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

Home

MR. KANUHA: If we keep on going this way, we are going to be here all night trying to correct this. MR. MELROSE: I want to make a motion that we choose not to keep Plan _40, and we understand that as we work at some of the adjustments, there are some thoughts here that we look at, particularly in the north area, that we look at after the public hearings. But, I think rather than spending a lot of time right now trying to adjust each of these, I'd rather not try to do it on the run right now, so we can move on. Mr. Melrose moved to reject Plan _40, and not to make Plan 40 available for public hearings. Seconded by Ms. Siracusa. MR. KANUHA: Is there any discussion? MR. KAHUI: Yes, I think what happened with Plan _3 9, we deleted it and worked on Plan _40, then Plan _40 was okay in its initial inception. I think, we are here in Kona, and I see my constituents shaking their heads. When looking at the map and looking at the original deviations, they are far removed from the changes we just made. So, I'm not sure if we can get back to the original Plan_40, which we saved earlier for further discussion, but didn't want to add more changes to that because I thought it was well within the deviations. CHR. SIRACUSA: It was well within the deviations, but it was terrible for Puna and Volcano. MR. KAHUI: Well, this is where we work out those concessions, and this is where we put our plans out to the public for comments. You just bear with the process, I think. We will let the process take its course. MS. POINDEXTER: I agree with that. Not everybody agrees with this map; some areas will and so forth for other maps. I think it is good to bring this out to the public hearings and let the public make their comments, and then we can go back to the drawing board and we then make adjustments then. But I would like to see this map brought out to the public as well. MR. KAHUI: I would also add that I haven't seen another public person today that has worked on, or submitted a map for consideration. I think it would be our due diligence, at least we can say that we are listening to the public. It would a shame for us, just on its face, because we have been meddling with the original, to dismiss it because we finally messed up the deviations. So I would rather go back and look at the original Plan _40 that we were looking at. I would request my colleagues to rescind their motion. We have a constituent out here who has been working on this, and spent their time on it, and I haven't seen anybody else out here doing the same. So we ought to give this individual that courtesy. Thank you so much. MR. MELROSE: I will withdraw my motion. CHR. SIRACUSA: And the original Plan_40 is actually Plan-39, corrected. 42