2004-01-30 TDoutor Coffee - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

into an enforcement action. I don't think that's proper based upon what the agenda item is and what I believe your intent was when you voted on this at your last meeting. So I'm not going to go there because I believe it would be improper to do that today. I guess that's about it. I don't have anything else to say right now, but if you have any questions, I'll be happy to answer them. FUJIKAWA:Okay. Thank you, Mr. Tsukazaki. Commissioners, any questions with Mr. Tsukazaki? If not, Dennis Krueger, proceed. KRUEGER:Thank you, Mr. Chairman. First of all, Mr. Chairman, I'd just like to respond to Commissioner Graham's question with respect to the prior motion. I believe under Qnadqs&rQtkdrneNqcdq that in order for somebody to bring a motion to amend, they have to announce at the prior meeting that they intend to bring the motion at a subsequent meeting and exactly what the motion is that they intend to bring at that subsequent meeting, and then that motion has to be added to the agenda at the subsequent meeting. So under Qnadqs&rQtkdrne Nqcdq, the motion to amend couldn't have been made at the last meeting, it would need to be made today. But there could be an announcement that the Commissioner intended to make it today, at today's meeting. My -, I guess my foremost objection to the Commission's entertainment of a motion to amend is that, in my opinion, the Commission lacks jurisdiction to do anything on this case at the present time. After the Commission ruled on the request for a special permit, the Commission's ruling and findings of fact in that case were appealed to the Third Circuit Court and to Judge Ibarra. Once that appeal took place, this Commission lacks jurisdiction to do anything further on this case unless the Commission, through its legal counsel or through its representative, goes to the Third Circuit Court and asks the court to allow it to do something further in this case while it's still on appeal. If you look at Section 91-14 of the Hawaii Revised Statutes dealing with judicial rule of ` contested cases, there's a provision in there that discusses how an applicant may go and get additional evidence admitted before the Commission so that it can be considered by the Third Circuit Court in the appeal. I would submit to this body that in order for this Commission to change its opinion that is on appeal, it first needs to go to the court and get the court's permission to allow you to conduct a hearing to discuss that change. And nothing of that nature has been done. And, again, just for further reference, there's a case called McPherson versus the Zoning Board of Appeals of the City and County of Honolulu, the citation is 67 Hawaii 603; it's a 1985 case. One of the conditions that the court, this is the Supreme Court of Hawaii, ` addressed in that case was whether or not a motion for reconsideration that was brought by one of the parties after the planning, or after the Zoning Commission's hearing could be heard if somebody appealed prior to the motion for reconsideration being heard. And what the court said was where an administrative agency's regulations permit the filing of a petition or motion 7