2006-11-01 tcouncil - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

shorten your timeframe. And so even if somebody were to sue on this it would seem that, you know, the court would look at this and say, you know, I see what youre saying but no harm here. And so its hard to see where anybody would even have standing to bring such a lawsuit. So, you know, onthat basis, thatswhy I feel comfortable in saying that its okay for you to go forward. Of course, you always do have the option. Youre the ones who are goingto have to make the decision on whether you go forward, or you could even decide to go forward but recommend that the Council redo it because you feel like, you know, the language that was put forth is just, just seems too unclear. But basically in the end because it, it just seems to me that its early enough in the process that you can remedy any perceived harm. I think its highly unlikely that there would be a challenge and even less likely that such challenge will be successful. GRAHAM:Thank you. Commissioner Watanabe? WATANABE:AsIstatedearlier,ImnotasconcernedasMr.Iwashita.Andbasedon the subsequent discussion that has followed, Im ready to make a motion if thats in order. GRAHAM:Hold on just a second. Making a motion with regard to this procedural issue that were discussing right now or making a motion in regard to the content? I think wed want to have a presentation by the Director and some discussion on the content before we finish with this agenda item. WATANABE:Oh, okay, well, I guess weve heard it before, but I dont know that you need a motion for the procedural issue, or do you want -? Why dont we just do a voice, any opposed or whatever? GRAHAM:Okay, let me catch Mr. Iwashitas read on this at the moment. IWASHITA:Thank you, Mr. Chair. I guess in an exercise of caution to me at minimal what this body should do is at least go beyond the directed time periods that the Council has so that what Mr. Torigoe said would be more true; and that is that if we took more than the 60 days, right, then it cant be said that we acted within, you know, within the timefame, but, one suggestion. Two, another procedural point that, you know, the resolution that was sent down had a proposed ordinance attached to it in which the Council-directed amendments to 16.2; and that goes on for 2 pages or so. The Directors response, and the resolution itself speaks of 16.2 and quotes the language in 16.2. The Directors proposed ordinance, the one we had last time and the one we have today, has changes for 16.2 but adds changes to16.1, which is not what the Council asked for. So I have some concern about the proposal by the Director that basically goes beyond what the Council asked to have done. So thats an additional concern that I have about proceeding with this matter. GRAHAM:Mr. Yuen, would you like to comment on that question? YUEN:Yeah. First we are actually beyond the 60 days. This was transmitted to thth the Department on, I believe, the letter is August 29,wereceiveditAugust30;andtheonly way we, we were not able to put it on the agenda in a normal, early October meeting, it was 8EXHIBIT B