a lot of time, especially in situations where <br /> commissioners have jobs and children, which two commissions could cut that workload <br /> substantially. <br /> Mr. Yuen's major issues of concerns of having two planning commissions is that some final <br /> decisions truly have an island wide effect and deserve to be looked at and considered by people <br /> from around the island. To address the complicated issue of what matters would go to both <br /> planning commissions Mr. Yuen stated a solution could be that the Planning Director decide <br /> which applications would go to both commissions based on certain criteria and noted that it must <br /> be kept in mind that when presenting something to voters it's important to keep it as simple as <br /> possible. His second issue was a legal one concerning a provision in state law that refers to <br /> decisions being made by the planning commission and whether or not that meant that the County <br /> is supposed to have only one planning commission. If that be the case, Mr. Yuen stated that <br /> Maui County has three planning commissions which to his knowledge has never been legally <br /> challenged and that in his judgment, he believes state law does permit a County to have more <br /> than one planning commission. A final issue was that which was raised by Mr. Pilago regarding <br /> unity of the island which he noted could work both ways. Although Mr. Yuen believes very <br /> strongly that as an island community we are interdependent and should stay together as one <br /> governmental unit, he said having two commissions wouldn't necessarily complicate that. <br /> With regard to technical matters, Mr. Yuen noted the issue of transitioning from one system to <br /> the next but said his suggested transitional language as proposed in the charter amendment that <br /> allows members of the old planning commission to hold over to the other commissions is good <br /> and provides continuity and commission member experience. The second technical matter is a <br /> situation involving a matter that should be considered by both commissions, noting one raze and <br /> clear example being a land use permit involving a property that straddles both commission <br /> boundaries. Mr. Yuen clearly felt in a situation such as this both commissions should be <br /> involved and a joint decision would make sense. Most other matters that would go to both <br /> commissions but were not geographically specific, are text amendments to the zoning and <br /> subdivision codes but saw no real need for those kinds of matters to be heard jointly. Mr. Yuen <br /> also stated that general plan amendments whether arising in one part of the island or another, <br /> should be looked at by both commissions as well as text changes to the General Plan as well but <br /> that those could be voted on by separate commissions and result in separate recommendations. <br /> Corporation Counsel William Brilhante stated that upon evaluating the legality of the proposed <br /> amendment under state statutes as well as the County charter in was his opinion the proposed <br /> charter amendment fell within legal requirements of both the State statutes and County charter. <br /> With regazd to Maui County's three planning commissions, Mr. Brilhante stated he was unaware <br /> whether that issue was legally challenged but in his opinion it sets the precedence for the <br /> proposed leeward and windward planning commissions. He stated their office also <br /> recommended that the transitional provision include a date certain when the old commission's <br /> <br /> jurisdiction would terminate and the proposed new leewazd and windwazd commissions would <br /> commence. <br /> PC Report No. 47 <br /> <br />