2008-04-18 TKOHALA LLC - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

his decision, and therefore he based it on very carefully selected material that Mr. Lim presented to him. Thank you. WATANABE: Any further comments? DOMINGO: Mr. Chairman. WATANABE: Mr. Domingo. DOMINGO: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I seconded the motion, and obviously it’s because I think what Mr. Woodward had emphasized with regard to this issue before us, I support it totally and I agree with him. I agree strongly that the doctrine of fairness has been breached, you know. We’ve considered many times applications for extensions – in fact, extensions upon extensions. And this Commission has not been as critical to those extensions as we have been on this particular issue. And some of the information, as stated by a previous speaker, with regard to being omitted, the Kohala Development Plan has not been adopted, and some of the concerns that were expressed have not totally been adopted as a policy statement with regard to the development of that particular area. In my opinion, as I stated, I support very strongly that -, what changes have happened there that would warrant the downzoning and the revocation of the zoning? To me, nothing. The General Plan has not been changed. There have been opportunities for the General Plan to be changed; and it has not changed one bit. The policy elements for development along that coast have not been changed also. So you know, why all of a sudden the decision to revoke the zoning and the SMA Permit has come out? And that’s why I strongly emphasize, you know, the doctrine of fairness totally has been breached because of the part of -, the applicant has not been given fair consideration in their application. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. That’s all. WATANABE: Mr. Woodward. WOODWARD: Mr. Chairman, thank you. Yeah, exactly. The problem here I think is an issue of fairness. And I hate to say it, but the Planning Department has not worked with the applicant at all. We’ve been through several meetings, and we’ve encouraged the Planning Department to try and work out a compromise with the applicant. The applicant has volunteered to reduce the number of lots from 50 to 25. There has been nothing from the Planning Department other than, you know, my way or the highway. And it really is an issue of fairness. And I think what’s going to happen here, if we vote this down, they are going to have a contested case, they are going to take it to the court, it’s going to come back to us. And to be honest with you, they are going to win. There is no question in my mind because this has not been a fair process. WATANABE: Any further comments? Mr. Iwashita. IWASHITA: Mr. Chair, my view is that we as a body -, or my view of my role in this body is that I need to apply the proper standard. And there has been discussion about fairness; and you know, there’re no allegations that our rules are not fair. It appears that argument has been made that somehow, in applying those rules to this case, that the result is not fair apparently EXHIBIT A 16