|
We are considering a process similar to the Land Use Commission which is what they call order
<br />to show cause. So, let's say we have an applicant that this particular rezoning has been sitting
<br />here for ten years, and we haven't heard from them. There's been, you know, no annual progress
<br />reports, no requests for a time extension. We are considering creating the procedure of being
<br />able to initiate an order to show cause, and what happens is basically, the Commission or the
<br />Council votes to issue an order to show cause to the applicant. They will be required to come
<br />before the Commission or Council, and they are the ones that have to show compliance or lack of
<br />compliance. And at that point, the Commission or Council can initiate if they feel like you know
<br />what, you haven't done anything, you're not going to do anything, we're going to revoke. The
<br />otheror, the Council can say we're going to, we're going to revoke this ordinance and anybody
<br />that comes in the future, so it can be reverted or it can remain the same without conditions, but
<br />for them to come back to Commission or Council to refresh those conditions. So, it's like they
<br />have to submit a new application. And, again, that's something that has to be worked out.
<br />With, with the Land Use Commission, they only have two options: revert, don't revert. They
<br />don't have the ability at this time to amend the conditions. They were asking for that in the last
<br />legislative session, but apparently the bill died. They would like to have that flexibility. I don't
<br />think the Commission or Council is limited by that. I think you would have the ability to be able
<br />to revert, not revert, or amend as you see fit. Okay, so, as we mentioned, it places the
<br />responsibility of proof of performance on the applicant instead of the Department to have to
<br />prove that.
<br />We are also considering something that the Land Use Commission does which I don't—again,
<br />this is a legal matter, but we noticed that they, during the order to show cause hearings, they
<br />would ask the applicant to show proof that they have the ability to finance the project, and it was
<br />pretty interesting because, you know, I mean, they'll come with a letter from the bank saying we
<br />can loan you this much money. And, then, they got a question well, is that letter legitimate,
<br />right? Did you just make that up or, you know, but they didn't—they brought the letter and it
<br />said yeah, we can finance the project, but then it was like, wait a minute, it that a legitimate
<br />letter? So, we were dealing with some characters at that point, so there was reason to question.
<br />But, it would be good
<br />HALL: —Stay on topic.
<br />DARROW: I'm trying, I'm trying. It would be good to have some information provided like
<br />yeah, we have the ability, because a lot of times, the people, again the main reason we are
<br />hearing is that they didn't have the ability to move forward financially, right? They couldn't get
<br />a loan or whatever it was. There are times that its other issues, mainly health issues, something
<br />happened, and that just can't be helped. Those things are unforeseen.
<br />So, to kind of come to a conclusion here, one of the, a few things that came up at the Leeward
<br />Planning Commission, and this has kind of been the way we've done things in the past `cause
<br />we've had a number of ordinances as I've mentioned that have been sitting for years. So, you
<br />know, we come across them every so often in our everyday activities, and we say hey, these guys
<br />are out of compliance. What do you want to do? And, the—at the direction that we've been
<br />given at this point was, well, it's currently the appropriate zoning for the area even though they
<br />EXHIBIT E
<br />9
<br />
|