2009-07-01 THI JOHNS - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

is to have the State opine as to whether or not those two things are somehow connected? HAYASHI: That is correct. MELROSE: Okay. HAYASHI: Exactly. MELROSE: Okay. So if that’s the case, I don’t have a problem cause I don’t think they’re connected. In fact, I know they’re not connected, cause the law doesn’t say that as far as the State law. And this says, it’s really, I understand the use of the words -. And it’s one of the areas where we’re going to come up with this kind of cross-over using the same words for two different things. Naming your twins the same thing isn’t a good thing sometimes, right? But I think if that’s the case, I’m not concerned too much about this issue. Well, I appreciate your raising it but I’m not really, I don’t think it’s, I think the answer is going to come up pretty clear. So that being the case, the conditions that he spoke to and the addition of that additional extension is acceptable to us. WOODWARD: Very good. Okay, do we have a second? ISHIBASHI: Second. WOODWARD: All right. Any further discussion? Maybe we ought to just have the motion read again, just so everybody is clear. OGATA: Okay. Let’s try this again. The motion is that the Planning Commission will send a favorable recommendation to the Land Use Commission for the request for a special permit, SPP 09-82, based upon public support, public benefit, and testimony provided today. And if the Land Use Commission determines it does not have to ratify the actions of the Planning Commission then SPP 09-82 will be deemed approved with the conditions stated by the Department. And that’s it, period. WOODWARD: All right, great. Mr. Melrose. MELROSE: I didn’t get the first portion of that when it was first read. WOODWARD: Okay. MELROSE: Can I have it read back for a moment? WOODWARD: Okay. That’s why I wanted everybody to be clear -. MELROSE: Yes, thank you. Thanks for rereading that. WOODWARD: About what the situation is. 14 EXHIBIT A