Laserfiche WebLink
this application; and Mr. Torigoe was kind of clear that he felt that it was appropriate because of <br />the nature of the correspondence that we deal with the correspondence specifically. So that’s <br />what I intend to do right now. <br />IWASHITA: I understand that position, Mr. Chair. I guess as a practical matter, there <br />were two votes at the last meeting that, you know, basically can be interpreted as in favor of a <br />denial, and if three others today joined, then all of this discussion is moot. I mean if the <br />application in fact is denied, then the whole procedural question disappears. <br />GRAHAM: I understand that. <br />IWASHITA: So my preference would be, you know, to at least make the motion, make <br />it part of the record; if the motion fails, then we can deal with this procedural issue. <br />GRAHAM: All right. Thank you for your thoughts. I’d prefer to deal with <br />Mr. Matsukawa’s correspondence directly as sort of a specific topic before us right now. <br />Does one of the Commissioners choose to make a motion in regards to what we received from <br />Mr. Matsukawa? Commissioner Domingo? <br />DOMINGO: Chairman, since it comes to us after the close of a hearing -. Is that right? <br />GRAHAM: Correct. <br />DOMINGO: I think we should accept both letters and submit that into the records, the <br />record of the proceedings on this specific issue, and just leave it at that, and then consider the <br />issue of the bed and breakfast application as a new issue, not a new issue before us but an issue <br />which we can address either for or denial of that application. <br />GRAHAM: All right, thank you. It sounds to me like you are speaking in general the <br />same tone as Commissioner Iwashita who would like to do that. And also the question whether <br />this needs to be admitted into evidence is another question. Mr. Torigoe, maybe you can speak <br />to that? <br />TORIGOE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The correspondence basically again is like a <br />written request, and so it wouldn’t necessarily be considered evidence; it’s just part of the record. <br />I think if the parties again have any other position on that, we should get that on record. But I <br />don’t think it needs to be formally entered into evidence. <br />GRAHAM: Thank you, Mr. Torigoe. Could I ask the parties, go through one more <br />time, if they have any further commentary on what we are saying right now? Mr. Matsukawa? <br />MATSUKAWA: No. <br />GRAHAM: Mr. Krueger? <br />KRUEGER: No, I don’t. <br />GRAHAM: Mr. Yuen? <br />EXHIBIT A <br />10 <br /> <br />