Laserfiche WebLink
argument that the law cannot be applied because it’s the first time and it would be unfair to the <br />developer. You know, it basically would handcuff anything that we do. As far as I’m <br />concerned, then we should pass only those developments that we are certain will be done and not <br />be speculated upon over years and years and years and years and years and years, and then be <br />turned over and on basically just speculative purposes, and nothing actually gets done. So that’s <br />what we are really looking at. And it is very precedential. I think that in the end -, well, my <br />feeling is we should prevail; we are properly exercising our discretion under the terms of the <br />rezoning ordinance itself and under our fair rules, and the rules have been applied fairly in this <br />case. Thank you. <br />WATANABE: Thank you. <br />WOODWARD: Mr. Chairman. <br />WATANABE: Mr. Woodward. <br />WOODWARD: Well, first I would like to say there is a fundamental difference between <br />law and justice, unfortunately. That’s just the way it works. The law is not always right. And <br />you mentioned discretionary; yes, well, that’s the key point here. If you look at the discretion <br />that the Planning Commission has used, as far as granting extensions – and I can’t name the <br />number that we’ve looked at over the last year and half – where we had discretion, and they may <br />be 5, 10 years, you know, out of compliance, and we worked with them. That’s not what <br />happened here. What happened here was there was a political agenda to downzone this property <br />because some people felt that the original zoning in 1997 was inappropriate. It was a political <br />act. It was not a legal act. It was not fair. And as I say, there is a fundamental difference <br />between the letter of the law and justice. And that’s the problem with our system. <br />WATANABE: Ms. Bowman. <br />BOWMAN: I just have a couple of comments. Being the new kid on the block, I <br />haven’t been cognizant of the extensions and how many improvements were made or -; so I can’t <br />address that. But in preparation for this meeting, I did review the Northwest Hawaii Regional <br />Outdoor Plan. And you know, back when all this was happening it was a market driven <br />economy. And if you look at the Plan and you look at everything that was planned, I think this is <br />the first of many challenges we’ll have as far as growth. So you know, after reviewing the Plan <br />and seeing that, yes, this is precedent setting, but I have just a gut feeling that this is – how can I <br />say it -. <br />WATANABE: Tip of the iceberg? <br />BOWMAN: Yes. And I, you know, recommend that we do review these plans because <br />we have a lot of work cut out for us that the previous -, you know, you talk about politics; I think <br />that was back then. I think now rather than political, I think we really need to look at <br />environmental and growth and capacity, building for this island. So and, that’s all I have to say. <br />Thank you. <br />EXHIBIT A <br />18 <br /> <br />