Laserfiche WebLink
SPRINGER:Following up on Commissioner Iwashitas discussion, in our letter from <br />the Planning Director dated September 1, 2005, on the second page theres a discussion <br />regarding bananas which may be in full production 12 to 18 months after planting, and papayas <br />and taro can also be harvested within a year. Im wondering what this statement is based on and <br />if the Director has taken into consideration that there were also citrus and avocado crops grown <br />by the applicant. <br />YUEN:The statement is based on personal experience with bananas as a <br />commercial banana farmer; and with papayas and taro as a person who has grown them. The <br />bananas can be in full production in 12 to 18 months. The Schedule F forms that we received do <br />not itemize between various crops. But in, and Ive just listed what the claimant himself listed as <br />the principal products in those tax forms. We are not, certainly avocados and citrus take longer <br />to bear. And we dont know of, we dont know the proportion of income earned from the <br />various crops, but clearly by his own report some of it was earned from relatively short-term <br />crops. <br />GALDONES:CommissionerSpringer? <br />SPRINGERMr.Director,wouldyouconsiderthenacompensationofthe$3,623for <br />two years of time a reasonable compensation? <br />YUEN:I oppose any compensation on the grounds that he is not entitled to any <br />compensation after selling the property. If the Commission disagrees then I would hope the <br />Commission takes into account the points made about that some of the crops were relatively <br />short-term crops and that theres labor involved. <br />SPRINGER:Mr. Director, in Rule 14 when, lets see, on the sheet thats part of our <br />background packet, adverse impacts will include physical injury, medical or health conditions, <br />business or economic loss. How should we consider this business or economic loss? Then, it <br />seems to me in your letter youre suggesting that the sale of the property was indeed the <br />compensation due the applicant. <br />YUEN:Thats right. It terminates a persons right to income from the property <br />when you sell the property. Certainly a person who had crops or fruit trees affected by a <br />geothermal event could make a claim against the Geothermal Asset Fund for that loss of crops. <br />If hydrogen sulfide or caustic soda destroys your crops, you can make a claim; and it would go <br />through this adjustment process of reviewing the claim. And if youve made your burden of <br />proof, then thats a legitimate claim that we would respect. Similarly, if you are, you have to <br />move, youre dispossessed from your house and you move back, then you have a claim for <br />temporary relocation, youve a claim for temporary accommodations. Our position on the basic <br />claim is that, as I said, that once you sell your property youre not entitled to earn any income <br />from it. <br />SPRINGER:So, Mr. Director, just so that Im clear on what your guidance to us is is <br />either the applicant could have sold the property, or if he had retained the property then we might <br />be taking into account this loss of business due to the condition of the land? <br />9 <br /> <br />