My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2017-10-30 Hearing Transcript - Amendments to PC Rule 9 (Joint Meeting)
PublicDocuments
>
Planning Department
>
Leeward/Windward Planning Commission
>
Minutes & Exhibits Transcripts
>
2003-2022 Exhibits Transcripts
>
2017
>
2017-10-30 Hearing Transcript - Amendments to PC Rule 9 (Joint Meeting)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/4/2018 3:27:01 PM
Creation date
1/4/2018 3:26:20 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
87
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
don't [inaudible] that effect, we wouldn't have this issue to contend with. I remain concerned by <br />people who would object to whatever it is that we decide to do on the basis of fine line <br />procedure. So, I'm supportive of the motion but would like to go through the arguments forward <br />of proposal with regard to advice and counsel from the Planning Director so to speak, but I do <br />remain somewhat concerned procedurally. <br />HENKEL: Any other comments? None from Windward. None from Leeward. Then, at this <br />point, we have to deal with this motion, and we could act on it; it could be withdrawn; or we <br />could table it until after the presentation which I think is what Vice Chair Unger possibly <br />suggested, but we need to act on it somehow, so if it's <br />HALL: The motion on the floor is just a consideration so you may as well— <br />SHIMAOKA: —This is Commissioner Shimaoka. I agree with Vice -Chair Unger that maybe <br />what we should do is listen to the presentation by the Planning Department. I mean, they went <br />through the trouble of preparing it and then we can make a better assessment after we listen to <br />the presentation. Thank you. <br />HENKEL: Commissioner Clarkson, you have a comment? <br />CLARKSON: Yes, I would just like to make clear that my motion was only to remove the <br />consideration of who initiated our consideration today by clearly asking the Joint Commission to <br />initiate it via approval of my motion. Imy motion is not substantive in any way in our <br />consideration of these proposed amendments, but merely to remove any shadow of impropriety <br />over how we convened this meeting to review these proposed changes. Thank you. <br />HENKEL: Then, I would ask for action on the motion starting with Leeward. Would you do the <br />roll call vote? I'm sorry, Maija has a comment. <br />JACKSON: Chair Henkel, I can take the voice vote for both Commissions. <br />HENKEL: Okay, Maija Jackson will be taking the voice vote here. <br />JACKSON: Okay, Commissioner Clarkson? <br />CLARKSON: Aye. <br />JACKSON: Commissioner Miyasato? <br />MIYASATO: Aye. <br />JACKSON: Commissioner Dela Cruz? <br />DELA CRUZ: Aye. <br />JACKSON: Commissioner Ikeda? <br />EXHIBIT A <br />19 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.