|
industrial-leased levelled lands. Commissioner Iwashita talks about entitlements; and I can see
<br />how by granting this particular application, we would hand out an entitlement that not every
<br />operator of a trucking company has. And I’m not sure if it not being in support of agriculture, an
<br />agricultural business, that it’s the wisest use of that permitting process. So that’s my take on it;
<br />and I’m more inclined to vote against the permit, or the application.
<br />ALAMEDA:Thank you, Commissioner Salavea. That’s a really good point there that
<br />hasn’t been brought on the table. Thank you for that mana`o. Other thoughts? Is there anybody
<br />willing to make a motion or -? Go ahead, Commissioner McCall.
<br />MCCALL:Thank you. Actually, just one other point that I forgot to say when I
<br />was -. You know, if he does have an actively-going hog operation, it would be legitimate to
<br />have a small dozer, a backhoe, possibly even a dump truck or something like that. So those
<br />should be allowed in a, you know, I don’t think that kind of stuff should be exempt from any
<br />type of, whatever, control. So -.
<br />ALAMEDA:Okay. Thank you, Commissioner McCall. I’d also like to make note for
<br />my Fellow Commissioners of the letters of support. You know, I’d like to commend the
<br />Applicant for getting all these signatures; and I also noticed that a lot of the signatures are from
<br />folks who live above this property, some contractors, some folks who’ve been there, you know, a
<br />really long time. So, you know, just to add that to the mix. Twenty-five signatures is a lot for
<br />kind of a small area like that; so just to make note of that as well.
<br />I also like to revisit Commissioner Galdones’ earlier comment about the possibility to
<br />compromise; and I don’t know if that’s still on the table, Commissioner Galdones.
<br />GALDONES:Thank you, Mr. Chair. My thoughts about striking a compromise was
<br />based on the response from Mr. Nishimura who stated in his document that they were responding
<br />to a negative approval from the Director, and they are willing to abandon or cease and desist the
<br />operation, but give them a five-year timeline to do so. However, in the mix of the discussion that
<br />we’re having right now, there are some feelings that quite possibly that we should allow the
<br />operation to continue. Now where I’m coming from is that I would like to help the Applicant to
<br />survive as a business. I do not want to shut his operation down and see him going out of
<br />business. I don’t want to do that. If it means that the Commissioners would like to give him a
<br />positive approval, I’m willing to support that. But short of doing that if we’re not able to
<br />approve that, then, yes, I would like to entertain a compromise in terms of the timeline, one year
<br />and with the possibility of extending another year versus the five years that they are asking for.
<br />ALAMEDA:Okay. Thank you, Commissioner Galdones. Okay, Fellow
<br />Commissioners, we have several options. First, the Department has come with actually a denial
<br />of the application. And just from the discussion it appears that some of the Commissioners
<br />actually disagree with that denial, and yet other Commissioners feel that perhaps the denial is in
<br />order but, yet, maybe it’s not that stringent, maybe we can kind of strike a compromise around
<br />time limitations. And, yet, there might be one or two Commissioners who feel that a denial is in
<br />order. So that actually leaves us three avenues to undertake.But I think we’ve got to respond to
<br />the denial first, or no? Mr. Torigoe, how can we -?
<br />TORIGOE:No, you can make whatever motion you want.
<br />EXHIBIT D
<br />19
<br />
<br />
|