My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2003-05-27 TBLASMAN (2)
PublicDocuments
>
Planning Department
>
Leeward/Windward Planning Commission
>
Minutes & Exhibits Transcripts
>
2003-2022 Exhibits Transcripts
>
2003
>
2003-05-27 TBLASMAN (2)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/13/2011 3:10:55 PM
Creation date
6/13/2011 3:10:41 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
102
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
M. ROY:ThatÓs correct. But heÓll make it, can make it as early as he can. <br />So, hopefully, thatÓll work in line with our timing. In other words, early afternoon, <br />hopefully? Something like that. <br />GIFFIN:Okay. Commissioners, any questions on that sequence? Hearing <br />none, Mikahala, you may begin. <br />SPRINGER:Madam Chair? <br />GIFFIN:IÓm sorry, sure. Hannah Springer? <br />SPRINGER:Madam Chair, I want to make sure that we all have the same <br />documents before us. And as much as this panel takes the Public Access Shoreline <br />Hawaii decision, as well as the Ka PaÒakai O KaÒaina decision, into account and as much <br />as we refer to those documents as we do the various County and State regulations that <br />have been cited, I would like to offer that weÓre additionally taking into consideration the <br />decisions of Topliss versus Hawaii County Planning Commission, No. 15586, dated <br />January 6, 1993, and the State of Hawaii versus Hanapi, dated November 20, 1998, <br />which is No. 19746. I think that itÓs important that we all have copies of these decisions <br />at our disposal to understand where weÓre all looking at and what the panel is looking at <br />in regard to our deliberations. Also, I appreciate the Intervenor Klana Huli Honua <br />including for us the unofficial version of Act 50. I reviewed the Revised Statutes 343, <br />which is amended in part as a result of Act 50. But I think it would be to our benefit to <br />have the formal and approved copy of Act 50 circulated for us to <br />deliberations. <br />GIFFIN:So, Commissioner Springer, is that a request that copies be <br />available or -? <br />SPRINGER:IÓm not sure how to handle that, if these become exhibits or if <br />theyÓre background information. But I think it would be important for us to have copies <br />of all of them somehow. <br />GIFFIN:Ivan? <br />TORIGOE:I think what youÓre referring to is just the law of the land. And, so, <br />I donÓt think we need to have them as exhibits unless someone wants to provide them as <br />such. <br />VITOUSEK:IÓm sorry, Commissioner Springer, is this something that youÓd <br />like to have now, because we can get copies made and brought down here if that would <br />be helpful. I mean, my office is right up the street. <br />SPRINGER:If you could, I would appreciate that. Again, IÓm not sure if the <br />formal proceedings but -. <br />8 <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.