MIN RDC 2011-09-23.tif - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

as the one we rejected already. The only thing positive I can say fort this one is the deviations are okay. MR. KANUHA: Yes, the deviations seem really good. Are there any other comments? MR. MELROSE: That is the issue. Because that is the way the Ordinance was written, deviation tends to be the trump card in this process. So it is important for these that we be really clear what the reason is that we discount them, so that we have a good reason for it. Otherwise, someone might argue otherwise. My sense is that this one still has a connectivity problem and the compactness of that district that runs from Po`ohiki to Honuapo is an odd connection. So those would be two reasons for rejecting it. MR. MIDDLESWORTH: And it does not take into account growth, which is one of the other things that we are supposed to be looking at. CHR. SIRACUSA: This also has an east /west division in Puna, which creates some major connectivity issues as well. If you look, Mountain View is now in District 3, and so is Kurtistown, it appears. So Puna is getting divided that way. Ms. Siracusa moved to reject Plan _3 5, based on connectivity issues in District 5. Seconded by Mr. Middlesworth and carried by the following vote: Ayes: Commissioners Kahawaiola`a, Kahui, Kanuha, Melrose, Middlesworth, Poindexter, Ugalde and Chair Siracusa. Noes: None. Absent: Commissioner Carvalho. Review and Discuss Plan 36 MR. KANUHA: Moving onto Plan_36. CHR. SIRACUSA: We have some deviation problems here, reference District 8 and 9. Mr. Melrose moved to reject Plan _3 6, based on deviations in District 8 and 9. Seconded by Mr. Kahui and carried by the following vote: Ayes: Commissioners Kahawaiola`a, Kahui, Kanuha, Melrose, Middlesworth, Poindexter, Ugalde and Chair Siracusa. Noes: None. Absent: Commissioner Carvalho. 29