My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2007-01-05 tgpamendment
PublicDocuments
>
Planning Department
>
Leeward/Windward Planning Commission
>
Minutes & Exhibits Transcripts
>
2003-2022 Exhibits Transcripts
>
2007
>
2007-01-05 tgpamendment
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/13/2011 8:43:21 AM
Creation date
6/13/2011 8:43:20 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
8
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
the General Plan is what my impression of the interim amendment would be. So that’s <br />my concern; and so, frankly, I don’t see a real need to do this. <br />GRAHAM: Okay, thank you. Commissioner Watanabe. <br />WATANABE: I don’t want to belabor the point, but I believe the Planning <br />Director did make mention that the Council was concerned about the timeframe with <br />regard, in relation to their term; and if the present process takes over a year to occur and <br />th <br />their term is only two years and the situation arises in the 7 month of their term its likely <br />that nothing gets done. I think what we have to recognize also is that the public has input <br />on who they elect to the Council. So whether we may agree with what course of action <br />the Council may want to see occur, you know, interim amendment, it in theory is, you <br />know, the voice of the people. So I don’t see any real issue with this because you still <br />have public input and you have sufficient controls. Actually I think the Director and <br />Corporation Counsel have done a good job of trying to balance off the issue of <br />deliberating and not just pushing things through, and yet still give the Council some <br />ability to make interim changes if at some point in time they see a need for them. <br />GRAHAM: Commissioner Watanabe. <br />YUEN: I just want to add one more thing, that in addition to the <br />timeframes the bill that we did which is Number 4 does clean up and clarify some of the <br />existing language in the procedures in a pretty positive way, I think. <br />GRAHAM: Thank you. <br />ALAMEDA: Point of procedure, Mr. Chair. <br />GRAHAM: Yes. <br />ALAMEDA: On this document before me on the upper right-hand side it does <br />suggest that Item No. 4 be presented today but it also suggested that it can be presented at <br />th <br />the Planning Commission meeting on the 19. So if we make a motion for today, will it <br />resurface another way? <br />WATANABE: Actually, I might be wrong on this but this is, I believe, the third <br />meeting we’re having on this. The proposed amendments have not changed significantly <br />and the intent certainly is upheld. And so, you know, both sides of the island have had a <br />chance to hear and make comment on this. So I don’t know that we have an issue there. <br />ALAMEDA: Okay, Mr. Chair, your thoughts? <br />GRAHAM: Yeah, Mr. Torigoe, do you have thoughts of whether we should <br />continue this for action to the Kona meeting. <br /> EXHIBIT C <br />5 <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.