HomeMy WebLinkAbout2025-09-18 Leeward Planning Commission MinutesPage 1 of 11
Leeward Planning Commission
September 18, 2025, Minutes
LEEWARD PLANNING COMMISSION
COUNTY OF HAWAI‘I
MINUTES
SEPTEMBER 18, 2025
A video recording is made part of these minutes, which can be viewed on the YouTube County of
Hawai‘i Planning Department channel at https://www.youtube.com/live/dStGv7JOpds
Timestamps are provided for reference in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 92, Hawai‘i
Revised Statutes. In the event the video recording becomes unavailable at the above-mentioned
URL address, the public can contact the Planning Department for assistance.
The Leeward Planning Commission met in regular session on September 18, 2025, at 9:40 a.m.
in the West Hawai‘i Civic Center, Council Chambers, Building A, 74-5044 Ane Keohokālole
Highway, Kailua-Kona, Hawai‘i, with Chairperson Dean Au presiding. This meeting was
streamed live on YouTube.
Secretary’s Note: The meeting began at 9:40 a.m. rather than 9:30 a.m. due to technical
difficulties which staff resolved prior to convening.
COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Vice Chair Donna “Kinuko” Noborikawa, Commissioner
Alexandria “Lexie” Ayers, Commissioner Michael Dela Cruz, Commissioner Rebecca “Kawehi”
Inaba, Commissioner Armando Rodriguez, and Dean Au (Chairperson).
COMMISSIONERS ABSENT AND EXCUSED: Commissioner Clement “CJ” Kanuha III.
ALSO PRESENT: Diana Mellon-Lacy, Esq. (Deputy Corporation Counsel to the Commission)
Jeffrey Darrow (Planning Director), and Planning Department staff.
Approximately three members of the public were in attendance.
The meeting was called to order at 9:40 a.m. by Chair Dean Au, with a quorum present.
Commissioners and staff were introduced. Attendees were reminded to silence cell phones, and
directions to restrooms and the public testimony sign-up process were provided.
[SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 00:43]
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
At 9:42 a.m., the Commission addressed the minutes of August 21, 2025, Leeward Planning
Commission meeting. No corrections were offered. Vice Chair Donna “Kinuko” Noborikawa
moved, and Commissioner Michael Dela Cruz seconded, to approve the minutes as submitted.
The motion was carried unanimously by voice vote, with one member absent and excused. [SEE
YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 02:35]
Page 2 of 11
Leeward Planning Commission
September 18, 2025, Minutes
STATEMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC ON AGENDA ITEMS
At 9:43 a.m. the Commission took up this item with approximately three members of the public
were in attendance. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 03:28]
Chair Au asked if there were in-person testifiers, Planning staff noted that one testifier was
present and would provide testimony when the agenda items #1, #2, and #4 were called. [SEE
YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 03:30]
Chair Au asked if there were any Zoom testifiers, Planning staff noted that one testifier was on
Zoom and wished to provide testimony at the beginning of the meeting. [SEE YOUTUBE
TIMESTAMP 03:53]
One individual provided testimony via Zoom for Items #1 Scott F. Church and John Totah
(PL-SMA-2025-000080) and Item #2 Scott F. Church and John Totah (SMA 03-000007):
1. Janice Palma-Glennie [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 04:41]
The hearing on the item concluded at 9:47 a.m.
NEW BUSINESS
1. APPLICANT: SCOTT F. CHURCH AND JOHN TOTAH (PL-SMA-2025-000080)
Application for Special Management Area Use Permit to construct a two (2) story, single-
family residence with a pool and related improvements on a 15,203-square foot shoreline
parcel within the Special Management Area. The subject property is located on the makai
side of Ali‘i Drive, approximately 0.25 miles south of Lunapule Road, Kahului 2nd, North
Kona, Hawaiʻi, TMK: (3) 7-5-019:030.
The Commission took this item up at 9:47 a.m. with three members of the public in attendance.
[SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 07:46]
Staff presentation was given by Derek Harbaugh. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 08:33]
Chair Au opened the floor for Commissioners’ questions to Planning staff. [SEE YOUTUBE
TIMESTAMP 16:56]
Applicant John Totah gave a presentation. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 35:05]
Chair Au opened the floor for Commissioners’ questions to the Applicant. [SEE YOUTUBE
TIMESTAMP 36:13]
Chair Au opened the floor to public testimony. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 42:55]
One individual provided in-person testimony at 10:23 a.m.:
1. Simmy McMichael – [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 43:30]
Page 3 of 11
Leeward Planning Commission
September 18, 2025, Minutes
Chair Au opened the floor for Commissioners’ questions to the public testifier. [SEE YOUTUBE
TIMESTAMP 50:35]
Chair Au closed public testimony for this agenda item. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 52:57]
Action: Vice Chair Noborikawa moved to approve Special Management Area Use Permit
PL-SMA-2025-000080 to construct a two-story single-family residence with five (5) bedrooms,
five (5) bathrooms, a pool and related improvements on a 15,203 square foot shoreline parcel
within the Special Management Area, based on the Planning Director’s findings,
recommendations and conditions, to be adopted as amended with the change presented earlier by
the Applicant. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 53:16]
Before the motion was seconded, Vice Chair Noborikawa amended her motion to reflect a two-
story single-family residence with three (3) bedrooms, three (3) bathrooms, a pool and related
improvements, including a two (2) bedroom garage on a 15,203 square foot shoreline parcel
within the Special Management Area. The amendment was further corrected to specify a two-
car garage. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 54:18]
Commissioner Armando Rodriguez asked to pose a question regarding the Applicant
constructing a wider road. Chair Au interjected, stating that questions should relate to the
motion on the floor and not lead into further discussion. He noted that if there is no second to
the motion, it will fail, and another motion could then be introduced. [SEE YOUTUBE
TIMESTAMP 55:32]
Commissioner Dela Cruz seconded the motion to open the discussion. [SEE YOUTUBE
TIMESTAMP 56:08]
Chair Au began the discussion by stating that he does not support the motion. He noted that the
applicant initially proposed a 5-bedroom, 5-bath residence and believes it should remain as
originally requested. He added that if the applicant decides to downsize it to a one-bedroom,
two-bath home, that is their kuleana; however, they would still be subject to the fifteen
conditions regardless of any reduction in size. He reiterated that he does not support the motion
as currently presented and invited comments from his fellow Commissioners. [SEE YOUTUBE
TIMESTAMP 56:15]
Vice Chair Noborikawa commented that she could go either way on the motion. She noted that
since the applicant provided information indicating a smaller project than originally proposed,
the motion could be amended to reflect that. She also expressed agreement with the conditions
that would be applied. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 57:05]
Commissioner Rebecca “Kawehi” Inaba concurred with Chair Au, stating that whatever comes
before the Commission should be clear and what they are voting on. She noted that if the
intention was to reduce the size of the home, including the bedrooms and garage, it should have
been presented that way, rather than leaving it as originally proposed when the deferral occurred
at the previous meeting. She further stated that, at this point, she is unable to support the request
as presented. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 57:39]
Page 4 of 11
Leeward Planning Commission
September 18, 2025, Minutes
Commissioner Rodriguez expressed concern about public safety and traffic conditions in the
area. He referenced a recent tsunami warning during which his family was unable to evacuate
safely and noted that infrastructure improvements, such as traffic control measures, should be
addressed by the government, not the applicant. He acknowledged that the project was small but
pointed out that the Commission had previously approved a 100-room hotel in the vicinity. He
stated that approving projects without adequate infrastructure is troubling and, while it may not
be legally required, he does not want to support anything that could put people at risk. [SEE
YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 58:23]
Chair Au addressed the applicant, Mr. Totah, referring to testimony from Ms. McMichael about
families who have lived in the area for generations. He noted that the applicant had already
reduced the project from a four-story condominium to a 5-bedroom, 5-bath single-family home
and stated he did not want to require further downsizing. He added that limiting the home to 3-
bedrooms and 2-baths might be insufficient for larger future families and felt the project should
remain at 5-bedrooms and 5-baths. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 59:43]
Commissioner Dela Cruz asked Mr. Totah if the decision to downsize to 3 bedrooms was final,
noting his agreement with other Commissioners’ comments on the changes. Mr. Totah
confirmed that it was “100% confirmed” and that preliminary plans were being prepared for
permitting. Commissioner Dela Cruz suggested the applicant return with the drawings for
Commission review and asked if the matter could be deferred to the next hearing to reflect the
recent changes. He also noted that Mr. Totah could present the changes when ready. [SEE
YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 01:01:27]
Chair Au followed up, asking if a new application was required. Mr. Totah asked whether the
permitting documents reflecting 3-bedrooms and a 2-car garage would suffice. Commissioner
Dela Cruz noted it was a comment and was unsure if a new application was needed. Chair Au
asked Vice Chair Noborikawa to clarify the motion on the floor, which she confirmed was for a
3-bedroom, 3-bathroom, 2-car garage. Chair Au stated that the motion addressed the question,
and another SMA application was not necessary. He then asked Mr. Totah if he agreed with the
motion, noting that he personally would like to hear from the applicant. [SEE YOUTUBE
TIMESTAMP 01:03:00]
Mr. Totah stated they are complying and noted he believed the application was for a single-
family home, not realizing the size was a factor. Chair Au advised that SMA permits must
specify the project; while building less than approved is allowed, the permit cannot be exceeded.
He referenced Vice Chair Noborikawa’s motion for a 3-bedroom, 3-bath, 2-car garage and asked
Planning staff to confirm. Planning Staff Derek Harbaugh confirmed and explained that if the
motion is approved, the Planning Department will ensure the home matches the approved plan.
If it does not, the permit will be rejected, and an amended SMA application would be required.
Chair Au added that his concern for not supporting the motion was that it remains a single-family
residence. He noted that downsizing from the original application is acceptable as long as the
conditions are followed. He further stated that if this is the wish of the applicant and the
Commission, so be it. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 01:04:58]
Page 5 of 11
Leeward Planning Commission
September 18, 2025, Minutes
Commissioner Alexandria “Lexie” Ayers sought confirmation that, even if not stated in writing,
the applicant would still be held to the downsized plan particularly the reduced bathroom count
when applying for building permits, since the home will connect to the County sewer. [SEE
YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 01:07:40] Planning Director Jeffrey Darrow stated that this situation
is unusual. Typically, an applicant requests a project and the Commission votes. In this case,
the applicant indicated at the hearing that they intended to downsize the project. He explained
that the permit language would note both the original request and the downsized approval for a
three-bedroom, three-bath, two-car, two-story garage. He added that while it is uncommon, the
Department is generally fine if the completed project is smaller than originally proposed, if it
does not exceed the approved scope. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 01:08:18]
Commissioner Ayers asked if it is safe to assume the square footage of the 2-story home will
remain the same. Mr. Totah replied to the square footage will be less and clarified that it is a
3-bedroom, 3 and ½-bath home with an additional powder room. Commissioner Ayers asked
about the setback line, whether the home will be farther than 40 feet, moved back, or if the pool
will remain in the same area. Mr. Totah replied it will not impact the 40-foot setback; the home
is actually over 40 feet. Commissioner Ayers asked if the smaller square footage would change
the front location or push the home back toward the highway. Mr. Totah replied the front will
remain the same. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 01:10:11]
Commissioner Inaba commented that the new information should have been provided earlier.
She noted the item was deferred from the previous meeting and assumed the applicant would
have made any changes based on public testimony. She expressed concern that changes are
being presented verbally rather than in writing, suggesting that the applicant could have worked
with the Planning Department to provide a clear, amended plan. She stated that this raises
concerns about how construction will proceed and recommended that the SMA permit be
amended to clearly reflect what the Commission is being asked to vote on. [SEE YOUTUBE
TIMESTAMP 01:11:35]
Chair Au asked Planning Director Darrow if submitting another SMA permit would require
going through the full process with new fees. Director Darrow replied that it is not necessary, as
the SMA review for a 5-bedroom dwelling has been completed. He noted that a smaller
dwelling would have fewer impacts and recommended the applicant amend the site and floor
plans to show the property layout and garage. He added that the Commission could defer the
item, have the applicant submit the amended plans, and place it on a future agenda.
Chair Au stated he would support the applicant’s choice. He agreed with Commissioner Inaba
that the agenda item reflects a 5-bedroom, 5-bath dwelling with 15 conditions, and that the
changes would not significantly affect community, wastewater, or road impacts. He noted Mr.
Totah is preparing plans for a 3-bedroom, 3½-bath, 2-car garage and could resubmit. Chair Au
said the applicant can choose how to proceed, but acknowledged the situation is confusing given
the motion on the floor and Planning Department guidance. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP
01:13:12]
Page 6 of 11
Leeward Planning Commission
September 18, 2025, Minutes
Vice Chair Noborikawa stated she is willing to withdraw her motion and make a new motion to
defer, allowing Mr. Totah time to submit a revised site plan and building plan reflecting a 3-
bedroom, 3½-bathroom, 2-car garage with a smaller footprint. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP
01:15:56] Chair Au confirmed that Vice Chair Noborikawa will withdraw her original motion
and make a new motion to defer. Vice Chair Noborikawa confirmed. [SEE YOUTUBE
TIMESTAMP 01:16:24] Chair Au then asked Commissioner Dela Cruz, who seconded the
original motion, if he agreed with the change; he replied yes. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP
01:16:40] Chair Au recapped that the original motion was withdrawn, and the new motion is to
defer to allow the applicant to submit updated plans, and the second agreeing. Planning staff
Maija Jackson restated the motion is to defer to provide the applicant time to submit a revised
site plan, floor plan, and project narrative. Vice Chair Noborikawa confirmed, and Commissioner
Dela Cruz seconded. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 01:16:48]
Chair Au opened the floor for discussion on the new motion. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP
01:17:47]
Commissioner Dela Cruz asked if the new motion would include the 15 conditions from the
original motion. Chair Au replied yes, and asked Mr. Totah if he agreed. Mr. Totah responded
that he raised his hand to be honest, noting he thought downsizing the footprint would be
straightforward, but he will abide by the Commission’s decision. Chair Au complimented Mr.
Totah on his honesty. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 01:17:54]
With no further comments or discussion, a roll call vote was taken, and the motion carried with
six ayes (Noborikawa, Dela Cruz, Ayers, Inaba, Rodriguez, and Au), no noes, and one absent
(Kanuha). [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 01:19:33]
The hearing on this item concluded at 11:00 a.m.
2. APPLICANT: SCOTT F. CHURCH AND JOHN TOTAH (SMA 03-000007)
Request to revoke Special Management Area Use Permit No. 03-000007, which allowed
the development of a twelve (12)-unit multiple-family residential development and
related improvements on a 15,203-square-foot shoreline parcel within the Special
Management Area. The subject property is located on the makai side of Ali‘i Drive,
approximately 0.25 miles south of Lunapule Road, Kahului 2nd, North Kona, Hawaiʻi,
TMK: (3) 7-5-019:030.
The Commission took this item up at 11:00 a.m. with one member of the public in attendance.
[SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 01:20:12]
Planning Staff Maija Jackson stated the second agenda item was a request by Applicants Scott
Church and John Totah to revoke the old permit if the new permit is approved. Since the
Commission deferred the decision on the new permit, she recommended deferring this item as
well. Chair Au concurred and deferred the agenda item. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP
01:20:19]
There were no testifiers, either in person or via Zoom, for this agenda item.
Page 7 of 11
Leeward Planning Commission
September 18, 2025, Minutes
3. APPLICANT: SHANHARI SIVAGNANASUNDARAM (PL-SPP-2025-000086)
Application for a Special Permit to establish and operate an event venue with overnight
accommodations, weddings, tours and similar gatherings on an approximately 5-acre
portion of a larger 22.347-acre parcel in the State Land Use Agricultural District. The
subject property is located at 73-4340 Huehue Street, approximately 0.3 miles from its
intersection with Kaloko Drive, Kaloko-Mauka Subdivision, Kaloko, North Kona,
Hawaiʻi, TMK: (3) 7-3-048:004 (por.).
This agenda item was deferred at the request of the applicant.
There were no testifiers, either in person or via Zoom, for this agenda item.
3. DISCUSSION ON ESTABLISHING COMMISSIONER ATTENDANCE
STANDARDS IN THE PLANNING COMMISSION’S RULES OF PRACTICE
AND PROCEDURE
The Commission took up this agenda item at 11:01 a.m. There was one member of the public
present in the audience. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 01:20:58]
Planning Staff, Maija Jackson noted there would be no staff presentation. She informed the
Commission that materials were provided, including samples and examples of attendance
standards from other commissions and planning commissions in Hawaiʻi and across the country,
to help initiate the discussion. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 01:21:18] [Examples of
Commission Attendance Standards from Other Jurisdictions - SEE EXHIBIT A]
Chair Au explained that the discussion began among a few commissioners regarding maintaining
a full seven-member commission. He noted it has been challenging at times to have a quorum,
as everyone is busy with work, family, and other commitments. He stated the intent is to start a
conversation on how commissioners feel and to consider adding language to encourage greater
participation. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 01:21:42]
Chair Au opened the floor for Commissioners’ comments and discussion. [SEE YOUTUBE
TIMESTAMP 01:22:30]
Commissioner Inaba thanked staff for the information and noted she reviewed attendance
policies from strictest to most lenient, with Hawaiʻi State Boards and Commissions being the
strictest (three consecutive unexcused absences). She emphasized the importance of considering
what works best for this seven-member commission. She expressed concern about maintaining
quorum due to vacations, family, and work commitments, and suggested setting a standard for
attendance and improving communication such as notifying others in advance of absences, to
ensure sufficient attendance and better serve the community. She noted that the strictest
attendance rules are those of the Hawaiʻi State Boards and Commissions, followed by Maui, and
said these are good examples. She emphasized that the commission should decide what works
best for them and shared her manaʻo to continue the discussion. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP
01:22:36]
Page 8 of 11
Leeward Planning Commission
September 18, 2025, Minutes
Vice Chair Noborikawa agreed with Commissioner Inaba and thanked Planning staff for the
information. She emphasized that members should notify the commission of absences and
expressed concern that the current rule only addresses three consecutive unexcused absences.
She suggested adding a provision that more than six absences in a one-year period, whether
excused or unexcused, could be grounds for dismissal, as frequent absences reduce the
commission’s effectiveness. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 01:24:38]
Deputy Corporation Counsel Diana Mellon-Lacy noted that any changes to attendance rules
would require amending the Planning Commission Rules, which under Rule 2.1 must be a joint
effort involving both Windward and Leeward commissions. She also referenced County Charter
Section 13.4(b), explaining that members are appointed by the mayor, confirmed by the Council,
and can only be removed through the mayor’s recommendation and Council approval. She
added that while removal is a complex process, the commission could still make
recommendations regarding non-participating members even without a rule change. [SEE
YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 01:26:58]
Chair Au shared that, based on his 15 years serving on boards and commissions, he strives to
attend all meetings but recognizes that emergencies and personal obligations can arise. He
acknowledged the concerns raised by Commissioners Inaba and Noborikawa but noted that all
members are volunteers trying their best. He emphasized the difficulty of imposing strict
attendance standards on volunteers while balancing the frustration caused when a lack of quorum
prevents meetings and limits public testimony. He concluded that it is a challenging issue but
worth discussing. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 01:28:34]
Commissioner Rodriguez asked about the number of commissioners and noted that having more
members could help maintain quorum. Chair Au replied that both this commission and the
Windward Planning Commission have seven members, with four required for quorum. He
explained that having an even number of members present could result in tied votes, which is
why an odd number of commissioners is preferable. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 01:30:36]
Planning Staff Maija Jackson clarified a majority of the entire membership is needed to pass a
motion. Therefore, if four members are present, all four must agree. In reference to
Commissioner Inaba’s concern, she added that the current practice is for commissioners who will
be absent to notify the secretary, who then informs the Chair and Vice Chair. She stated the
Commission may consider changing this practice if desired. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP
01:31:29]
Chair Au stated he likes the current process, noting that Kelsie informs him whenever a
commissioner reports an absence and whether quorum will be met. He added that it is mainly a
matter of commissioners responding in a timely manner and reiterated his support for keeping
the current practice. He mentioned it is worth having the discussion for the Windward Planning
Commission and believed it may also be on their agenda. He asked if they were going to discuss
it, and Maija Jackson replied not yet. She explained the discussion started with this Commission
and stated that if they wish to move it to rulemaking, she will then inform the Windward
Planning Commission. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 01:32:14]
Page 9 of 11
Leeward Planning Commission
September 18, 2025, Minutes
Commissioner Inaba asked to forward the matter to the Windward Planning Commission for
discussion, stating it is worthwhile. She noted it would provide some structure on what is
expected of commissioners, as there is currently no written guidance. [SEE YOUTUBE
TIMESTAMP 01:33:03]
Deputy Corporation Counsel Diana Mellon-Lacey commented that if the Commission believed it
had quorum, but a member did not show, the Commission could still hear testifiers. While they
could not vote, there is no reason to prevent testifiers from presenting, as this falls under the
Sunshine Law. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 01:33:25]
Chair Au stated he supports placing the item on the Windward Planning Commission agenda for
discussion. He noted that if they wish to move forward, this Commission would also be
supportive of potentially changing the rules. He added it is positive that the discussion has
started and requested that the Windward Planning Commission be informed of their support for a
possible rule change. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 01:34:04]
Commissioner Inaba asked whether this would be a rule change or the creation of a new rule, and
if a rule already exists. Ms. Mellon-Lacy responded that the current rules do not address a
minimum attendance requirement. Maija Jackson agreed and stated it would be an amendment
to the Rules of Practice and Procedure for both this Commission and the Windward Commission,
which operate under the same rules. She explained the amendment would be approved and
adopted by the joint commissions and would not require County Council review. Ms. Mellon-
Lacy added that changing the rules requires a public hearing and involves more steps than just
the commission’s decision. Chair Au stated it is worth moving forward and suggested starting
the discussion to see what happens. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 01:34:54]
Ms. Mellon-Lacy added that prospective board or commission members should be aware of the
requirements and commitment involved. She noted this board requires significant work
compared to others and suggested developing background materials to help applicants
understand the responsibilities and workload. She stated she is unsure what information is
currently provided to new applicants but emphasized the importance of ensuring people
understand the demands of this commission. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 01:36:21]
For clarification, Maija Jackson asked whether the Commission would be making a motion for
action on this item or if she should simply contact the Chair of the Windward Planning
Commission to inform him of the Leeward Commission’s discussion and see if Windward
wishes to discuss it, or if the Commission wants to proceed directly to rulemaking. Chair Au
stated that based on the discussions so far, he strongly recommends placing the item on the
Windward Planning Commission agenda to have a similar discussion. This will allow them to
decide if they want to move forward, with the Leeward Commission showing support. He noted
it would require a joint meeting to proceed. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 01:37:29]
The hearing on this item concluded at 11:19 a.m.
Page 10 of 11
Leeward Planning Commission
September 18, 2025, Minutes
PLANNING DIRECTOR’S REPORT
Report on Special Management Area (SMA) determinations and minor permits issued by
the Planning Director.
At 11:19 a.m., Chair Au introduced this item, noting that the Special Management Area (SMA)
determination and minor permits issued by the Planning Director for August 2025 report had
been emailed to the Commissioners. There were no questions from the Commissioners
regarding the report. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 01:38:56]
AGENDA ITEMS FOR THE NEXT MEETING
Planning Staff Maija Jackson noted that the October meeting will be canceled due to a lack of
agenda items, with the next meeting scheduled for November 20, 2025. Chair Au mentioned a
tentative 2026 meeting schedule was provided and advised the Commission to review it and
inform Kelsie of any dates they cannot attend. Chair Au stated there will be an election for new
officers and encouraged anyone interested in taking on different roles to consider stepping up.
Ms. Jackson confirmed the election will take place in December. Chair Au added that he is
willing to remain as Chair but is open to others taking the role. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP
01:39:48]
ANNOUNCEMENTS
As previously announced, the October meeting is canceled, and the next scheduled meeting is
scheduled for November 20, 2025. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 01:40:55]
Commissioner Inaba requested receiving commission packets earlier, noting that one week does
not provide sufficient time, especially for heavy agendas. Chair Au acknowledged the concern,
stating staff send packets as they become available and that he sometimes checks online if
materials are delayed. He agreed that for heavy agendas, packets should be provided earlier.
Maija Jackson confirmed that the practice is to provide packets at least two weeks prior to
meetings, with most reports available earlier, though occasionally one or two may arrive later.
Chair Au asked that secretaries and staff be reminded to provide materials as soon as possible
and noted this issue does not need to be placed on the agenda. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP
01:41:13]
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, it was moved by Commissioner Dela Cruz and seconded by
Commissioner Inaba that the meeting be adjourned. The motion was carried unanimously by
voice vote, with one member absent and excused. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 01:43:26]
Chair Au adjourned the meeting at 11:23 a.m.
Page 11 of 11
Leeward Planning Commission
September 18, 2025, Minutes
Respectfully submitted,
Melissa Dacayanan-Salvador
Secretary
ATTEST:
Dean Au, Chairperson
Leeward Planning Commission
Melissa Dacayanan-Salvador (Nov 21, 2025 08:34:56 HST)
Meli s aDcy n-S nvnd vordNrn2 1,05
Examples of Commission Attendance Standards
from Other Jurisdictions
Provided by the Planning Department to the Leeward Planning Commission for its 9/18/25
meeting, Agenda Item #4
Hawaiʻi State Boards and Commissions (HRS §92-15.5):
(a)Notwithstanding any law to the contrary, the term of a board member shall
expire upon the failure of the member, without valid excuse, to attend three
consecutive meetings duly noticed to all members of the board and where
the board failed to constitute quorum necessary to transact board
business. The chair or acting chair of the board shall determine if the
absence of the member is excusable. The expiration of the member's term
shall be effective immediately after the third consecutive unattended meeting
and unexcused absence. The vacancy shall be filled in the same manner as
the original appointment.
(b)This section shall not apply to ex officio members of a board.
(c)Notwithstanding the definition of "board" in section 92-2, this section shall
apply only to a state board and shall not apply to a board of any political
subdivision of the State or whose authority is strictly advisory.
Maui County Planning Commission Rules (§12-201-28):
No member shall be absent for the service of the commission, unless the
member is sick or otherwise unable to attend and has so advised the
chairperson prior to the meeting. In accordance with subsection 13-2.5 of the
revised charter of the County of Maui (1983), as amended, the chairperson shall
request that the mayor recommend to the council the removal of any member
who misses 50 percent or more of the commission’s regular meetings over any
120-day period.
EXHIBIT A
Kauai County Planning Commission Rules (§1-2-24):
No member shall be absent from the service of the Commission, unless the
member has so advised the Chair prior to the Meeting or be sick and unable to
attend.
Roy City, Utah Planning Commission Rules:
Every member of the Commission shall attend the meetings of the Commission
unless duly excused or unless unable to attend because of extenuating
circumstances. Any member desiring to be excused shall notify the secretary.
The secretary shall call the same to the attention of the Chair. If a member of the
Planning Commission is absent from three consecutive regular or work session
meetings or four regular or work session meetings within a calendar year without
being excused by the Chair, the Chair may recommend to the City Council that
the member be removed from the Commission for cause. A member may be
removed from office for misconduct or failure to comply with attendance
requirements by an affirmative vote of the majority of the City Council.
Cashmere, Washington Planning Commission Rules (Section 2.48.040):
Any commissioner anticipating to be absent from any planning commission
meeting shall notify the secretary at least 24 hours in advance. The secretary
shall document the notice in the minutes of the planning commission meeting
and provide immediate written notice to the mayor when any commissioner fails
to attend three consecutive regularly scheduled meetings or five regularly
scheduled meetings in a calendar year. The mayor shall review and consider the
commissioner notices of intended absence, if any, and decide whether the
commissioner should be removed from the planning commission. In the event
the mayor determines that the planning commission member should be
removed from the planning commission, the mayor shall provide notice of this
written decision to the planning commission secretary, chairperson, and the
removed planning commission member within 15 days following receipt of the
written notice from the secretary.
Hilton Head, South Carolina Commission Rules:
Commissioners are expected to attend all Commission meetings and all
Committee meetings to which they are appointed. If a Commissioner is unable
to attend a meeting, the Chairperson or Secretary of the Commission shall be
notified in advance of the scheduled meeting. The Chairperson will determine if
the absence is excused or unexcused. The Secretary shall keep records on an
annual basis of the number of unexcused absences of members. If a
Commissioner has a total of three unexcused absences from the annually
scheduled regular meetings, the Commission shall consider and may
recommend to the Town Council that the Commissioner's appointment be
revoked. The Town Council may remove a Commissioner for cause, according to
Section 2-13-70(b) of the Code of the Town of Hilton Head Island. The cause may
include, but shall not be limited to, nonattendance at the Commission's
meetings.