|
The process for the enactment of a Community Development Plan is that the draft Plan is
<br />prepared – and there is a lot of public interaction and the interaction with the Steering Committee
<br />all along with that – and then it goes to the Steering Committee for their recommendation; and if
<br />it’s recommended for approval by the Steering Committee, then it comes through the Planning
<br />Commission for a Planning Commission recommendation, much like a General Plan amendment
<br />or a rezoning, but then finally it goes up to the County Council to be enacted by ordinance. If the
<br />County Council makes changes, substantive changes, the Steering Committee is supposed to be
<br />able to have given a chance to comment on it again. But the County Council, of course, has a
<br />final say as a legislative body of the County whether to enact it or not and what to put in it.
<br />So we noted that the Planning Commission didn’t have a timeframe for dealing with this. All
<br />other matters where the Planning Commission has issues of recommendation have a timeframe;
<br />and typically it is 60 days from the time when the Planning Commission gets it. So just to avoid
<br />any confusion about what should happen, if we, if the Planning Commission, say, has a 4-4 vote
<br />and cannot render a 5-vote recommendation up or down, we thought it would be a good idea to
<br />act ahead and to put a timeframe in for the Planning Commission’s action and to specify what
<br />happens if the Planning Commission doesn’t take action within that timeframe. So what you
<br />have here is an amendment to the County Code, which would set that at 60 days, which is
<br />consistent typically with the timeframe for the Planning Commission to make a recommendation
<br />on something, and the statement that if the Planning Commission doesn’t take official action
<br />within that time, and that would be by five votes one way or the other, then it goes up to the
<br />County Council with an unfavorable recommendation from the Planning Commission.
<br />So, and just to, just one more thing about that. We would bring the Community Development
<br />Plans to your East and West Hawaii agendas, even though, you know, say, we have a North and
<br />South Kona Community Development Plan, they do have island-wide implications; people live
<br />on one side of the island, work on the other side of the island, go to beaches on the other side of
<br />the island, use County facilities on one or the other side of the island. So we are all on one
<br />island. And so we would, just as we bring General Plan amendments to both of your meetings,
<br />even an interim amendment that directly affected only one side of the island, we would bring
<br />these to both meetings. So you would have, 60 days gives you a number of meetings that you
<br />could be looking at the Plan and spending some time with it.
<br />WATANABE: Thank you. Do we have any questions of the Director? Yes,
<br />Ms. Siracusa?
<br />SIRACUSA: Well, first of all, I would like to thank you, Chris, for being proactive and
<br />jumping the gun and looking at getting this down, so that we have a process and a timeline
<br />before we actually have the Community Development Plans and then have to start figuring out
<br />after the fact practically.
<br />However, I disagree with some of your points that you would like to put into this, and I’d like to
<br />discuss them. For one thing, the 60 days, when we think that our communities have been
<br />working for more than a year on these Plans, and a lot of disparate people, you know, they try to
<br />bring in all the stakeholders that they could finagle into it, and lots and lots of meetings, lots of
<br />public outreach, lots of emails back and forth, you know, in between meetings, and this is so
<br />important to the communities. And we know how very often we won’t have, you know, a
<br />quorum or we’ll do 4-4 or want some more information. And I really feel that to show due
<br />EXHIBIT B
<br />2
<br />
<br />
|