Laserfiche WebLink
YUEN: I would look at it as a clarification. As a practical matter, yes, you <br />would have to include -. If in the end it has an effect on what the person does with their <br />property, yes, you have to let them know. So it would include, it simply states something <br />that would be required if there is any notion of due process of law. <br />WOODWARD: All right. Well, I don’t have a problem with it.It says all steps <br />should be done in consultation with, which is a good thing. It doesn’t say it shall be done <br />such and such. Do you have a problem with that? <br />WHITE: A problem? No. I have a lot of problems, but not on this one. <br />But, anyway, with regard to the idea of community -. <br />WOODWARD: Well, we’re not going to get into all your problems today. <br />WHITE: Okay, no, I’m sorry. I’m just kidding. Okay, so in the sentence <br />where it says “All steps should be done in consultation with the community,” the <br />assumption is that landowners are part of our community. But if they feel that, you <br />know, we actually have to spell that out, then what else do we have to spell out in terms <br />of finite sections or representations of the community? I think that the intent of this one, <br />particularly here, the community meant, you know, of all our land, that we’re talking <br />about it in terms of landowners. Scientists, natural resources managers and cultural <br />experts may or may not be within our community. So that -. <br />WOODWARD: Well, again, the way I look at this, it says “done in consultation,” <br />that just means taking in their opinion. It doesn’t mean you have to act on it. But it <br />means taking in their opinion. And we may want to change it to “affected landowners,” <br />if that’s acceptable to both of you. <br />LUCE: Mr. Chairman, the rules of the Commission throughout are <br />consistent that the interest of landowners, adjacent property owners impacted, affected <br />property owners is clearly distinguishable from that of the general public. Those are your <br />contested case standing rules; and that’s all I’m after. When I asked about including <br />landowners during a focus group meeting, I was told that landowners equal community. <br />And I don’t agree and I don’t think the Commission’s rules allow that either. The <br />interests of the landowners are clearly distinguishable from that of the community or <br />general public. <br />WOODWARD: Well, we certainly recognize that you have a bigger stake in that <br />particular area than the rest of the general community both financially and every other <br />way. So I have no problem if that’s acceptable to both of you that we just add “and <br />affected landowners.” And, again, it says “in consultation with.” It doesn’t obligate <br />anybody to do anything. It just says bring them into the loop. So if that’s okay with you <br />then I think that would -. Does that satisfy your question, Commissioner Iwashita? <br />IWASHITA: I made a motion. <br /> EXHIBIT C <br />8 <br /> <br />