|
HENKEL: If the, if the Council, I guess is it—Cory pointed out that right now, if the Council
<br />doesn't act on an introduced bill within 60 days, it's automatically approved?
<br />DARROW: I'mI have no idea.
<br />HENKEL: Do you—can you help me out, Malia?
<br />DARROW: I don't think that—
<br />HO: Yeah, that's a, we can't really change that. Those are Council rules, but yeah, they have,
<br />basically if they don't act, but they also are very aware of like if they don't act on approvingI
<br />think this is for the bill, though. I don't know if this would beI didn't, haven't read the, if this
<br />would be actually in 227 or not.
<br />HENKEL: Daryn?
<br />ARAI: I'm not sure, but normally on Council initiated bills, when the Commission has, the
<br />Director has a 120 days in order to bring the matter, offer his recommendation or her
<br />recommendation to the Planning Commission which then conducts the hearing. Once the
<br />hearing is held, I think they had 60 days if I remember correctly to make its recommendation so
<br />we need to check our rules, but I think that's how it was structured. We do have certain time
<br />limits in which to act and make a response back to the County Council. We cannot simply drag
<br />it on. So, we can verify the actual days, but there was—but as it stands right now, you're in good
<br />standing obviously, but if there's any reason to that you think you're going to ask for a
<br />continuance of this particular matter, then we'll need to double check to make sure you operated
<br />within those prescribed timeframes.
<br />HENKEL: Okay, and for clarification, we're looking for a favorable recommendation or an
<br />unfavorable recommendation for the Council, and the Planning Director has recommended
<br />against, unfavorable.
<br />DARROW: Correct. And, again, with that unfavorable recommendation, we are forwarding
<br />alternative language, suggestive language that they could consider.
<br />HENKEL: Thank you. Yes?
<br />CLARKSON: I have a question. Considering that there's been so little interaction but so few
<br />complaints, so few applications, where is the motivation for changing the original ordinance
<br />coming from? And, I mean, even a speculation as to, you know, why it's happening. Is this just
<br />a language clean up? Is this somebody on the Council has got concerns? If so, what are they?
<br />DARROW: Well, this particular bill was initiated by Council Member Margaret Wille, and as
<br />far as her, I mean, in testimony, she had said that her goal was to simplify the process to make
<br />the permitting process easier for current agricultural operations to comply with because, as
<br />mentioned, because only two have come in, that means the remainder of them are actually non -
<br />11 EXHIBIT C
<br />
|