Laserfiche WebLink
HALL: Okay, so I guess we can continue until people start to show up for that meeting. At that <br /> time, we're going to have to wrap up. <br /> REPLOLGE: And when it comes— <br /> JACKSON: However— <br /> REPLOGLE: —to wrap up its going to happen. Yes, Maija? <br /> JACKSON: Malia, we do have applicants in the waiting room. <br /> HALL: Okay. <br /> JACKSON: Not testifiers. <br /> REPLOGLE: So, we should — <br /> HALL: Okay. <br /> REPLOGLE: —close this up? Mr. Van Pernis? <br /> VAN PERNIS: Thank you. <br /> REPLOGLE: Make it— <br /> VAN PERNIS: Thank you. <br /> REPLOGLE: — let it out. <br /> VAN PERNIS: I'll get it out real fast. As Ms. Yates said and Ms. Galimba had said. What are <br /> we voting on? The intent is one thing. The letter of the law is more important than the intent. <br /> So, I think that the intent needs to be finalized in a "- - -"letter. So, I appreciate Mr. Kern <br /> willing to bring this back written rather than intent. <br /> REPLOGLE: Thank you. <br /> CLARKSON: I move that we adjourn. <br /> JACKSON: Excuse me, can I say one thing before we adjourn. <br /> REPLOGLE: Yes, you may. <br /> JACKSON: Item number 2 was supposed to be a discussion of Planning Commissioners <br /> suggestions for future rule amendments, and I think we have a few things on our radar. We have <br /> changes to the SMA and Shoreline Setback Rule,we have potentially new language that we'd <br /> 21 <br /> EXHIBIT B (DRAFT) <br />