2008-04-18 TKOHALA LLC - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

comes before us, they’ll either come themselves or they’ll come with their consultant. And Mr. Lim has always appeared for Kohala LLC. We don’t have any idea who the principals of Kohala LLC are. And we’ve never been informed who they are. And I’m just wondering why that is. Mr. Lim, could you answer that for me? Is that appropriate? LIM: Well, I -. SIRACUSA: It’s not like I would take it into consideration in my, you know, in my voting. I just -, it seems strange to me. LIM: I’ll answer it this way. The client of -, actually there is a living person behind Kohala LLC, and he has not been able to come because of his business concerns. But I think that’s about all I can say with respect to the LLC. WATANABE: Okay, thank you. Maybe we should limit it to that. I’ve been informed that technically we should reopen the hearing, if we are going to start introducing more evidence. And I might also point out that when you are – to me, anyway – when you are making a land use decision, it’s not critical who owns the property. And I note that you said that you wouldn’t necessarily take that into consideration. But because of that, I don’t see the particular relevance of whether we know who all makes up Kohala LLC. SIRACUSA: I just thought it should be part of the record, so that somewhere along the line if something happens and Kohala LLC dissolves, for example, then we know who, you know, it’s on the record who the principals are. WATANABE: Okay, thank you. So, yes, Mr. Woodward. WOODWARD: Mr. Chairman. And I don’t know if this is appropriate without reopening the hearing. I’ll throw it out and see what Mr. Torigoe has to say. But I know Mr. Lim at the last meeting has said that the principals involved may be willing to reduce the number of lots. And as far as I know, we haven’t heard any information in that regard. They had originally reduced them to -, I believe it was 25. So I would be interested, if it’s appropriate at this time, to find out what Mr. Lim has to say. Now, that may require reopening the hearing, I don’t know. I’ll leave that to Mr. Torigoe. TORIGOE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would recommend, if you want to start discussing the substance of the merits, then you reopen the hearing. And you probably want to do that anyway to consider, you know, whether you’re going to allow further correspondence in. WATANABE: I understand that. But you know, initially Mr. Lim indicated that he wanted us to reopen the hearing for the specific purpose of introducing this as part of the record, and the condition was that we would also include the correspondence that Mr. Yuen had provided to the County Council, and not so much to open up the arguments. Let me ask my Fellow Commissioners. How do you feel -, do you feel that it would be productive if we reopen the hearing to discuss further, a further limiting or are we pretty hard and fast on our positions? EXHIBIT A 5