2007-12-12 TKOHALA LLC - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

but we’ll probably be at it for another few minutes for sure. Thank you for your forbearance. Mr. Lim, do you have comment, please? LIM: Yes. Mr. Chairman and Members of the Commission, you know, we first started out this hearing some months ago, and I think one of the, my main thrust in that hearing was that we were asking the Commission for basic fairness. And you know, I think that I outlined in my proposed schedule enough, way enough time for both myself and Mr. Yuen to prepare the adequate legal arguments and proposed Findings, a very, you know, clear path to get everybody’s facts on the record and you can review, you’ll have something in the neighborhood of two weeks at least to review from the last submittal. You know, this is something that, like I said, is very important to the applicant. We feel that basic fairness dictates that we should be able to have this time. For the Planning Director to recommend that the zoning go up before the SMA action means that he wants you to vote on the matter before we even get a chance to get ready to give you our best argument. I think that’s not in good faith. I think that we should have fairness. The applicant is stalled in his development because of the proposed down zoning; we’ve stopped all work on the project. We can’t proceed with the project. So to me, you know, there is no harm to the Planning Director, to the County, for us to take this extra time to give us the chance to give you, the Planning Commission, the chance to review all of the arguments and all of the facts. I think that, you know, the rush to judgment, the rush to push the change of zone ahead of the SMA action is not warranted. I think that you should consider both in your decision. Thank you. GRAHAM: Mr. Lim, one question I had, when you spoke to the Findings of Fact thth submittal and all, I think you had February 8 for the applicant and February 29 for the Planning Director. Why does the Planning Director need extra time to essentially do the same th thing? I think you are doing it by February 8. LIM: Yes. We figured that we would give the Planning Director adequate time. His attorneys are quite busy also, and so we didn’t want them to have to respond in a week, so we thought we would give them that extra time, that’s what, 21 days. th GRAHAM: So when you say February 29, you are talking about him responding to yours, not him submitting his. LIM: Yes, he could submit his own. But, yes, we would submit our legal th memorandum and a proposed Findings on the 8 of February, then he would come back with his thth on the 29 of February. We would then have about maybe a week or so for rebuttal to March 7, and then you would have all of documents at least two weeks before the hearing to review. And th then we would come back on March 20 to argue the proposed Decision and Orders, and you could take final action at that point, if you wish to. GRAHAM: I see. Also we might keep in mind that since we have a difficult decision maybe to make here today, the Planning Director is at least in general agreement with you as far as the SMA permit. So, you know, as far as us deciding what we’re going to do taking votes, we might sort of split them and get one out of the way and deal with the rezoning one or -. I’m just throwing that out as a way to help us move forward, if we need to do that. Commissioner Watanabe? EXHIBIT A 15