Laserfiche WebLink
• <br /> Bernard K.Akana <br /> ; j- <br /> •Aa% Planning Commission Mayor <br /> •• r 25 Aupuni Street,Rm.109•Hilo,Hawaii 96720• (801ri) 961-8288 <br /> %N'"61 /• Hp4' <br /> December 13, 1989 <br /> Robert Bethea, Esq. <br /> Chairman <br /> Hawaii County Charter Commission <br /> Hilo Lagoon Centre <br /> 101 Aupuni Street, Suite 235 <br /> Hilo, Hawaii 96720 <br /> Dear Chairman Bethea: <br /> I am writing to you on behalf of the Hawaii County Planning <br /> Commission to seek your assistance in clarifying a procedural <br /> problem in voting and to also voice our opinion concerning our <br /> duties . <br /> The background for this request concerns interpretations of <br /> the current charter by the corporation counsel ' s office. As you <br /> may be aware, the planning commission serves two functions, as <br /> an advisory body making recommendations of approval or rejection <br /> for subdivision or zoning ordinance changes . The commission has <br /> final authority for such other matters as appeals from the <br /> director, special use permits, and variances . <br /> We have always been guided by Hawaii County Charter, <br /> section 13-4 ( i) , which states : <br /> The affirmative vote of a majority of the entire <br /> membership shall be necessary to make any action of a <br /> board or commission valid; provided, that in the case <br /> of ( an) advisory board or commission, the affirmative <br /> vote of a majority of those present shall be <br /> sufficient to make any action valid. <br /> Prior to last year, the commission had worked under <br /> the premise that where a recommendation was being made, <br /> then the commission was only advisory and a majority of <br /> those members present was needed to sustain an action. <br /> Conversely, when a final action was to be taken, then a <br /> majority of the full commission would be needed to approve <br /> any action. <br /> EXHIBIT A 707 <br /> (14 pgs . ) <br />