2019-06-20 KCDP Minutes.v02 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

the Kona CDP did not have mandatory implications. Ms. Rudolf shared Mr. Flaherty's concern that removing the "shalls° from the plan would undermine the community's intentions. 4. Shannon Rudolf, representing herself, testified in opposition to the proposed amendments. Ms. Rudolf expressed feeling that the hearing was poorly advertised. She shared that with the depth of work that members of the community put into drafting the plan, weakening the language would go against the intention of having a plan the County is mandated to follow. 5. Clare Loprinzi, representing herself, testified in opposition to the proposed amendments. She described how hard the community worked in putting together the plan and expressed her concern of yielding power away from the community in favor of developers or the County. 6. Janice Palma-Glennie, representing herself, testified on the proposed amendments. Ms. Palma- Glennie introduced herself as a member of the Action Committee, and the only member to vote kanalua on the amendment package at the May 141h Action Committee meeting. She expressed that while she has her reservations about some of the changes, she trusts that as long as the original commitment to community-driven regional planning remains the priority, the plan will be successful moving forward. She urged commissioners to take their time through the process and to be scrupulous in their decision-making. 7. Ken Melrose, representing himself, testified in support of the proposed amendments. Mr. Melrose introduced himself as the former chair of the Steering Committee from 2005 to 2008 then chair for the first term of the Action Committee. He felt that the vision and guiding principles which shaped the plan remain unchanged by the proposed amendments. He asked for a favorable recommendation for the amendments which he believes will go a long way toward helping to unlock the conflicts in the code which have held up progress. 8. Cristy Logan, representing herself, testified in support of the proposed amendments. Ms. Logan introduced herself as a Kailua-Kona resident. She shared her thoughts on the unintended consequences that the plan has brought forward including creating a development moratorium in Kona. She expressed concern that the plan was unintentionally causing development to happen outside of the urban area. She urged commissioners to forward a favorable recommendation of the amendments and to encourage amending this document as something that was supposed to be experimental from the beginning. 9. Franz Weber, representing himself, testified in support of the proposed amendments. Mr. Weber introduced himself as a member of the Kona Action Committee. He shared his belief that the plan would have been drafted differently if the legal consequences of the plan were better understood from the beginning. He expressed that an effort to revise the code as a means to implement the CDP would have been more desirable in some instances but agreed that amending the plan is necessary for liability and legal reasons. 10. Shane Palacat-Nelsen, representing himself, testified in support of the proposed amendments. Mr. Palacat-Nelsen introduced himself as a member of the Kona Action Committee and chair of the previous Kona CDP Amendments Subcommittee. He shared his effort to ensure the subcommittee look thoroughly at the whole plan. He urged commissioners to take their time in reviewing the document. www. hip Ian ningdept.com konana,hawaiicounty.gov Page 2