Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02-24-2010-Doc15928. / MINUTE S PLANNING COMMITTEE February 24, 2010 A meeting of the Planning Committee of the Council of the County of Kauai, State of Hawaii, was called to order by Councilmember Jay Furfaro, Chair, at the Historic County Building, Room 201, Lihu`e, Kauai, on Wednesday, February 24, 2010, at 9:15 a.m., after which the following members answered the call of the roll: Honorable Tim Bynum Honorable Jay Furfaro Honorable Daryl W. Kaneshiro Honorable Lani T. Kawahara Honorable Derek S. K. Kawakami Honorable Bill "Kaipo" Asing, Ex-Officio Member Honorable Dickie Chang, Ex-Officio Member The Committee proceeded on its agenda items, as shown in the following Committee reports which are incorporated herein by reference. CR-PL 2010-06: on Bill No. 2342 A BILL FOR AN ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING REGULATIONS, PROCEDURES, ZONING AND DEVELOPMENT PLANS FOR THE LIHU`E TOWN CORE AREA AND ESTABLISHING EXCEPTIONS, MODIFICATIONS AND ADDITIONS TO CHAPTER 8 AND CHAPTER 10 OF THE KAUAI COUNTY CODE 1987 [Approved as Amended.] There being no objections, the Committee recessed at 11:30. The Committee reconvened at 11:39, and proceeded as follows: JAY FURFARO (COMMITTEE CHAIR): We're going to call the Committee back to order here after that short recess. And I would like to go to the top of today's Planning agenda and if you could read Bill No. 2022 and Bill No. 2323 simultaneously, I'd like to speak about those bills at the same time. Bill No. 2022 A BILL FOR AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND CHAPTER 8 OF THE KAUAI COUNTY CODE 1987, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE [This item was deferred.] Bill No. 2023 A BILL FOR AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND CHAPTER 10 OF THE KAUAI COUNTY CODE 1987, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT PLANS [This item was deferred.] Mr. Furfaro: I have asked to put these back on the Council agenda and I want to reflect a little bit here for a moment if I can, you know • the General Plan document here is... is our plan and I know the Mayor has indicated that they want to identify funding to update this plan and I perhaps would like to say that is the right way to go rather than the new plan. These two (2) bills 2022 and 2023 are actually the vehicles that are intended to address many of the goals and objectives that were set out in the Kauai General Plan. The bill 2022 is a bill that turns many of the items that we've been dealing with into reality from the General Plan. For example, we're dealing with the Administrations plan that comes over now to talk about changes in the Open space but I can make this reference because I sat on the Advisory Committee that did the General Plan, although I didn't finish, I was transferred to the South Pacific but I also was a member of the Planning Commission when the previous Planning Director introduced 2022. My predecessor as Chair has left this bill dormant for a long time and it was made dormant until such time that we could have a workshop. In 2022, many of the things that we are now addressing that are in the vision of the ,General Plan, are also covered in that bill and I'll just touch on a couple of them for you. For example, we have now come to a solution dealing with the attrition of ADU's in the agricultural areas and we did it by first having people declare that they wanted to have the unit and then gave a time limit. That vision of needing to do that is in Bill 2022, but we've addressed it as pars. In bill 2022 is also a specific portion that the Administration has sent over to us to deal with Open space. The Open space suggested pieces are in 2022, rather than working it on a separate bill. But more importantly in 2022 which are consistent with the General Plan vision, it also addresses the possibility of looking at density on Ag property and looking at the smart growth principle of clustering so that we can preserve Open space. I have talked to past members of the Planning Department and current members and I certainly would like to see that 2022 could be presented to us in a workshop two (2) weeks from now on a Tuesday morning, the day before this bill would come back and maybe have some time to actually hear those principles that support the implementation of the General Plan on Open space, Ag density, the use of clustering as well as the attrition of ADU's, which we have already covered so the bill might have to be modified but it would be exceptionally appropriate for us now to deal with looking at that bill and it was deferred until it could come out of Committee. Now as the Committee Chairman, I would like to ask for some support to put 2022 and 2023 in a workshop. 2023 specifically deals with the portions of the neighborhood plans in the North Shore and in the Po`ipu - Kalaheo area as it relates to some of the suggested changes in clustering, so that is what I would like to do in two (2) weeks is be prepared to schedule a workshop and have some past members of the Planning Department come in and speak to us. It's a very sophisticated kind of scale to implement Ag density and clustering but you can see that it addresses many of the things that constantly come up because there are policies that are in the General Plan. We have to remember that the General Plan is not a resolution; the General Plan is an ordinance that says this is what you need to do to set the planning goals going forward. So I would simply like to ask for your support to schedule roughly in two (2) weeks a Planning Workshop on 2022 and 2023. Can I have any discussion? Mr. Bynum. TIM BYNUM (COMMITTEE MEMBER): Yeah. Mr. Furfaro: I just was reminded as I spoke that I have to also remember the date will be subject to the two (2) Planning Tuesdays where the Planning Department doesn't have a Planning Meeting. Mr. Bynum the floor recognizes. Mr. Bynum: Yeah I wanted to discuss these bills because 2 in preparation for the Open space bill you know I've spent a lot of time reviewing the Council transcripts from 2000, 2002 and the General Plan and as the schedule indicated... as the agenda indicated these bills were deferred in 2002, pending a workshop, a lot has happened since 2002 and in reviewing those bills and the discussion that happened at Council at that time, I actually prepared a presentation if necessary to discuss that related to the Open space bill because you are actually correct there's a lot of overlay and that... I believe was historically the Planning Department's you know following through with the General Plan recommendations as you indicated. So I welcome the idea of a workshop, I just would want to point out that we've had eight (8) years of water under the bridge since then and as you indicated while there are really good concepts in those bills, some of them may not be as applicable as they were in 2002 but to go back to the concept of appropriately managing agricultural lands and you know applying some of these principles, I think is a really welcome idea. I think that these issues are very important for the County of Kauai and I would be hopeful that if we do schedule a workshop that it be made available to the public by recording it and making it available on Ho`ike. You know we just had a workshop, a great workshop on the Lihu`e Town Core Plan that we didn't make those arrangements and we kind of repeated some of that today for the public's benefit so you know these are complex issues and I welcome... I appreciate the leadership from our Planning Chair to put forward those concepts because you know the Open space bill that we currently have before us is only a portion of some of the goals that this 2022 attempted to address. A short version of everything I just said, great idea to do a workshop, hopefully it's available to the public and so we don't have to repeat until we bring those concepts back to the floor. Mr. Furfaro: Just to address a couple of your concerns, I understand you've been working on it as a member of the Planning Committee and I want to reiterate that I've only been the Planning Chair for the last fourteen (14) months, but I've been working on this since I volunteered for the CZO, that I served on the General Plan update. You're absolutely correct, this bill is about implementation of the kind of guidance that is being provided in the General Plan. I have subsequently addressed some of the things that I'm aware of when I served on the Planning Committee, for example, how do we successfully exit from the ADU piece, we've addressed that. This bill that's coming up is talking in reference to the Open space; I think it's maybe time that we revisit this. I also want to give an explanation that I sent to many of you on this past workshop because the Planning Department exhausted their Lihu`e Town Core Planning budget, I decided to request within our Council budget, we pick up the travel expenses for PBR for Kimi and bring them over for a workshop. So those are cost that we incurred because their budget was exceeded and therefore I made the choice of having the workshop for the Lihu`e Town Core with PBR present versus the idea that we would arrive this week and we would be re-video presenting the maps and the scope of the ordinance changes and so forth. So it was for that purpose in getting Kimi over here which was a very important part of the workshop that I made those decisions, so I heard you on the second portion and you know that is certainly a possibility but I don't want us to think that there was any purpose in not doing video presentation twice. The purpose was making sure that we had Kimi here to help in the presentation. so... Mr. Kaneshiro. DARYL W. KANESHIRO (COMMITTEE MEMBER): I just wanted to make some clarification that possibly because it's been in the book since 2002, I was in the Council in 2002 and I needed to let you know that moneys were appropriated to do the CZO update with previous Council to when I came on already had a process going where they appropriated I believe almost a hundred thousand dollars • ($100,000) to do this CZO update. In my years I remember that even till today currently we have about two hundred thousand dollars ($200,000) appropriated to do the CZO update so it's not that we just to wash things away, I believe there was a process in place. The process took a little longer and so this ordinances were provided by the Chair and brought up and the efforts that Mr. Bynum and everyone else is doing so I still want people to understand that there was a process in place. It took longer, we've appropriated money to have it done and if you go back and look at all those records you can date it back to before I was even on the Council to the 1996 or 1994 we had a CZO update already in the works in regards to the Open districts so... Mr. Furfaro: Yes. Mr. Kaneshiro: So I wanted to point that out that it's been an ongoing process. Mr. Furfaro: I think that was an excellent point to share you know we moved the Lihu`e Town Core Plan just now out of Committee, it took us six (6) years to get there but things don't quite move that rapidly and I do want to acknowledge your comments because I think that the Planning Director Mr. Costa has committed to us a September report on the updated CZO and that is on record. Mr. Kaneshiro: Yep. Mr. Furfaro: And that money was there but I just would like to get some feeling about airing these two (2) in a workshop. Mr. Kaneshiro: And I fully support that. Mr. Furfaro: Thank you. Any other Committee members, comments on this? If not, thank you Mr. Bynum, thank you Mr. Kaneshiro for those quick summaries and we will coordinate with the Planning Department when we could have the workshop on 2022 and 2023, and we've addressed many of those issues already but I think we should look at the Ag piece before we get to the update of the CZO so. Mr. Kaneshiro: I'll go ahead and make a motion to defer pending the workshop. Mr. Furfaro: May I have a second? Mr. Bynum: Seconded. Mr. Furfaro: Thank you very much. Any further discussion? All those in favor say "aye." Committee Members: Aye. Upon motion duly made by Councilmember Kaneshiro, and seconded by Councilmember Bynum, and unanimously carried, Bill No. 2022 and Bill No. 2023 were deferred. Mr. Furfaro: Can we read the next item Bill No. 2298. 4 BILL NO. 2298 A BILL FOR AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND CHAPTER 8, KAUAI COUNTY CODE 1987, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE AND SINGLE-FAMILY TRANSIENT VACATION RENTALS [This item was deferred.] Mr. Furfaro: Thank you. I would like to ask... I believe that the County Attorney had circulated some comments today to us, am I correct? ALFRED B. CASTILLO, JR. (COUNTY ATTORNEY): That is true. Mr. Furfaro: That is true, okay. Does everybody have those copies? And I believe what is being said here... in that copy, there's some suggested amendments to bi112998. Mr. Castillo: 2298. Mr. Furfaro: 2298, I'm sorry. And I guess after I've looked at them I still... as Chairman of the Committee I have some questions of the principles of what makes up a substantial change and so I feel I would like to request an Executive Session with the Committee of the Whole to review your suggested amendments, that's where I'm at right now. But since we have it as an agenda item I'll ask the public if there's any testimony on their part? Is there anyone that would like to speak? Yes. There being no objections, the rules were suspended. BARBARA RO$ESON: Thank you Committee Chair Furfaro, Chair Asing and Councilmembers. For the record my name is Barbara Robeson and handing out my quick testimony regarding the TVR bill 2298. I just have a couple of suggestions on the bill itself and I numbered these pages, they're attached to my testimony. The first one is on page three (3) and my suggestion is to add in there where I indicated "County building codes" and the second addition is on page four (4) of the bill itself and that would be to add in "sworn TVR Affidavit" and that would be to comply with the nonconforming use certificate application requirements that are in the original bill. Now I do have some concerns about the "sworn affidavit" which is also attached to my testimony. And as I indicated on the copy of the affidavit that item number three (3) that the applicant swears that they have operated a transient vacation rental on the property since some particular date. And the TVR, the exsisting ordinance states that the in section eight dash seventeen point eleven (a) (8-17.11a) violations of conditions of approval or providing false or misleading information on the application etc... So my concern is specifically to the Wainiha and Haena area at least in that area, in particular a number of approved TVR's had applicants who claimed homeowner's exemptions on their property taxes. And was this issue considered before the TVR in use permits was approved. And if so or is there a violation of the TVR ordinance if they falsely claimed information. So I just concluding quickly with a couple of questions, if the applicant lived in their house, would it still qualify as a TVR? And the second one, my second question is should those approved TVR's be rewarded if they provided false information to get their permit, and that's all I have, thank you. Mr. Furfaro: Thank you Barbara, let me see if there's any questions. Does anybody have any questions of Barbara? No. Thank you. 5 • CAREN DIAMOND: Aloha Council, Caren Diamond. My first issue is one of governance and I went to a County Council meeting on Maui and was quite happy to see that on the bottom of their paper it says "approved as to form and legality" and so before anything comes up in front of the public, in front of... gets listed on the agenda, it's already approved as to its form and being legal. And I want to use it as example on a bill like this where we had to come as citizens where it's been sixteen (16) times or how many times and we're awaiting still opinions whether something legal or not legal from the County Attorney yet the public has to come and I ask if in good governance if that could be added to Council before things come up. And then in this case you know as this bill does it comply with 205A, does it specifically comply or doesn't it. And it looks like when I read 205A there's a special use permit that is the process and as I look at the amendments to this bill and (d) has basically it says "upon expiration of this un-enforcement agreement then you go ahead and follow that process, I never heard of a county implementing an un-enforcement agreement that has the Director agreed not to enforce and if we're talking agriculture land, the only ways these places got approved to begin with was they said they were farms and it was a farm dwelling and so now I don't understand it wasn't a farm dwelling, it was a transient vacation rental and now you want to grant them grandfather status because of that? That doesn't... I don't understand that and I don't think it complies with 205A either. The second thing I would like to say is accountability, the vacation rental ordinances has had zero accountability in the implementation. As citizens, we have been unable to get any records. As the Council, we have gotten no help in actually being transparent of what the County has approved and I don't really think that more... more things should be given to the Planning Department to actually do until we have gotten accountability about what has happened, has our residential areas turned into a resort? Or now our agricultural lands going to turn into a resort. And the entire zoning where we had resort areas and residential areas and the reasons for having specific residential areas and the reasons for having those resort areas and if you look at our hotel sector now, we have the lowest, lowest occupancy rates in the hotels, while we're building the vacation rental business in our neighborhoods. Mr. Furfaro: Caren, I'll give you an additional three (3) minutes. Ms. Diamond: Thank you. ITT have the capability to do an incredible work on this, most of it was supposed to be put on the website at some point... much of it was on the website but we haven't been able to get any correlations, nothing to compile the data, how many vacation rentals got approved on the North Shore, how many in Hanalei, how many in Wainiha, how many in were there before when the reports were being compiled, and how many have been approved now? So before you give additional work, we really like accountability of what has transpired and the ITT website actually could be updated so that information is available to the public because as it is now this is... we have the secret resort and we have what is approved is secret and the inspection reports are secret and you know did the building... is the building what it was when it was built? It's all secret. And we're asking for more secret stuff not to get approved and not... no additions to the TVR, ordinances until these things are straightened out. I hear Papaa Bay is remodeling itself to be a transient vacation rental, think about the can of worms you're going to open if you change this without putting in any protections at all. And after saying that, I want to say I'm not against the little cottages on farm land, a farmer who has a farm, who has a little vacation rental cottage, that's fine. And I think the process for approval and making that legal is 6 f already there with the State Special Use Permit which goes through the Planning Commission and we're not against that and so if you're planning on approving anything, we'd ask you to have a couple regulations like that they be a real farm, not that you put in one after but that you actually already have one and you've filed your scheduled (f's) and you have been operating as a farm and in additional I also ask for some size restrictions so we don't have the ten (10) bedroom, ten (10) bathroom agricultural place be grandfathered in. And the last thing I would like to address real quickly is just the takings and you know there's amulti-prong test for takings, it's not just you say "you can't vacation rental it" and people have a case for takings, as long as you have the use of your property in other ways, there is no takings. So I think that's just a bogus argument here and I ask you to think about protecting our Ag land if it is allowed to be used as a resort, nobody's going to be able to farm the land, we're not going to be able to afford farm land, the price of it is just going to go up and up. Thank you for your considerations. Mr. Furfaro: Thank you. Any questions of Caren? If not, thank you. Is there anyone else in the audience who would like to speak? KEN TAYLOR: Chair, members of the Council, my name is Ken Taylor. First of all I would like to say that I support comments from the two (2) previous speakers. I hope that you folks listen carefully to what they had to say. And that you will give it some serious thought and consideration. I also think that in this whole planning process one of the things that we need to get in place and to protect the outlying Open areas and Ag lands is growth boundaries in all the major communities and that would go a long ways to solving some of these problems and until that's done, we're going to continue to 'see the areas erode into the development of one sort or another. So please, please consider what the two (2) previous speakers have had to say and deliberate on their comments and let's get this thing resolved, thank you. Mr. Furfaro: Thank you. Is there anyone else from the public who would like to speak? If not, I'm going to call the meeting back to order and if my colleagues would give me a few moments I just want to say that you know I certainly believe that anytime we plant the seed about more lands disappearing and so forth, we forget that in the General Plan... the General Plan basically said we need to regulate vacation rentals and this was driven from an opinion from the Deputy County Attorney and often referred to as the Kobayashi comments and those were comments that Mr. Kobayashi shared it with the Council, I think it was addressed at the time to Councilman Swain. It was done publicly and I think those of us that served on the Citizens Advisory Committee for the General Plan recognized what was being said in that letter. We recognized it to the point that the General Plan said we need to regulate it. And I think what Mr. Kobayashi was saying is, you need to draw that line in the sand but any new prohibition cannot go backwards, it can't go backwards, we have to find a way to address regulating this and at the same time you know find a way to have some attrition by setting up certain goals that we could lawfully expect from people who were operating transient vacation rentals. You know one of the things that's very awkward for me and I'm going to touch on this if I can is that fact that the State often says things kind of like in general but they don't come down with any rules. Okay we're battling that right now in a farm workers bill. The State says in the important Ag land piece that you can have farm worker housing but they give you no parameters as to what a farm worker housing opportunity is. You know it says "shoot for the moon, we don't care if you go this way, that way, this way, this way, get to the moon" but you can have farm worker housing so I've been working with members of 7 • the staff here to establish some of those criterias that Caren Diamond just mentioned. There is nothing that prevents them from applying for farm worker housing in the important Ag land bill as it stands. Farm worker housing is something the plan says you need to have to support farming but it doesn't limit... ah you can have three (3) dwellings but between the three (3) you get no more than eighteen hundred (1,800) square feet, you have to provide your plan and your plan says, you know organic farming or not. So we have to have a farm worker bill that gives the State policy some parameters, the same is true for all of this. The State had no dilemma about collecting the taxes, the State clearly says we couldn't advertise the people that had vacation rentals, I used that early in another bill. In other words you can't go backwards, so we have to set up rules. And Caren touched on this again that the rules and the approval of form and matter should be on the Council's agendas, that's why we have other Commissions, whether they are Fire, Planning and so forth, we expect them to come up with those sets of rules and we said that in the bill, we said that in the bill and in that bill it... you pointed out some things that could have been accomplished, unfortunately weren't. We were prepared to give extra staffing, we were prepared to give extra time but it didn't happen so I'm just trying to appeal right now to your senseability on this you know the keying intellectual perception of what the General Plan said to what we had to do. We should regulate. The line is drawn in the sand for March eighth (8th) no new vacation rentals, anywhere. The State doesn't give us clear definitions on the Important Ag lands, we have to create that so I want to let Barbara know that I think you gave us some good pieces here especially on the affidavit, you know somebody swears that they're doing this, they got that kind of revenue and so forth and notarize it, that means you're liable for your statement as far as I'm concerned but to... please understand that this Council is now trying and yes I'm sorry Caren it's taking sixteen (16) deferrals but we're trying to do it right, we're trying to look at everything that's under every tree and that's why I'm saying right now I got some questions on the principles that deal with you know substantial changes in the bill that's why I'm looking for the deferral and that's why I want to have an Executive Session in the Committee of the Whole that Mr. Asing will Chair, that's how I'm feeling right now as the Planning Chairman. So Mr. Bynum, I will go to recognize you but I'm just asking others not to be thinking that this Council isn't trying to be accountable, heck we just appointed a Citizens Committee made up of all of those that are looking at the Important Ag land bill. This bill says these exceptions may only be made until the Important Ag land bill is identified, those lands anyway so be patient so we can do it to the best of our ability. Mr. Bynum. Mr. Bynum: Thank you Mr. Chair. I sense the... well I'll share... I'm frustrated that we haven't... that we have a number of deferrals on this but I think the Chair's comments are correct that we need to get it right. The... this has been a long time coming since way before I was on the Council, this was discussed and you talked about the Kobayashi manner and you know which is kind of infamous now but you now some parts get left out of that sometimes he said you know he gave an opinion and then said "and if the Council you know feels differently or be prudent to regulate this, it would be prudent to..." and the General Plan said regulate. That was more than just about ten (10) years ago so when we were on the Council, everybody knows let watch this... on March seventh (7th) 2008, as you indicated we finally in my opinion said you know what from this point forward nobody who wasn't lawfully in use will be allowed to do vacation rentals, TVR.'s outside of the VDA. The rub comes on... the lawful and use. That is very complex it turns out in the State of Hawaii and as you also indicated we haven't received clarity from the State, there were court cases in the past that might have brought about some clarity but those cases were settled and so the courts haven't 8 ~~ given clarity, the State in my opinion has not given clarity and it falls on the County of Kauai to provide that clarity for farm worker housing, for TVR's and we're looking at trying to resolve this issue in a way that it is fair and lawful as possible. I like Ms. Diamond's about form and clarity and that's an issue we may want to look at and the way we structure and the way we work things in Council because it is kind of a routine on Maui that when a bill is introduced it's been reviewed for form and clarity, those aren't advices or opinions, it just says... it's in the proper form and it's you know it's lawfully constructed. We do, do that here we just haven't formalized that process in a way that makes it clear to the public. And so I wish that we were introducing amendments to bring that clarity but I reluctantly concur that we need some more time in discussion. It's frustrating to lay this thing off. The... but I really want to point out... and then Ms. Diamond mentioned some plan to do vacation rentals at Papaa Bay, as far as I know Papaa Bay has never had a vacation rental. Mr. Furfaro: And I would like to clarify us that the agenda item is not Papaa Bay today and therefore you already made the point as I have that there are no new permits out there. Mr. Bynum: Right. And I'll just add to that just by saying and thank you for that clarification that I don't believe that it's anybody intent in any way space or form that I'm aware of to not keep that line drawn in the sand, we're just arguing about what was already out there so and it is complex and difficult, I would hope that within two (2) to three (3) weeks we either have amendments to this bill or a new bill to try to bring that clarity and so reluctantly I'll be supporting the call for a deferral today. Mr. Furfaro: Okay I'm back to looking for a deferral. DEREK S. K. KAWAKAMI (COMMITTEE MEMBER): Move to defer. Mr. Kaneshiro: Mr. Furfaro: say "aye". Committee Members: Mr. Furfaro: Seconded. Thank you Mr. Kaneshiro. All those in favor Aye. Thank you very much. Upon motion duly made by Councilmember Kawakami, seconded by Councilmember Kaneshiro, and unanimously carried, Bill No. 2298 was deferred. Mr. Furfaro: We are deferring this and Mr. Attorney, I will send over my query about my early statement. Mr. Castillo: Thank you. Mr. Furfaro: Okay. Could we have the next item please? No, we're done in the Planning Committee. Ms. Simao: Bill No. 2339. 9 1 ~ .. Mr. Furfaro: Oh shocks. I'm hungry... Okay 2339, I'm sorry I drew a line through it earlier, my apologies. BILL NO. 2339 A BILL FOR AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ARTICLE 8 OF CHAPTER 8 OF THE KAUAI COUNTY CODE 1987, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS IN THE OPEN DISTRICT [This item was deferred.] Mr. Furfaro: Okay my earlier statement when I was... I was hoping that we could have this workshop... (Inaudible) Excuse me? Mr. Kaneshiro: See if there's anybody in the public. Mr. Furfaro: Is there anybody in the public that would like to speak on this item? If not, I will call the meeting back to order. Mr. Kaneshiro: Mr. Kawakami: Move to defer. Second. Mr. Furfaro: Okay it's been moved to defer and seconded, all those in favor of the deferral please say "aye." Committee Members: Aye. Upon motion duly made by Councilmember Kaneshiro, seconded by Councilmember Kawakami, and unanimously carried, Bill No. 2339 was deferred. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 12:18 p.m. Respectfully submitted,. ~_ GM ~l,~~wc~l~rn~ G(,~--- Darrellyne M. Simao Council Services Assistant I APPROVED at th~mmittee Meeting held on March 10, 2010: JAYS Chair 10