|
most recent amendments to the General Plan were passed and it included the expressed authority
<br />to use community development plans to implement the general provisions of the General Plan.
<br />Now 23-6 says that in implementing the Subdivision Code in approving subdivisions that the
<br />Department shall apply the General Plan, including implementation of the community
<br />development plans, right, to do an effective job and promote what the General Plan says
<br />supposed to happen. And the concern I think consistent across this body is that it’s not
<br />happening. Right? It’s not happening. So what to do? We don’t have the community
<br />development plans. And the little bit that I’ve seen of what is being done right now in Kona it’s
<br />nothing more than a mini-general plan. To me what I’ve seen preliminarily is not real helpful.
<br />It’s not going down the right road, to be specific. And in my mind, my thinking, is that, you
<br />know, there really needs to be more involvement, it needs to be on smaller scales, and these
<br />community development plans can be implemented through the Subdivision Code.
<br />Just looking at this now, the Department can tell subdividers, well, we’re waiting for the
<br />community development plans to be done so that we can properly implement 23-6 under the,
<br />which says that we shall, the Department shall implement the Subdivision Ordinance in
<br />accordance with the General Plan. And because the General Plan is not fully implemented now
<br />with properly adopted community development plans for the island, you know, so that if there
<br />was a mind to the administration can say, we’re going to wait. The law, Section 23-6, says we
<br />wait -- Until we have the necessary guidance and the proper, the adopted community
<br />development plan for your area we cannot really proceed to approve your subdivision.
<br />As to the authority of the Council, the main authorizing section of the Charter is Section 3-15(a)
<br />which says, “The council shall enact zoning, subdivision, and such other ordinances which shall
<br />contain the necessary provisions to carry out the purpose of the general plan.” Okay, the Council
<br />has the authority to change the subdivision ordinance, there’s no question under that.
<br />The argument being made is that Chapter 4, Section 6-4.2(f), which basically says that the
<br />Director shall “Render decisions on proposed subdivision plans pursuant to law,” is intended to
<br />exclude the Council’s authority to change of the Subdivision Ordinance. Well, it’s not that clear,
<br />it’s not that clear. And because it’s not, you know, “Render decisions on proposed subdivision
<br />plans pursuant to law,” well, what does “pursuant to law” mean? Pursuant to law means that
<br />pursuant to the ordinances that the Council passes. Okay? That argument can be made. And
<br />because (f) is not really clear, I think it’s a stretch to argue that the Council does not have
<br />authority to make changes to the Subdivision Ordinance that affects how the director ends up
<br />making a decision. The Charter is not that clear on that point.So I don’t think we should give
<br />developers’ lawyers arguments against, you know, how this is done. But, in any event, to me
<br />that’s not a real argument that the Council doesn’t have authority. The Charter is clear that the
<br />Council has the authority to change the Subdivision Ordinance. And if the Council had a mind
<br />to, I could suggest the Council could make the subdivision ordinance very onerous -- Sure,
<br />Director, you can make a decision but, you know, at minimum it’s going to take you three years,
<br />we require you to spend three years to review a subdivision application. I mean, Council can do
<br />that, right? Council can do a lot of things. So, and you guys send it up to us for us to comment
<br />before you make a decision, Council can do that clearly. So we need to do something.
<br />Again, I go back to the community development plan, because the Subdivision Ordinance is just
<br />a, I agree with Commissioner Domingo, this is an administrative, should be just a ministerial
<br /> EXHIBIT B 8
<br />
<br />
<br />
|