2006-11-01 tcouncil - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

and primarily was what this was all about. So, really, my presence here today was just to apologize for any misunderstanding there was and to assure this Commission that the County Council is fully cognizant and aware of your authority,your responsibilities, and they would not do anything to violate that in the least bit. You know with that, Id be more than happen to address any questions that you have or carry any message back to the Council on your behalf. GRAHAM:Thank you, Mr. Ashida. Do we have any questions from the Planning Commission Members? IWASHITA:I do. GRAHAM:Mr. Iwashita? IWASHITA:Thank you for being here today. I understand that under the General Plan interimamendmentsectionthatanychangesinparticulartothispartoftheGeneralPlanwould require initiation by the Council with regard to this resolution. Im, and I guess so that because it is a resolution it doesnt have -. Well, Im a little, Im sorry, but Im a little skeptical about, you know, proceeding and not following the exact the letter of the law, in this case 16.2, because of any prospective future challenges. And even understanding the distinction between an ordinance and a resolution, and that the ordinance is law and the resolution is not binding law, still my concern is that if the process is initiated in a perceived wrongful way and if ultimately it is so held to be wrongful, then whether or not its law, you know. Because the process is Council does a resolution, and then the Director responds, makes a recommendation to this body, this body takes action, and then it goes forward back to the Council with a proposed form of an ordinance. So that the end resolution of the resolution, you know, the triggering resolution is law. Right? So that I believe, Im hesitant, you know, I, especially cause of Hokulia, that things are done to the letter of the law. And I understand with respect to the spirit of the law. But to me we really, in really taking action here, I dont want to take an action where, you know, some question can be raised as to complying with the letter of the law and, therefore, not properly initiating this process. So that would be my main concern, or thats still my continuing concern about that. So I dont know if its appropriate for you to respond to that or thats an executive session matter. But that is still a residual concern that I would have. The other concerns I have about this is that 16.2 requires a feasibility study and the Director has already mentioned that thats an ambiguous term and hard to define. I have a problem right now in looking at all the papers that have been presented as to whether a study, not to mention a feasibility study, has been done and reported on back to the Commission. So that is another concern. And I guess I would appreciate, I dont know if you have any comments, but that is a residual concern that also I have. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. GRAHAM:So, Commissioner Iwashita, you didnt ask direct questions but youve made known your areas of inquiries. So if Mr. Ashida has any comments on that, we welcome them now. ASHIDA:No comments. You have competent counsel that can advise you appropriately. GRAHAM:Mrs. Siracusa, you have a question? 3EXHIBIT B