2020-12-17 Leeward Exh B (AMEND SMA 388)

Home

VAN PERNIS: Why not include the roof, along with the framing? CARR SMITH: We are not being specific to anything. VAN PERNIS: Wasn't I, I didn't see any vote taken on the language. I would like to see a roof, as well as framing. And Mr. Vitousek, with all due respect, is not correct that the applicant is Diamond Resorts; that's a trading, the name only. The applicant is DPM Acquisition LLC - - - doing business as merely trading. I think that if we are gong to go forward with this, we need to have a condition that the Planning Department, or the planning director, will determine whether or not the applicant exists (indiscernible–noise) before the CARR SMITH: Kim, can you mute,please? VAN PERNIS: before the, this vote is effective CARR SMITH: Okay, all right, Mark, we VAN PERNIS: both the lawyer and the county don't know. And whether they were existing at the time of initial filing is not important; the question is do they exist now when we are to vote CARR SMTIH: Okay, I think the question has been asked, and the answer was already given, so we are not going to talk about— VAN boutVAN PERNIS: - - - CARR - -CARR SMITH: Mike. VITOUSEK: Well, I mean, to me I don't think it's harmful to include a condition that the applicant verify that their business is in good standing, or with- - - Hawai`i we have business registration requirements, annual business registration requirementsI don't know if that's a stan- a normal thing or what, but if that's a condition that's being proposed by Commissioner Van Pernis that the business be required to be in good standing, then that's not a, not a harmful thing to include in there as a condition. CARR SMITH: Jeff Darrow, are you available? KERN: I'm here, Madam Chair, Zendo. CARR SMITH: Okay, go ahead, Zendo. KERN: So typically, you know, the planning,property taxes are paid, we get a tax clearance certificate, which shows that they are 32 EXHIBIT B