2007-05-24 TIBBETSON_2_ - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

GRAHAM: Okay. And Mr. Krueger, were you saying that there is like a formal closing of -, given what we’re intending to do, is there some formal closing that the Chair should make here today? KRUEGER: Well, I believe the Commission closed the public hearing the last time before the matter was decided upon, and I -, as long as the public hearing is not re-opened, I don’t think there is any need to close it. But if there is a re-opening of it, you need to close that before the Commission considers the final Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law. GRAHAM: Okay. Just for the record, also let me just ask if there is anyone here in the audience that intended to speak on this matter today, since it is on our agenda. Could you raise your hand or let me know? Okay. So, Commissioners, I think we have an agreement on how we are going to proceed, which is that we are not going to take any action today, but we are going to have formal Findings made by both of the parties; and they will send them both to the Planning Department and to the other party, and then they will have a chance to make Exceptions to the Findings of the other party; and all that material will come back to us, and we will have a meeting where we will use that as our source material for making our decision. And my presumption, if that’s okay with the Commissioners at that time, is at that time we will allow the parties to speak to what’s on the record and answer any questions from the Commissioners. Do any of the Commissioners have comments on that process or anything? Okay. Mr. Torigoe? TORIGOE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Just for reference, as Mr. Matsukawa said, substance of HRS Section 91-11 is contained in your Rule 4-23. So if you want to look at that, that will give you an idea what’s going to happen. And that Rule does also say that the parties are to be allowed to file Exceptions and present argument to the Commission. SIRACUSA: Excuse me. Could you repeat that reference again? TORIGOE: Yes. Four-23 of your Rules. GRAHAM: Mr. Krueger? KRUEGER: Mr. Chairman, and perhaps either the Chair or Mr. Torigoe intended to do this, but can we establish a time for the submission of the Findings to the opposing party, and then a time for submitting our Exceptions to the Planning Commission and the other parties, and then -, so we have some indication of when that’s necessary? GRAHAM: Yes, that was my intention. And I think what we want to do is kind of have a time schedule that’s okay with the both of you. So do you have a suggestion you can put forth, Mr. Krueger, and then we can see if that’s acceptable to Mr. Matsukawa? KRUEGER: Mr. Chair, I would really like to do it in a manner that would allow us to address this matter at the next Commission hearing, if at all possible. I think we can both reasonably prepare the necessary Findings in adequate time to get to the next Commission meeting on this matter, if we work backwards from the -. I don’t know what the date is, but whatever the date is, we can work backwards from that date and establish a time frame for doing that. EXHIBIT A 9