Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOM 0181.006 2006-2008 Page 1 of 2 Murashige, Laura From: GeoMikeS@att.net Sent: Monday, April 02, 2007 9:48 AM t'jfj~ ~ ~-p f,_. , To: counciltestimony@co.hawaii.hi.us Cc: Ford, Brenda; Pilago, K. Angel ~(`,'ii;v i Subject: Planning Commission Bill 75 testimony Hawaii County Planning Commission Testimony Bill 75 Apri13, 2007 Please include this a-mail as testimony APril 3, 2007 asking the Panning Commission not to adopt the revisions to the General Plan in Bill 75 as proposed by the Planning Director. I believe the changes in the Bi1175 amendments as listed in the Planning Commission agenda are too vague and simplistic and remove too much specific information concerning the process. Therefore, I ask the Planning Commission to reject this amendment as written. If it goes forwazd, I would suggest the following based on principles of timely governmental response and clarification. One of the goals of government is to perform in a timely fashion and that should be met here rather than tailoring the General Plan to this particular Planning Director's whims. For example, I believe the time stated for review of submissions is excessive and is out of line with General Plans of other Counties. Specific objections for 16.1 are: a) There is nothing wrong with having a review every 10 years, especially as the General Plan may be in force longer than that period. Therefore the review should take place at least every 10 years. b) A cleaz definition of the term "substantial change" needs to be included. There should be a clear understanding between Department and Council on the use of this term. c) The words "the Council shall adopt" should be changed to "the Council may adopt" to allow the County Council to hold public hearings on the proposed amendments. This is needed because the proposed change appeazs to eliminate any and all requiremenst for public hearings or input. d) The 150 day period should be changed to "within not more than 60 calendar days" in order to make it consistent with the time Frame in 16.2 Suggested changes to 16.2 are: a) That the Commission shall submit its recommendation to the Council within 60 days. b) In an issue dropped by the revision, I suggest that a $100.00 filing fee be submitted at the time of submitting an amendment by the general public, and if the amendment is accepted for processing by the Director, an additional $400.00 fee shall be submitted to help defray administrative costs of processing the amendment. Comm. No. ~ g~• Ref. To:OronM~ii 4/2/2007 Ref. Uat~~~- Page 2 of 2 Presently, the County Council is conducting interviews with various Departments and Commissions regarding appropriations. If the Planning Commission/Department needs more staff to address issues in a timely fashion and to conduct thorough reviews of submissions, they should ask for it in their budget request. Please submit to the County Council a revision to the General Plan that reflects timely processing for submissions and clarifies rather than muddles the process. Michael Reimer Kailua-Kona GeoMikeS@att.net 4/2/2007