Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning 042616 MinutesKAUAI PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING April 26, 2016 The regular meeting of the Planning Commission of the County of Kauai was called to order by Chair Mahoney at 9:04 a.m., at the Lihu`e Civic Center, Mo`ikeha Building, in meeting room 2A -213. The following Commissioners were present: Chair Sean Mahoney Vice Chair Louis Abrams Mr. Wayne Katayama Mr. Roy Ho Mr. Kimo Keawe Absent and Excused: Ms. Glenda Nogami Streufert The following staff members were present: Planning Department — Michael Dahilig, Leslie Takasaki, Jody Galinato; Deputy County Attorney Jodi Higuchi Sayegusa, Office of Boards and Commissions Administrator Jay Furfaro (entered ar 9:55 a.m), Commission Support Clerk Darcie Agaran Discussion of the meeting, in effect, ensued: CALL TO ORDER Chair Mahoney called the meeting to order at 9:04 a.m. ROLL CALL Planning Director Michael Dahilig_ Commissioner Keawe? Mr. Keawe: Here. Mr. Dahilig: Commissioner Katayama? Mr. Katayama: Here. Mr. Dahilig: Commissioner Ho? Mr. Ho: Here. Mr. Dahilig: Vice Chair Abrams? Mr. Abrams: Here. Mr. Dahilig: Commissioner Streufert? Chair Mahoney? Chair Mahoney: Here. Mr. Dahilig. Five (5) members present, Mr. Chair. Chair Mahoney: Thank you. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA Mr. Dahilig: You do have Item C, Approval of the Agenda. The Department would recommend moving Item L.2. related to Charles Somers to the first action item after Item H on this morning's calendar. And then that would leave Item L. L, which would be the last item for the agenda this morning. Chair Mahoney: Okay. Chair will entertain a motion. Mr. Abrams: Move to revise the agenda. Mr. Keawe: Second. Chair Mahoney: Moved and seconded. Any further discussion? Hearing none. All in favor? (Unanimous voice vote) Motion carries 5:0. MINUTES of the meeting(s) of the Planning Commission Mr. Dahilig: Thank you, Mr. Chair. We are now on the minutes of the meetings of the Planning Commission. We do not have any for approval this morning. RECEIPT OF ITEMS FOR THE RECORD Mr. DahiljW Item E, Receipt of Items for the Record. We have not received any supplemental testimony or any supplemental information to add to this morning's packet. HEARINGS AND PUBLIC COMMENT Continued Agency Hearing (NONE) New Agency Hearing (NONE) Continued Public Hearing (NONE) New Public Hearing (NONE) All remaining public testimony pursuant to HRS 92 (Sunshine Law) Mr. Dahilig: We are now on Item F, Hearings and Public Comment. We do not have any Continued Agency Hearings, New Agency Hearings, Continued Public Hearings, or New Public Hearings for this morning. And in terms of Item F.5., the Department would recommend making a call for any testimony on any other remaining agenda item for this morning's meeting. Chair Mahoney: Is there any member of the public that would like to testify on any agenda item? Seeing none. CONSENT CALENDAR Status Reports (NONE) Director's Report(s) for Project(s) Scheduled for Agency Hearing on 5'10'16. Class IV Zoning Permit Z -IV- 2016 -12, Use Permit U- 2016 -10 and Special Management Area Use Permit SMA(U)- 2016 -3, for the construction of two (2) portable classroom buildings and associated improvements on the Hanalei Elementary School campus, and Variance Permit V- 2016 -2 to deviate from the land coverage requirements within the Open (0) zoning district, pursuant to Section 8- 9.2(a) of the Kauai County Code (1987), further identified as 5 -5427 Kuhi6 Highway, Tax Map Key 5 -5- 006:018, and affecting a portion of a larger parcel approx. 3.7 acres in size -= State ofHawai `i, Department of Education. Class IV Zoning Permit Z -IV- 2016 -13 to allow construction of a warehouse facilitv and associated site improvements on a parcel situated at the terminus of Leleiona Street in Puhi, approx. 700 ft. south of its intersection with Puhi Road and further identified as 1821 Leleiona Street, Tax Map Key 3 -3- 011:004, and containing a total area of 1.095 acres = Hawktree Land, Inc. Mr. Dahilig: Thank you, Mr. Chair. We do have Item G, which is the Consent Calendar. We do not have any status reports for acceptance this morning, but we do have two (2) Director's Reports; both for Class IV Zoning Permit Z -IV- 2016 -12, Use Permit U- 2016 -10, and SMA Use Permit SMA(U)- 2016 -3, as well as Class IV Zoning Permit Z -IV- 2016 -13. These items are being asked to be received for the record, as well as set for agency hearing on 05/10/16. Chair Mahoney: Chair will entertain a motion. Mr. Abrams: Move to approve the two (2) items, 2.a. and 2.b., and schedule for agency hearing on 05/1016, 16, Department of Education and Hawktree Land, Inc. Mr. Ho: Second. Chair Mahoney: It's been moved and seconded. Any further discussion? Hearing none. All in favor? (Unanimous voice vote) Motion carries 5:0. EXECUTIVE SESSION Mr. Dahilig: Thank you, Mr. Chair. We are now on Item H. We do not have an executive session for this morning. UNFINISHED BUSINESS (For Action) Amendment to Special Management Area Use Permit SMA(U)- 2008 -5, Use Pen-nit U- 2008-4 and Class IV Zoning Permit Z -IV- 2008 -6 in conjunction with Status Report in the matter of Charles Somers, as Trustee of the Charles Somers Living Trust dated November 12, 2002, and 11 est Sunset 32 Phase I LLC. Mr. Dahilig: We are moving to Item L.1., which is Unfinished Business. This is Item L ... sorry, L.2., my apologies. Amendment to Special Management Area Use Permit SMA(U)- 2008 -5, Use Permit U- 2008 -4, and Class IV Zoning Permit Z -IV- 2008 -6 in conjunction with the status report in the matter of Charles Somers, as Trustee of the Charles Somers Living Trust dated November 12, 2002, and West Sunset 32 Phase I LLC. The amendment hearing was closed and deferred on 0430/13 and on January 28, 2014, and this item was recalled and re- deferred on 03/08/16. Jody has been the planner that has been handling this for the past three (3) years. Staff Planner Jody Galinato: Good morning, Mr. Chair and members of the Commission. I have Director's Report Supplement No. 7, and I'll just kind of go over this to refresh you because it's been a long history. Ms. Galinato read the Project Description and Use, Property history, and Exhibits sections of the Director's Report Supplement No. 7 for the record (on file with the Planning Department). Ms. Galinato: I'll hold off for my conclusion, and I did receive, yesterday afternoon, Phase I Grading Plans that were submitted to the County and a letter submitted to State Historic Preservation. And I would defer to the applicant if there's any questions. I haven't gotten through all that. Chair Mahoney: Okay. Is there a representative for the applicant present? Could you state your name for the record, please? Max Graham: Good morning, Planning Commissioners. I'm Max Graham, and I represent the applicant in this matter. The owners of the property are Charles Somers, the Charles Somers Trust, and an associated LLC, West Sunset Phase 1 LLC, so those are the two (2) owners. And after that pretty thorough presentation, if you have any specific questions, I'd be happy to answer them. I don't know what I could add to the background in this matter, unless the new Commissioners want me to point out, on a map, where the specific areas on the property are. 4 Chair Mahoney: Are there any concerns from the Commissioners? You want any identification? Good? Mr. Ho: I'm good. Chair Mahoney: Okay. Any questions for the applicant? Mr. Abrams: One (1). Max, Jody said she received an SHPD letter. Could you summarize what the substance of that letter was? Mr. Graham: The Kahili Quarry Road is a separate lot adjacent to the property. It's been maintained up to this point; just routine maintenance. Now the owner has filed grading plans for the more or less permanent improvements to the road, which will include swales and an appropriate covering of the road that required a grading permit application and the preparation of an NPDES permit application. The State Historic received a copy of it and asked me to present them with the background on the matter, and we will be meeting onsite with the Kauai Archaeologist, Mary Jane Naone, to look at the ... so she can look at the road. Mr. Abrams: Okay. Mr. Graham: So I was just copying the Planning Department on that. Mr. Abrams: Well that's good because I know we had a lot of discussion on the road and it seems like it is making progress. It's good to hear. Thank you. Chair Mahoney: Any further questions for the applicant by any members of the Commission? No? Mr. Katayama: Chair. Max, one of the issues with the Quarry Road was the ... working with the wildlife there. Has those issues ... it seemed like it was a three -party issue on developing the road, depending on which segment of the road, and where the road ... if it would go down all the way to the original Quarry Bay itself. Has that been resolved? Mr. Graham: Yes, it has. So what will happen is the applicant has prepared a Phase I Grading Permit with plans and that takes the improvements from the top of Kahili Quarry Road on the Kilauea Plateau where the pavement ends, takes it all the way down to the driveway into the present main house. Phase II plans are being prepared and will be ready in about a week or two. The Phase II plans will take the road from that driveway area through the Fish and Wildlife lot to the parking area down by the river mouth, and that is being done in conjunction with the Fish and Wildlife Service. So at the end of the day, there will be an improved road that will go all the way down to the parking area in the Fish and Wildlife lot. Mr. Katayama: And the farm plan that is currently on record, is that the proposed farm plan? Mr. Graham: We don't have a farm plan on record. There will be a requirement that we present a farm plan, so we will need to ... the plan is to do orchard crops in front of the main house. So in order to get the building permits, we will need to present the farm plan to the Planning Department. Agricultural activities are allowed within the conservation easements, but we will still have to run the fann plan by the Hawaiian Islands Land Trust as well, and amend the conservation plan to make sure that we are consistent with the conservation values. But that will be done prior to any building permit approvals. Mr. Katayama: I guess the challenge before this Commission is ... well, one of the challenges has been is the faun plan consistent with the development of the infrastructure; namely the farm dwelling or the barn. I mean, when will the Commission get a feel if it's appropriate for the Ag operation? Or is this something that's going to be left up to Building to decide? Mr. Graham: I think, actually, it's left up to the Planning Director to decide, but I'll let the Planning Director speak to that. Mr. Dahilig. You got to love these Ag questions. (Laughter in background) I will say this. That when you look at the large acreage of the property and if there are areas that do need to be maintained even from a scale standpoint, there is, I believe, a reasonable expectation that some heavy equipment needs to be maintained and stored on the property. That being said, whether the equipment that is used is in the facilitation of very large Ag production versus, you know, what is, I guess, routine in terms of maintaining, I mean, it's many, many acres. Having some type of storage facility for that type of equipment, I think, is at least reasonable. Now, whether it's done in conjunction with what we expect as, you know, growing up when you hear a barn, you think of animals and those types of things in there. I don't think that this is something I would expect that would facilitate, I guess, a very large faun plan if you are also looking at context of a conservation plan that is being put forth by HILT. If I had my druthers about one way or the other, where you want to see the area cultivated versus where you want to see the area preserved, I think it's ... the natural state elements, I think, would have to weigh in on our evaluation of the farm plan because I think that's what, generally, has come out through the community process has been this desire to leave things at a natural state. So that being said, I think we would not be predisposed to requiring a certain type of faun plan for the property, but at the same time, I think the discussion I'm bringing is probably the views I would probably ask Jodi to review the farm plan with. But I think at least at a minimum, there is a reasonable, I guess, expectation that they would need to have somewhere to store large equipment on the property. Mr. Katayama: I guess the view from this Commissioner is that the use of the land, I think, is up to the landowner. The concern here is the ability to urbanize the land under the pathway of what is an appropriate facility to support the farm operation. Again, its where is that balance to be vetted in this process because this has gone on for quite a while. Mr. Dahilig: Right. Mr. Katayama: And it's been, you know, I give the applicant high marks for persevering, but again it comes down to this central issue where I'm not quarreling with the use. I just want to understand that the community needs are being addressed vis -a -vis the pathways and somewhat the conservation plan, which is quite admirable. And now it is the comfort that what seems to be posed as ancillary agricultural support facilities doesn't become an urbanization of that parcel. Mr. Dahilig: We would agree. Mr. Katayama: So again, where does that vetting take place? Mr. Ho: Max, is there an IRS farm designation that would cover this? Mr. Graham: I think we'll need to do that as part of the presentation of the plan to the Planning Department, so not done yet. As a little background here, just ... there has always been a tension between Ag activities and the conservation activities. This is a 160 -acre parcel. There are only 12 acres set aside for building improvements, and that will be utilized by the main house, and if you approve it, by the second farm dwelling unit. So that will mean that there are no further improvements other than Ag buildings, or the conservation maintenance building. The remaining 149 acres are subject to the conservation easement and that property, if you're familiar with it, is pretty steep, so it's not really good for Ag upland anyway. And then there are about 70 acres of the conservation area that are subject to the protection plan to protect the historic sites, so we don't want to touch any of those areas. We want to protect those areas, so the only Ag that really can be done is sublimited Ag down in front of the main house in the flat area by the river, and that would seem appropriate for the amount of development that has been undertaken on the parcel. Mr. Dahilig: Mr. Chair, we also do have some public testimony that came in late, so if there's any other questions for the applicant. Chair Mahoney: Any further questions for the applicant? Mr. Katayama: No. Thanks, Max. Chair Mahoney: Okay. Is there any member from the public who would like to testify on this agenda item? Could you state your name for the record, please? Come to the microphone. Thank you. Yoshito L'Hote: Aloha, Chair. My name is Yoshito L'Hote. I'm here to represent the Kilauea Neighborhood Association, and I'm the current President. This is a long testimony, so maybe I'll skip some of the formalities in the beginning, but try to cover and make the main points that we are trying to make. So summary, the KNA supports the recommendations of the Director's Report Supplement No. 7; particularly the rental use restriction, the requirement to do agriculture and the requirement that all the previous conditions imposed in conjunction with the SMA and Use Permits for the main house be completed before building permits are granted for the additional structure. Because the small acreage and minimum scope of conservation management, we ask that the square footage of the barn be reduced by 1,000 square feet. We ask for two (2) additional amendments to the 2008 Decision and Order pertaining to public access. The Planning Director's recommendation. If this application is approved, it is critical that the following recommendations of the Planning Director's Report Supplement No. 7 be adopted: A- 9 No vacation rental use, A -10 Agriculture is required, A -13 No building permits granted until previous conditions are complied with. Condition No. 12 of SMA Use Permit 2008 -5 is particularly important to the Kilauea community. Condition No. 12 stated in part: Applicant shall provide roadway improvements to the entire length of Kahili Rock Quarry as may be authorized by present owners. Said roadway improvements should include clearing drainage improvements as may be pennitted by the present road right -of -way width. While the KNA is highly gratified that Mr. Somers, the Fish and Wildlife Service, and the County are starting to work together to accomplish this condition, road improvements must be completed before any new structures are constructed. Please note that Condition A -13 also requires that the preservation of the archaeological site must be completed before building pen-nits are issued. Limited Conservation Plan. The two (2) conservation easements on the 161 -acre property covers 149 (acres). Among important values and resources of the area identified in the conservation easement documents are wetland habitat for endangered K61oa ducks, stilts and coots, ndnds and sea bird habitat, archaeology, agriculture and scenic resources. The easements also state that the owners have the right, but not the obligation, to conduct land management and /or environmental restoration activities within the easement areas including, but not limited to removal of alien species, restoration of wildlife habitat, restoration of wetland, and introduction of native species. At the previous application for these buildings in January 2014, the KNA was gratified that the Planning Commission required Mr. Somers to develop a conservation plan in order to demonstrate the need and use for the conservation manager's house and conservation maintenance barn. The conservation plan, which was submitted... Mr. Dahilig: Three (3) minutes, Mr. Chair. Mr. L'Hote: I'm sorry? Chair Mahoney: Okay, you used three (3) minutes. Mr. L'Hote: Oh, three (3) minutes. Chair Mahoney: Could you just wrap up your testimony? Mr. L'Hote: Okay, so I'll just jump to the end and wrap it up. Chair Mahoney: Thank you. Mr. L'Hote: Because it is two (2) more pages. Chair Mahoney: Yes. Mr. L'Hote: So finally ... and you'll get a chance to read the rest of it. But finally, the KNA wants to publicly also acknowledge the monetary assistance Mr. Somers has given to the development of the County- owned, community- managed Kilauea Ag Park. We are most grateful for his neighborliness and involvement. Thank you for your time and attention. Respectfully, Yoshito. Chair Mahoney: Thank you for your testimony. Mr. Dahilig: Mr. Chair, I believe we do not have anybody else signed up to testify on this. Chair Mahoney: Does any other member from the public care to testify on this agenda item? Seeing none. Okay. Ms. Galinato: Okay, ready for the conclusion? Chair Mahoney: Yes, please. Ms. Galinato: Okay. Ms. Galinato read the Conclusion section of the Director's Report Supplement No. 7 for the record (on file with the Planning Department). Ms. Galinato: That's all I have, Mr. Chair. Chair Mahoney: Thank you. Could the representative for the applicant please come to the...? State your name, again, for the record, please. Mr. Graham: I'm Max Graham, representing the applicant in this matter. Chair Mahoney: Okay. You heard the conditions. Mr. Graham: We have no objection to any of the conditions. Thank you very much. Chair Mahoney: Okay. Okay, the Chair will entertain any motions or any comments. Mr. Abrams: Mr. Chair, I'd like to make a motion to approve the Staff's recommendation to approve the amendment to the Special Management Area Use Permit SMA(U)- 2008 -5, Use Permit U- 2008 -4, and Class IV Zoning Permit Z -IV- 2008 -6 in conjunction with the status report in the matter of the Charles Somers, Trustee of the Charles Somers Living Trust dated November 12, 2002, and West Sunset 32 Phase I LLC. Chair Mahoney: Okay, the motion. Mr. Keawe: Second. Chair Mahoney: It's been moved and seconded. Any discussion? 9 Mr. Katayama: Chair, on Condition A -10, there is a ... as noted, a farm plan that was submitted in 2008. The applicant has testified there is no actionable farm plan at this point. Can we clarify that and make the appropriate status as part of this condition? Chair Mahoney: Could the applicant... can you comment on...? Mr. Graham: This is part of what I was talking about the interplay between the Ag and the conservation, so initially, the plan was to ... there was an Ag plan to put in forest trees, which would have been placed in the areas where the historic properties are. So rather than do that... actually in working with the Planning Commission, it was decided that that type of Ag was not appropriate to the conservation values, so it was never acted upon. Mr. Katayama: So I guess, Jody, what would be the appropriate wording for that condition? Ms. Galinato: I'm not exactly sure what you would want, but basically, we are going to require a new faun plan. Mr. Graham: Commissioner, just ... my understanding is that what is being meant by this condition is that since the original plan was never implemented, because, you know, pretty much by agreement with all the participants at the time, this time a farm plan will be required and the applicant will be required to submit it and have it approved prior to issuance of any building permits. Mr. Katayama: So would that be the appropriate wording for that condition? Ms. Galinato: Basically we are acknowledging that there was one sent in and there was some discussion as to that initial farm plan, and that they would have to comply with the requirements as how this was set up. Chair Mahoney: Would it be ... yeah. Mr. Dahilig: If I may, would that be ... would the Commission be comfortable, then, in memorializing it ... a fixed condition and actually stating that a farm plan will be required and have it ... amend Condition A -10 to have something that has a date certain? Mr. Katayama: Yeah, I think the applicant has acknowledged that the previous farm plan is inappropriate and so be it. And yet, you know, I think to move forward that they need to revise it and get ... is the Department in agreement? Mr. Dahilig: I think it's reasonable, certainly. I would... Mr. Katayama: Sort of reflects the facts of this situation. Mr. Dahilig: So I guess as a proffer, we could add it as an amendment to Condition A -10, at the very end of the paragraph, must comply with all requirements pursuant to HRS Chapter 205 and submit an amended... 10 Mr. Katayama: I would delete the original (inaudible) farm plan. Mr. Dahilig: Yeah. Mr. Katayama: Because that is void, I would think. Mr. Dahilig: Yes. It's a notwithstanding language just to, I guess, more for historical purposes to kind of characterize what ... because I mean, certainly we are not objectionable to striking the whole thing and then just putting up a certain farm plan language in there. Maybe it would be appropriate if we could take a 5- minute break to try to resolve the language on that and then we can reconvene. Chair Mahoney: Can we take a... Mr. Abrams: I had one other thing, maybe, that would be incorporated into the... I noticed the neighborhood association has proposed a trial program, which at that point, to try and get access up to the falls. But you did state that people could call you to gain access because you'd go through that process, and I think that that's fair. Would that be something that we would want to also include the manager there as having the authority? I'm not ... you are not going to be around forever, so at that point... (Laughter in background) I want to have something that goes beyond that, so that the community can figure that out. Mr. Graham: Thank you, Commissioner. (Laughter in background) I think appropriately the contact should be the conservation manager. Mr. Abrams: Okay. Mr. Graham: Alright. Mr. Abrams: Okay. If that would be something ... I mean, we don't even actually have a condition in there. Mr. Dahilig: Yeah, we've... there's actually not a condition because it was a finding as part of the initial Contested Case Hearing. Mr. Abrams: Okay. Mr. Dahilig: When they ... that saying that there was a Finding of Fact that it was at the owner's discretion. Mr. Abrams: Yeah. Mr. Dahilig: Whether that discretion needs to be memorialized as a condition of approval, maybe it's something we can talk about with Mr. Graham over the break because I can see him smiling and (inaudible). Mr. Abrams: Yeah. It can be some sort of formal letter or whatever; I don't know. Something that if in case something came back to the Planning Department relative to something like that that happened in the future, that you would be able to go back to something that would allow that. Mr. Dahilig: We probably have to take a look at the '08 language. Mr. Abrams: Okay. Mr. Dahilig: And try to... Mr. Keawe: So are we going to take a break? Mr. Dahilig: Yeah, it would probably be appropriate to take a ... maybe just make it a caption break since we are almost at the top of the hour. Chair Mahoney: Okay. We are going to take a caption break. The Commission recessed this portion of the meeting at 9:50 a.m. Administrator Furfaro entered the meeting at 9:55 a.m. The Commission reconvened this portion of the meeting at 10:00 a.m. Chair Mahoney: Call the meeting bacl: to order, please. Mr. Dahilig: Mr. Chair, given the Condition A -10 as proposed, the Department would like to actually amend its Director's Report to have Condition A -10 state the following. It would be stricken in its entirety and rewritten as follows, "Applicant is on notice that the property is "Agricultural" under State Land Use designations. Applicant must comply with all the requirements pursuant to HRS 205, including the submission and approval of a farm plan to the Director prior to building permit approval." We'd also like to add an additional condition, A -16, to our list of conditions on the amendment, and that would state, "Given the Finding No. 18 of the 2008 Decision and Order, applicant shall provide Director contact information should a member of the public wish to seek access to the falls, understanding access is at the landowner's discretion." We would suggest those two (2) amendments to our report, and if not objectionable, would seek indulgence from the Commission to incorporate that as part of their motion. Mr. Abrams: Okay. Well, we'll start with the process of withdrawing it, Jodi? Chair Mahoney: No, you can (inaudible). Mr. Abrams: Or just do this as an amendment? Mr. Dahilig: As a friendly amendment. 12 Chair Mahoney: Can we? Deputy County Attorney Jodi Higuchi Sayegusa: That's fine. I mean, but it might be cleaner just to withdraw, withdraw the second, and then make a new motion. Mr. Abrams: Okay, I'm going to withdraw my motion. You withdraw the second. Mr. Keawe: Withdraw the second. Chair Mahoney: Okay, the Chair will entertain a new motion. Mr. Abrams: Okay, I move to approve, as amended, Staff reports, Special Management Area Use Permit SMA(U)- 2008 -5, Use Permit U- 2008 -4, and Class IV Zoning Permit Z -IV- 2008 -6 in conjunction with the... Chair Mahoney: Excuse me. Before we continue, does the applicant have any objections to...? Mr. Graham: No objections. Chair Mahoney: Okay, we'll continue. Mr. Abrams: Okay. Chair Mahoney: Thank you. Mr. Abrams: Alright, I'll start again. Move to approve Staffs amended report to Special Management Area Use Permit SMA(U)- 2008 -5, Use Permit U- 2008 -4, and Class IV Zoning Permit Z -IV- 2008 -6 in conjunction with the Status Report in the matter of the Charles Somers, as Trustee of the Charles Somers Living Trust dated November 12, 2002, and West Sunset Phase 1 LLC. Mr. Keawe: Second. Chair Mahoney: Okay. It's been moved and seconded. Any discussion? Hearing none. All in favor? (Unanimous voice vote) Motion carried 5:0. Mr. Graham: Thank you very much. Chair Mahoney: Thank you. GENERAL BUSINESS MATTERS Clerk of the Commission's Recommendation to Refer an Appeal of the Planning Director's Decision Related to the Forfeiture of Non - Conforming Use Certificate TVNCU #5165, Jonathan J. Chun, Esq., representing Lloyd R. Fischer and Shirley Fischer, Tax Map Key (4) 13 13001088, Kekaha, Kauai, filed on 4/8/16, to a Hearings Officer (Contested Case No. CC -2016- 10)• Request for Delegation of Authority to the Clerk of the Commission to Procure and Appoint a Hearings Officer on Behalf of the Commission for the Instant Appeal. Clerk of the Commission's Recommendation to Refer an Appeal of the Planning Director's Decision Related to the Forfeiture of Non - Conforming Use Certification TVNCU #5003, Jonathan J. Chun, Esq., representing Lloyd R. Fischer and Shirley Fischer, Tax Map Key (4) 13001088, Kekaha, Kauai, filed on 4/8/16, to a Hearings Officer (Contested Case No. CC- 2016 -9); Request for Delegation of Authority to the Clerk of the Commission to Procure and Appoint a Hearings Officer on Behalf of the Commission for the Instant Appeal. Mr. DahiljW. Thank you, Mr. Chair. We are now on General Business Items (sic). This is Item 1.1., Clerk of the Commission's recommendation to refer an appeal of the Planning Director's decision related to the forfeiture of Non - Confonning Use Certificate TVNCU No. 5165, Jonathan J. Chun, Esq., representing Lloyd R. Fischer and Shirley Fischer, Tax Map Key (4) 13001088 in Kekaha, Kauai, filed on 04,10816 to a hearings officer (Contested Case No. CC- 2016-10). There's a request for delegation of authority to the Clerk of the Commission to procure and appoint a hearings officer on behalf of the Planning Commission for the instant appeal. And there's a memorandum from myself, as the Clerk, recommending a referral to the hearings officer, Mr. Chair. Chair Mahoney: Okay. Could you state your name for the record, please? Jonathan Chun: Good morning. Jonathan Chun on behalf of the petitioner on this one. Also, there's ... I guess ... did we call for both of them? For the Fischer's? They are both the same applicant. Mr. Dahilig: This is Item I.2., Clerk of the Commission's recommendation to refer an appeal of the Planning Director's decision related to the forfeiture of Non- Confonning Use Certificate TVNCU No. 5003, Jonathan J., Esq., representing Lloyd R. Fischer and Shirley Fischer, Tax Map Key (4) 13001088 at Kekaha, Kauai, filed on 04 0816 to a hearings officer (Contested Case No. CC- 2016 -9); request for delegation of authority for the Clerk of the Commission to procure and appoint a hearings officer on behalf of the Commission for the instant appeal. Mr. Chun: Again, for the record, Jonathan Chun on behalf of the Fischer's on this matter also. For both matters, the Fischer's have no objection to the referral of the matter to a hearings officer. Chair Mahoney: Thank you. Okay, the Chair will entertain a motion. Mr. Abrams: Mr. Chair, I move to approve the delegation of authority to the Clerk of the Commission to procure and appoint a hearings officer on behalf of the Commission for the appeals for Contested Case Nos. CC- 2016 -10 and CC- 2016 -9 for TVNCU No. 5165 and TVNCU No. 5003, Lloyd Fischer and Shirley Fischer. Chair Mahoney: There's a motion on the floor. Is there a second? 14 Mr. Katayama: Second. Chair Mahoney: It's been moved and seconded. Any discussion? Hearing none. All in favor? (Unanimous voice vote) Opposed? (None) The motion carries 5:0. Mr. Chun: Thank you, Mr. Chair and members of the Commission. Chair Mahoney: Thank you. Request for Reconsideration of withdrawal from the contested hearing (4/18/16) from Susan Gailey and Kim Richard regarding Contested Case CC- 2015 -16, Class IV Zoning Permit Z -IV- 2015 -28, Use Permit U- 20 -15 -27 and Special Permit SP- 2015 -8, Tax Map Key (4) 5 -2- 022:014, CRP Unit 2. Mr. Dahilig: Mr. Chair, we are now on Item I.3. This is a request for reconsideration of withdrawal from the contested case hearing dated 04/18/16 from Susan Gailey and Kim Richard regarding Contested Case No. CC- 2015 -16, Class IV Zoning Permit Z -IV- 2015 -28, Use Permit U- 2015 -27, and Special Permit SP- 2015 -8 at Tax Map Key (4) 5 -2 -022 Parcel 14 and CPR Unit 2. I believe that this was the communication that was received by the Department and distributed to the Commissioners, and I will suggest, Mr. Chair, that the County Attorney advise the Commission concerning the procedure for reconsideration on these types of communications. Chair Mahoney: Okay. Ms. HiQuchi Sayegusa: Okay, so in your packets, as you know, the Department received a communication from Ms. Susan Gailey and Ms. Kim Richard. The date was cut off, but that correspondence was transmitted to the Planning Commission for your consideration. For requests for reconsideration, typically the purpose for such a motion is to correct the hasty, ill - advised, or erroneous action, or to take into account added information or a changed situation that has developed since the taking of a vote. Other procedural requirements is only somebody who voted on the prevailing side of the motion, the previous motion that is being requested for reconsideration, can make that motion, and we do need a motion and a second for that to be put on the table on whether reconsideration should be taken up on the ... in this case, it would be the withdrawal of the contested case hearing. Again, the timing ... there are timing restrictions under our rules. It says, under 1 -2 -19, the Commission rules, that reconsideration has to be done on the same or very next meeting, so that's why it was agendaed for this meeting. Also, based on at least one (1) Commissioner's interest in making that motion. Chair Mahoney: Is there any Commissioner so inclined? Mr. Abrams: I'd like to hear more from the applicant, but you know, I mean, I understand that sometimes it's complicated for applicants, and that while we had to appeal, then not appeal, and then now appeal, you know, I think, probably, it's a good idea for us to probably let her have her chance to go ahead and do that because I believe that she did not understand what the W ramifications were. And then when she finally did, she decided that she did want to withdraw her withdrawal as it is, so double withdrawal of the contested case hearing. So I wouldn't mind hearing more from that, to hear it directly from her, outside of the letter, if she is here. Susan? Or Kim? Chair Mahoney: So would that need to be in a motion fonn or...? Mr. Abrams: Yeah, I can go ahead and make the motion. Ms. Higuchi Sayegusa: Yeah, to put it on the table. Mr. Abrams: I'll move to reconsider the withdrawal from the contested case hearing on 04!18/16 from Susan Gailey and Kim Richard regarding Contested Case No. CC- 2015 -16, which deals with Class IV Zoning Pen-nit Z -IV- 2015 -28, Use Permit U- 2015 -27, and Special Permit SP- 2015 -8, Tax Map Key (4) 5 -2- 022.014, CPR Unit 2; Susan Gailey and Kim Richard. Chair Mahoney: Do we have a second'? A motion has been introduced. It would need a second. Ms. Higuchi Sayegusa: I would advise that if we're ... before the matter is discussed and maybe before we go down that path, we should probably have a motion and a second prior to hearing the applicant. Chair Mahoney: The chair will ask if... There's a motion on the floor. Does any member of the Commission wish to second? Ms. Higuchi Sayegusa: The motion fails. Chair Mahoney: So the motion will fail, and then it won't be taken for reconsideration. Ms. Higuchi Sayegusa: Yes. Chair Mahoney: That's it. Mr. Dahilig: Okay. COMMUNICATION (For Action) Mr. Dahilig: Thank you, Mr. Chair. We are now on Item J, Communication. We have no communication today. COMMITTEE REPORTS Subdivision [[I Mr. Dahilig: Item K.1. This is Subdivision. Subdivision action matters have been ... there was a Subdivision Committee meeting this morning, and the report has been distributed. And it would be appropriate for the report to begin at this time. Chair Mahoney: Can we hear from the Chair, please? Mr. Abrams: Yes. The Subdivision Committee met this morning to approve three (3) items, and approved unanimously tentative subdivision approval for Application No. 5- 2016 -15, Ty and Ariana Owen, proposed 2 -lot subdivision. Also, approved Subdivision Application No. S -2016- 16, Koloa Village LLC, proposed 2 -lot subdivision. And the third one was Subdivision Application No. 5- 2016 -17, Cheryl Cowden - Schenck and Riley Family Revocable Trust, proposed 2 -lot boundary adjustment in Moloa`a. Chair Mahoney: Okay, thank you. Mr. Abrams: I make a motion to approve. Chair Mahoney: We need a second. Mr. Keawe: Second. Chair Mahoney: It's been moved and seconded. Any discussion? Hearing none. All in favor? (Unanimous voice vote) Opposed? (None) Motion carried 5:0. UNFINISHED BUSINESS (For Action) (Continued) Planning Director Michael A. Dahilig's Petition to Modify or Revoke Applicant Coco Palms Hui, LLC's Permits and Issue and Order to Show Cause and Set Hearing; Memorandum in Support of Petition; Declaration of Michael A. Dahilig; Notice of Meeting; Certificate of Service for Class IV Zoning Permit Z -IV- 2015 -8, Project Development Use Permit PDU- 2015 -7, Variance Permit V- 2015 -1 and Special Management Area Use Permit SMA(U)- 2015 -6 = Coco Palms Hui, LLC. Mr. Dahilig: Thank you, Mr. Chair. We are now on Item L, L.1. This is Planning Director Michael A. Dahilig's petition to modify or revoke Applicant Coco Palms Hui, LLC's permits and issue an Order to Show Cause and set hearing. This is relating to Class IV Zoning Permit Z- IV- 2015 -8, Project Development Use Permit PDU- 2015 -7, Variance Permit V- 2015 -1, and Special Management Area Use Permit SMA(U)- 2015 -6 for Coco Palms Hui. Just some background, Mr. Chair and Commissioners, the petition was granted by the Planning Commission on its 2!23 meeting in 2016; however, it was deferred to today to have the status report, as well as the opportunity to set a hearing, as well as there was a pending intervention motion filed by, I guess, PR II Coco Palms, LLC regarding this particular contested case hearing. At this meeting today, what we were supposed to be provided was a status on the progress of where the, I guess, the Coco Palms Hui has been in terms of meeting its conditions of approval; 17 specifically to some of the issues that they raised with respect to their closing and financing. What we have done at this point, Mr. Chair, is our department has conducted a site visit of the property the day after the deadline for demolition and we have ascertained that the buildings still remain and are not demolished; therefore, you know, to further verify our basis for petitioning a modification or revocation of the permits. I think, though, it would be helpful to have the applicant provide the status of where they are with all the moving parts with this before getting into the other two (2) items related to intervention and the hearing date. And there may be some options the Commission may want to consider with respect to timing of the remaining two (2) items after the presentation. So Mr. Chair, I think it would be appropriate to call the applicant up at this time. Chair Mahoney: Representative for the applicant, come forward, please. State your name for the record. Tyler Greene: Tyler Greene with Coco Palms Hui. Jon Pang: Jon Pang, Case Lombardi & Pettit, representing Coco Palms Hui. Chair Mahoney: Thank you. Mr. Pang: Thank you for hearing us today. At the last meeting, we were really excited that we had gotten commitment from a lender that was going to fund the acquisition, as well as the demolition of the project. But, as I kind of mentioned the last time, one of our challenges at that time was that the principal person involved with that lender had gone to the hospital in emergency that morning or the day before, but we were hopeful that he was going to be able to recover and help us close this deal. But unfortunately, unexpected things happened... Mr. Greene: Yeah, I can kind of speak to that. We essentially... we spent nine (9) months with this lender; underwriting the deal, getting new appraisals, submitting all of our tax returns, all with the understanding that our loan was approved. And in fact, about the middle of March we received an email from them saying that they will, in fact and for sure, close before the end of March. The gentleman who was responsible for handling this deal for that lender got congestive heart failure, then went into the hospital, that led to some liver problems, and then even after being out of the hospital, has been propped up on pain meds. So the long and the short of it is basically we had a complete lender blowout. So within the last four (4) weeks, we had to scramble around and find a new lender to come in; somebody that was willing to do business not only in Hawaii, but on the island of Kauai, and understood the hotel market here on Kauai. The good news of this is that we were successful in doing so. This lender just this morning has funded the demolition amount of the project. Although we've been given some very, very hard ternls from this lender, you know, Chad and I knew that our time was up, and just because our initial lender didn't make it across the finish line that we needed to be responsible and accountable and do everything we could to make sure that the Coco Palms train continues to move down the tracks. So in the spirit of that, we've been asked by this new lender to pledge all of our personal assets. I've got a pregnant wife at home that's 7 '/z months pregnant with twins, and Chad's got two (2) kids, and in the midst of having to In. get this loan, we essentially have to put up all of our personal assets. And that's not necessarily a customary thing to do in a loan of this size and this magnitude, but we did that because of the understanding that we wanted to do our very best to show you folks that we are serious about this deal, that we not only believe in Coco Palms, we believe in the County of Kauai and we believe in the community of Kauai. So we felt confident that if in doing so that if that is what it took to get the loan done and keep Coco Patens moving, that we would do that. I tell you this just so you can see our commitment to this project, you can see our commitment to the community and to the County of Kauai. Mr. Pang: So with respect to this new loan, I think you have, in front of you, letters; two (2) letters. One letter is from the Old Republic... Rochelle at Old Republic in Kapa`a, and in that letter she verifies that she has received ... it actually says that $3.5 million was sent, but she had not confirmed receipt. But subsequent to that, essentially the drive over from her office, she did confirm that she has received $3.5 million from the lender and she holds that in escrow. We have also ... that amount includes, obviously, the amount necessary to mobilize Pacific Concrete to start on the demolition and, in fact, includes enough to finish their contract. The other thing that we have done is all of the documents from the sale side and from the lending side have been deposited into escrow. What we are waiting for is this lender. What their way of funding is they have put together five (5) lenders. Well, actually there's more, but five (5) entities of lenders. They send their money to a sub - escrow in Utah and that escrow then forwards the money here, so they are trying to get that money into the escrow in Utah and it will come here. Once we get that money, the escrow will be able to immediately schedule the recordation of the closing documents. By State law, there's a 48 -hour rule; they cannot close, they have to verify good funds. And by the bureau procedures, there's like a lag, a day or two lag, depending on when you get the funds in. So we're looking at getting the funds in imminently, and once that happens, we could close in probably 48 hours; depending on what time. Now, once we close, the mobilization funds for Pacific Concrete will be immediately released to them automatically. It's already on the closing statements. The disbursement ... the instructions are to release it to them at which time, if you see their letter, once they receive them, they will begin the process. They will submit the required notice to the Department of Health that they need to give in order to start the demolition and once that happens, they are just going to go forward with the demolition. One of the things that did arise during this loan was that this lender is requiring that this demolition be bonded so there is assurance that if something does happen, the demolition will be completed. We are going to be getting it a payment and performance bond for the entire demolition. So I guess we would like to request that if it's possible for us to be able to provide you in a week or so, or anytime that you want, further status. We can come back every day, we can come back every two (2) days, and anytime that you need us we can do that. I am hopeful that the money will be in tomorrow, but we don't control that. But we are hoping it will come in at least by Friday at which time we are looking at a Wednesday recording because of the weekend, but hopefully that will be acceptable. 19 Chair Mahoney: Questions? Mr. Keawe: Jon, so obviously what you presented us now is just the sums that are available to do the demolition. And what you are waiting for is the balance of the funds to close the sale. Is that correct? Mr. Pang: Correct. Mr. Keawe: Have those five (5) lenders committed the funds to close the sale? Mr. Pang: Yes. Mr. Keawe: You know, we can go with this, obviously, but then what happens if they don't come through with it? Mr. Pang: Well, the... Mr. Keawe: Then, you know, escrow can't release the money. Mr. Pang: You are correct. You are correct. But generally, in my experience, once a lender partially funds, then the lender that ... the money that carne in came from the lead lender. It came from the lender that is gathering up the other lenders. So they committed enough to put their money at risk. Generally, lenders don't send their money until they know they are going to do the loan, and you know that, right? So the lead lender put in the $3.5 (million) and so for us, it is enough for us to submit our signed documents and to finalize to pledge Chad and Tyler's personal assets. So, you know, we are confident that generally if once a lender partially funds like that, it's just a matter of time to get it in, yeah. Chair Mahoney: Well, everything is a matter of time. But $3.5 million, I mean, for a project of this magnitude and this is all that you are able to finance, and it's still maybe this is going to happen, maybe that's going to happen, it might happen someday, or... Is there any clear, you know, I mean, with all the controversy and all the conditions that were put upon this, you know, is there like ... and the lenders by now, I mean, I'm sure you explained how important everything is to get all these ducks in a row, but it's ... well, there's $3.5 (million) and then there's a lot of if s; if this happens, if this happens, if this happens. You know, I was expecting more of a concrete plan that would come forth. This isn't much different than when you were here the last time. You know, somebody was sick and nobody else can handle a transaction and alright, so now it's we got this much and we're hoping for more. Well... Mr. Pang: I think it's ... as far as closings are concerned, I think we are at the furthest we can get to get to ... I think we are much further than the last time we were here. The last time we were here we did not have documents, we did not have any funds in. And I think we're ... I feel we're on a precipice of getting this transaction closed. It's just a matter of them getting their funds transferred because what generally, I mean, lenders, they liquidate their funds; they need to liquidate from what they have and they move it over and that sort of thing. And when you have multiple lenders, it takes some time to get them there. We've been working over the weekend, 20 every night, and what have you, to get it done. In fact, this morning, the final documents came in; for the loan documents. And we revealed them, we finalized them, and we got them to escrow by 9 o'clock this morning here on Kauai. So you know, I do think that we are very close, I mean, really close to getting this done. Mr. Greene: I just wanted to point out that, you know, we understand the time delays, but we've essentially done ... you know, with this last lender, we had nine (9) months. With this new lender, we've compressed that to four (4) weeks. And so to give you an idea of all the things that needed to happen in that four (4) weeks, it's a pretty long list. That's why, again, Chad and I were willing to pledge our assets. The fact that there is $3.5 million in escrow shows that they are committed. The fact that they've engaged in attorneys to put together loan docs shows that they are committed. The fact that they've, you know, called in their funds for the remaining balance of the loan and committed to the loan amount to close it and to move Coco Palms forward means they are committed. Lenders don't submit any funds unless they are fully committed to a loan. So the distinction is that unfortunately, there is not a Hawaii lender right now today that could operate within those timeframes. We had to reach out and reach far and wide and look all over the Country to find a lender that would come in in the timeframe that was given and pressed upon them to fund this loan, and so we are fortunate to find this lender that would come in, and so we are extremely encouraged. Again, we wouldn't have gone as deep as we had and risked our kids' future and risked our future if we didn't believe that they wouldn't fund. So we are actually very encouraged and confident that this will happen. Chair Mahoney: Okay. Mr. Abrams: Question. Chair Mahoney: Commissioner Abrams. Mr. Abrams: I'm going back to this Omega Capital Street. I need to get clear on this. This was the February 22nd letter when they were very close to the approval, and then Mr. Tomasso basically had the medical emergency, and Mr. Agostini basically, the Senior Vice President, was acting on his behalf, and then all of a sudden when this, I guess, loan rep at that point who couldn't work. You mean to tell me that they ... did they reject the loan? Or did they just tell you oh, gee, we can't work on this anymore? I don't understand. Usually there's something more than just one (1) person, you know, as the linchpin to a whole giant project, yeah? Mr. Greene: Correct, correct, and good question. They are what's known as a syndicated lender, and so they ... and this new lender operates in somewhat the same fashion, but they basically pool and syndicate funds to go into one (1) loan. So Antonio was the gentleman that went to the hospital, and Antonio had the relationship with the syndicated lenders, and so although Bob Agostini was part of that, he was more on the underwriting side and internally trying to push it forward. But it was the relationships that Antonio had with the syndication lenders that were providing the meat of the funds, and so when Antonio got sick, those relationships then kind of fell by the wayside and Bob wasn't able to pick up the ball that was dropped from Antonio in the time needed. So we knew that we had to adjust and you know, we had timelines to hit, and so we had to look in a different direction. 21 Mr. Abrams: Okay. So, relative to that, learning that lesson, I don't see the name of the new lender, okay, who sounds like a syndicated lender because you are bringing in more capital. What makes you think that you are anymore convinced that this lender, okay, outside of the fact that this lender knows he's going to get his money back, okay, if, in fact, this all falls in a heap because he has your personal guarantees and your collateral of your property and everything else as a way to get paid. And that's probably why he's doing it right now because ... I don't know; that's what I'm speculating on and that's what you needed to have done. But I don't know who the lender is, so I'm still skeptical that this is something that ... I'd like to see all of the, you know, it has been sent, has it been received, who's it from. I get that it needs to be disbursed out to Pacific Concrete for demolition, and I know you probably got more work and you've got other funds that are ... they're trying to aggregate, but at this point right now, I don't know whether I'm anymore convinced now than I was then. I appreciate the effort, but so far, not so good. Mr. Pang: Actually, they sent us, this morning, the list of the lenders, and I can tell you who they are. They are WCFM, Inc.; Coco Palms Lenders Partnership; Blue Glacier Fund, L.P.; Crestline AK Opportunistic Fund, which is kind of interesting; and PGC Credit Partners, LLC. The last one is the lead lender; that's Private Capital out of Sandy, Utah, I believe. As you may notice, these names kind of relate to Coco Palms and so one of the things that they ... their procedures is they create an entity, so they create an entity and they get investors in there. Mr. Abrams: Yes. Mr. Pang: So part of why it's been ... the steps that have to be taken takes time is that they create these entities, then they then fund those entities, so that is the reason. But we do have this list of lenders, but just for your information, the primary lender is Private Capital out of Sandy, Utah. Mr. Abrams: Okay. Mr. Pang: They've closed other deals in Hawaii, so they are a little bit more familiar, though we did need to educate them a little bit about it, but you know, they were pretty smart and they adapted pretty well. Mr. Greene: And sorry, that's Alpine, Utah. Mr. Abrams: Alpine? Mr. Pang: Oh, Alpine, Utah. Sorry. Mr. Abrams: So you're hoping that ... I'm not sure what the conditions are relative to the funds that were sent to escrow. What I ... I mean, I can see this is pretty hasty. We don't even have it on Old Republic's letterhead, this letter, which, I mean, from a formal ... and that's because it all happened today. Mr. Pang: It happened this morning at 9:30 this morning. Mr. Abrams: This morning. Okay. Alright, alright. 22 Mr. Pang: So it's been ... its real time. This is like a real time loan. Mr. Abrams: Yes. Mr. Pang: Yeah. Mr. Abrams: Don't get me wrong. I still feel like, with the extensions that we did, that I'd like to see this done, okay? I'm just losing, you know, faith, shall we say, in that process, and I realize it's very difficult. So I'll end my stuff here and then deliberate relative to whether or not we are going to see whether we want to move into revocation or not, yeah? Chair Mahoney: Alright. Any other Commissioners have any questions comments for the applicant? Mr. Pang: And I might add, we will come back tomorrow, every day, and give you an update if that would make you more comfortable. Mr. Abrams: It may be. Yeah, I mean, I guess it just is a matter of how long and whether or not in the context of an Order to Show Cause, whether or not all of this can ... when we get to that point because at this point right now, we have that and that seems to be the momentum to try and get this resolved as soon as possible. And then at that point, it ... we've been tripping up as we go along, and here we are again; close, we hope. And at that point, the only thing we have is to have some way to make it accountable so we can move this along. We, as a Commission, decided to wait until this period of time because we were confident, I guess at this point, in February that we would go ahead and move it ahead. So now we are at that point and you're telling us that we're even closer. How's the health of the lenders over there? Would you know? Do you check them (inaudible)? Mr. Pang: They're pretty good. They sounded good yesterday. Mr. Abrams: Okay, they're not going to kick the bucket right away. Okay. Mr. Pang: But I will tell you, almost every call, we do bring up the fact that the Commission has requirements. We do tell them that it is important. This is why their attorney is working overnight to get the final documents done to us, so we could submit the final ones this morning. I think they understand the urgency; they do. Mr. Abrams: So the conditions with this $3.5 million was what, now, in order to get this released? You've got all the closing documents ready. What was the condition, now, that they're waiting for? Mr. Pang: Oh, to close; to fund. Just to get... Mr. Abrams: So they're ready to close? They don't have any more conditions. Come Friday they're ready to roll? 23 Mr. Pang: As soon as the money comes in, because... Mr. Abrams: The money's in, right? Mr. Pang: Right. Mr. Abrams: Just has been sent, and you know you got it today. Mr. Pang: Yeah, $3.5 (million) is in. Mr. Abrams: Okay. Mr. Pang: Right. The other one ... the rest of it is being aggregated in a sub - escrow in Utah. Mr. Abrams: Okay. Mr. Pang: And once that comes in. So, I mean, we were talking to them about getting it in today, tomorrow. It just ... but we don't want to make promises to you on a specific date because of ..it's a third -party. Mr. Abrams: Yeah, because of the Antonio story. Mr. Pang: Right. But we don't think that's a hang -up. I think... Mr. Abrams: Yeah, okay, I get that. Alright. Mr. Greene: The intent behind them wiring the $3.5 (million) was to show the Commission that they are committed to the loan, and so ... with the understanding that they are not going to wire a dollar if they are not committed to the loan. So they knew that demo was the most urgent and pressing matter, and so they said well, we can wire, right now, the demo money to show that the demo will happen with the understanding that the rest of the money is a day or two behind. And that's why Jon showed you the different LLC's here. There is a time delay when you have to set up LLC's and get entities in order and so on and so forth. Mr. Abrams: Okay. Chair Mahoney: How much is the rest of the money? Mr. Pang: 19? 18? Mr. Greene: Yeah, if you were to look at our net loan amount, we'll come in at a net amount of about $18.5 (million). Chair Mahoney: Okay, so the demo money and the rest ... and then you have to have the purchase money, and that's what the... Could you explain that a little? 24 Mr. Pang: It also includes money to do the construction plans. So we need to satisfy your requirement to get the construction plans approved, so it also includes that. Mr. Keawe: I got one (1) more question. So we're back to where we were the last time you were here, right? We get the money to close; you have the demo money and you have the money to get them started, and that will close the sale. The property will transfer, ownership will transfer, and then now you have to come up with $130 million? To basically complete the construction of the project? I mean, roughly. Mr. Pang: I'm not sure how many... Mr. Greene: So the total project cost is give or take $130 (million). Believe it or not, that's actually an easier venture because at that point, we'll have building permits. Most lenders do not want to come into a project until they know that the full support of the County is behind that project. The way to show full support is to actually have building permits in hand. So as we work through the demolition process, we, then, in the proceeds from this loan will have enough left over to, as Jon said, process the building permits, so that becomes a much easier venture. This is what's called a bridge loan, and that's typically a much harder loan to get. But we could not go and get the entire capital stack for the entire $130 million until we could show that building permits were in process. Mr. Pang: And the reason that the lenders are comfortable is because you have ... they can evaluate things. You'll have owned the land, the ground is prepped, and you have building plans and permits that they can actually get appraised. An appraiser can say this is the value of it if this is built, this is the value. We will need construction contracts, so they'll know how much it's going to cost to build. We will have ... we have the operator. The operator will provide their budgets. They will provide how they are going to get repaid. Because every lender wants to know ... they are going to lend this, it's going to build, how are they going to get repaid? So once this happens and we get the building permits and be able to get the construction contracts, they are going to be able to evaluate, more definitely, what the value of the project is and their ability to get repaid. That is, you know, a bigger amount and there's moving parts, but it's more concrete information for the lenders, so they are more comfortable. Chair Mahoney: Excuse me. Is there any like preliminary negotiations or feelers out there? In the event that everything that you say today is happening, and now it comes time for the bigger portion, the construction costs, are there any lenders that you have any contact with? Or...? Mr. Greene: Yes. We're currently in discussions with three (3) different, what we would call, institutional -type lenders. Institutional -type lenders don't get involved in this smaller loan amount. They want to get involved into these larger projects. So we've been prepping for that and planning for that, but they've been kind of sitting back on the sidelines waiting for us to close on the property. Chair Mahoney: Thank you. Commissioner Katayama, do you have a question? 25 Mr. Katavama: Based on your best guess from a timeline, and apparently you have three (3) gates that you need to go through. One, you need to get the bridge loan, you need to close the acquisition of the property, and then you need to get permanent construction financing for the project. Based on what you know at 10:30 this morning, what kind of timing are you looking at? Mr. Greene: To open the property? Mr. Katavama: No. To get to the point where you can secure construction financing. So one, you need to get the bridge financing in place, you need to purchase the fee interest in the property, and lastly, you need to get the hundred or so million dollars for the actual construction. So what is your estimated timing on all of this? Mr. Greene: The demolition will take six (6) months. Once the demolition is complete, we intend to have building permits ready to go, which means we need to have a construction loan already in place, so we want to roll right into the construction side of the project. So we're going to start those efforts in the next month to two (2) months because typically, it's a 3- to 4 -month process to finalize a loan with a lender of this size. That all being said, we anticipate closing on a construction loan prior to the end of the year. Mr. Katavama: So the acquisition of the property, you think, will ... gaining title to the property will be pretty quick? Mr. Greene: Yeah, that's (inaudible). Mr. Pang: That'll be ... as soon as we get the money, we're getting title. Mr. Katavama: So in two (2) weeks? Mr. Greene: No, that's... Mr. Pang: No, next week. Mr. Greene: Yeah. Mr. Pang: At least. Mr. Katavama: Next week? Mr. Pang: I was hoping for Friday, but... Mr. Katavama: This Friday? Mr. Pang: Yes, but I'm not going to promise that because of the 48 -hour rule under the law and the bureau. But I, you know, I'm ... I think next week is to close. And then once that happens, concurrently with the demo, the construction plans will be starting so that they can get the permits for it, so all of that will happen concurrently. 26 Mr. Katayama: With this indication, it'll allow you to complete the acquisition and the construction plans? Mr. Greene: Correct. This will be everything we need to do to get to building permits, and so demolition, acquisition, and then the soft costs for architectural drawings. We delineate funding and closing differently because of that time delay, so we have been told this morning from the lender that the rest of the funds, the funding portion of this loan, will happen either today or Thursday. But again, and as Mr. Pang says, you know, we're relaying information to you as we get it, and then with the 48 -hour time delay, we see a closing imminent first part of next week. Mr. Katayama: Good. Thank you. Chair Mahoney: Commissioner Ho. Mr. Ho: Mr. Pang, this $3.5 million, what does that buy you? The demolition? The bond that needs to guarantee the demolition? Mr. Pang: Yes, all of it. Yes. Mr. Ho: And the Pacific Concrete contract? Mr. Pang: Yes, yes. So that's enough. How we have it is the closing statements already have a disbursement of $341,700, which is 100 o of the Pacific Concrete contract; that is what they need to mobilize and to start. Once that happens, we will... once... so in other words, once the money comes in and we close, it's an automatic disbursement. We're not ... in fact, we don't control that either because the lender wants us to do it, so the lender will require that money is disbursed to Pacific Concrete. It's not just us. Because that's what they're funding and they want that to be done. So once that happens, we'll have that, and the loan requires that their $3.5 (million) be held in a construction reserve. We don't get it. We don't touch it. The lender will control it. So when Pacific Concrete ... as they do their work and as they submit invoices for their progress payments, we submit that to the lender and the lender pays them. We don't even get involved. So the money—once it's there, it's there. Yeah, the lender is not going to let us touch it. Yeah. Mr. Ho: Mr. Pang, one (1) more. There were certain conditions attached to the permit. Is there money for that to fulfill those conditions? Mr. Pang: I think some of those... since the last meeting was done, I think the solid waste and the recycling plan... Mr. Greene: Yeah, so those there's (inaudible). Mr. Pang: Right. So those were submitted, right? Right. So some of those conditions (inaudible) we already did since the last meeting. I think two (2) of them, right? And then the last one that we understand is the building permits that is coming up imminently, and that's why we got money for the construction plans is to get the building permits. 27 Mr. Keawe: One (1) last question. The design phase. Obviously part of this aggregate includes money for design and plans and (inaudible). How long ... and have you already decided who's going to do it? I mean, there had been a lot of preliminary drawings and things that have been presented to the community. Now you've got to get down to brass tacks and actually do the construction drawings and everything else. How long will that process take? Mr. Pang: I think currently, WATG ... I guess people know them as Wimberly ... who is internationally well -known for their designs is going to be the architect for this project. I've seen them and they've been in discussions with theirs already. But that will start immediately. They can be engaged immediately because we will have the money for it. Mr. Keawe: So that's already been done as far as detennining who will actually do the design? Mr. Pang: Right. That's who they are looking at right now, right? Yeah. Mr. Keawe: Yeah. And there are adequate funds to ... for their contract? Mr. Pang: Yes. Sothis lender ... see, this lender wants us to get to the point of being able to get a construction loan because that's how they get paid off, so they are funding for what a construction lender is going to want to see and requiring us to do it. So that... Mr. Keawe: At what point does the perfonnance bond get done for the demolition? Mr. Pang: Right now. Yeah, we already did an amendment to their contract. It's signed. And they actually go get it, so they'll get it... Mr. Keawe: "They" meaning who? Mr. Pang: Pacific Concrete. And then we're funding the fee. Mr. Keawe: You're funding the fee, the... Mr. Pang: The 1 10. Mr. Keawe: The fee for the premium, yeah? Mr. Pang: Yes. Chair Mahoney: Any other questions? Mr. Dahilig: I guess, Commissioners, we have been in contact with Mr. Pang and his office pretty regularly over the past couple weeks, and you know, I think it does give some cause for evaluation with respect to the information that they are giving. I will say that I, again, I'm not completely comfortable in recommending to the Commission that we do not proceed with a contested case hearing given that Order to Show Case that was at my request, but I will say that, you know, given the context of what is going on and what they are saying on the record, 28 especially publicly, which, you know, in many cases you do not see public discussion about the inner workings of financing when it comes to these types of developments that there is, you know, if there is time for this lead to mature, it may be in the County's best interest to not necessarily trigger the contested case hearing at this point, and let these items that they have put on the table mature. And I think it would probably be our suggestion to the Commission that in as much as we would like to move forward with the contested case hearing, it's probably prudent at this point still not to do a firm set, but rather continue with ... and maybe even defer the setting of the actual contested case hearing upon receiving confirmation of these items that they have placed forth in front of the Commission. I don't think that what is being asked, in terms of a week or two (2) weeks in the grand scheme of things is too much to ask, but I think it does come with an increased warning to the applicant that the Commission, and I believe the Department as well, is serious about ensuring that what obligations they are putting forth are going to be met and kept. I have reminded Mr. Pang on the phone many times that the default still needs to be cured concerning the non - compliance with the condition that was cited, and so there will have to be some degree of process that has to still move forward with respect to amending the permits and ensuring that whatever additional requirements that may give the Commission some degree of assurance that the conditions we met may need to be altered in such a manner. But I think it is not unreasonable to allow the ... given the information that they have proffered today, allow the opportunity for those items to be realized, and if true, then I think it does ... it's not too much to ask for a week or a couple weeks standpoint. From a timing standpoint, you know, I think it is up to the Commission if you prefer to move down that path, or move forward with setting a hearing date. If we are going to move forward with setting a hearing date, my suggestion is that it is probably appropriate that we do handle the intervention at that time. But if you are seeking ... if you'd like to get more information before setting the hearing date, I would suggest not handling the intervention today as well, and leave those items for being handled should a day for the hearing be set because I think it's important to ensure that if the intervenor is admitted as a party, they should have input in how and when that hearing is set as well. So I think it's ... from a timing standpoint, if the Commission would like something sooner than later, we are hearing, you know, some degree of uncertainty in when the closing date will occur, but if the Commission would like to hear something, you know, we can schedule a Special Meeting in the two -week period; that is an option. We can recess this meeting and schedule it as soon as Friday as an option as well. The next Planning Commission meeting is on May 10'h. I personally will not be attending that meeting, so the Deputy Director will be handling that meeting, but that is the next regular scheduled meeting; that is two (2) weeks out from today. So I think, you know, it really is a ... there's many options for the Commission to entertain at this point, but those are just my thoughts and my suggestions concerning how we proceed at this point, and would leave it, Mr. Chair, up to the Body as to how they wish to proceed. Chair Mahoney: Is there input from the Commissioners? Mr. Ho: Mike, what happens to the status of the permit now? 29 Mr. Dahilig: Right now everything is ... it's in a ... I would say right now everything is in a cryogenic freeze where, you know, it's up to the Commission when to start the process of unfreezing it. Without a set hearing date, the Order to Show Cause is essentially inactive up until that point that a hearing date is set and therefore, the filing deadlines, motions, all those things will flow naturally once that date is set. So right now, there is no set date for that, but an Order to Show Cause is ordered because the Commission has found, in its February meeting, that there was enough evidence to show that there was a condition that was not complied with. So it's really a timing issue as to the Commission's comfort level as to how you would like to see this matter proceed, but once we do set a hearing date, that sets in motion a number of clocks concerning how and what can happen before that. Chair Mahoney: Okay. So some options, it could be on ... for discussion. Mr. Abrams: Yeah, I got a couple questions, Mike. Mr. Dahilig. Okay. Mr. Abrams: And maybe Mr. Pang can help. You had asked for specific conditions to be amended that dealt with timefraines, which at that point would have been included in the... should we choose to modify the permit or revoke it, that's one that would be happening. Mr. Dahilig: Yes. Mr. Abrams: So that will have to happen sometime down the road simply because they are not in compliance with it now if we decide to move with that. Mr. Dahilig. Yes. Mr. Abrams: Is there going to be any jeopardy from the other departments granting the demolition permit to theirs with this not being in compliance? Or do they ... is that your call? How does that work? Mr. Dahilix This was a condition that our department specifically had requested, so it was not a... Mr. Abrams: Okay, so that was just a (inaudible). Mr. Dahilig: Yeah, it was not at the request of any other agency. Mr. Abrams: Okay. Well, let me see, the other, I guess, the earliest outset... you're saying that if we just simply suspend or recess this particular process to come back to hear, the soonest you're hoping you would have notice that you're queued up and just waiting for the 48 hours... Friday? Is that what you're saying? Mr. Pang: That is ... I would... kill Mr. Abrams: Your wildest dream? Or practical? Mr. Pang: Well, put it this way, I'm ... it's not my money. I don't control it. But I'd be comfortable enough to sit here and face you again on Friday because they, you know, going to the lender, we were trying to get it tomorrow or Thursday, so as far as ... we wouldn't be closed, but... Mr. Abrams: Yeah. You wouldn't be closed, but you'd just ... the only thing that would hold it up is the 48- hour... Mr. Pang: Right, right. And it's tougher to ... whenever you get the money on Friday, it's just longer. Mr. Ho: Excuse me. What would we require at that next meeting if we were to hold one? That we would have definite proof that he has the money, he has the construction agreements in order? Are you going to bring something, if we do have another meeting, like that? Mr. Pang: Well, what we can do is ... first of all, the person that... once the money comes in, the person that is in control of it is escrow. Escrow is contractually obligated to do as the parties instruct. So I think she will be willing to confirm that she has all the funds and she has been instructed to close. We can also provide evidence of the wire that the wires have ... I think they can do that ... wire confirmations. I don't know exactly how they look, but we can ask her to attach that to whatever she confirms. And then she was saying she's holding it in escrow, but I think we can provide evidence that wires are in. Mr. Abrams: Okay. So Mr. Chair, then, so we either do that and wait 'til Friday to see that it's all queued up, or we defer this 'til the next meeting, which at that point it should have happened. But you're not here. Chair Mahoney: Why don't we hear from the other Commissioners? If they have any ideas or preferences or (inaudible). Mr. Keawe: Well, I think it's just ... the option at this point is what Commissioner Abrams was saying was we need verification that the funds are in, in escrow, number one. Number two that we're waiting for the 48 -hour period to expire. And because if they're going to basically put up the bond for the demolition that covers the concern about, you know, that whole issue of demolition. That was one of our major concerns. And then, you know, that's one way of doing it; that would be Friday or Monday. The other would be to defer it 'til the 10th, which is the next regular meeting. I don't know what we would gain by, you know, doing it on Friday or on the 10th. I mean, it's imminent. It's always been imminent, so... Mr. Abrams: Well, we would certainly have better insight when we went into the 10th after ... or we wouldn't have to worry. I mean, well, it's still going to be on schedule, I guess, for the 10th simply because we have to modify the permits. Mr. Dahilig: Right. 31 Mr. Abrams: If, in fact, it closes. Mr. Dahilig: I guess, as I mentioned to Mr. Pang on the phone, I still... because of the default ... may not consent, on behalf of the Department, to a non - adversarial process with respect to modification of the permits. I think it really ... it lies in the details with respect to how and what progresses. I think, you know, for me, like anything it is a fluid process and I would ... I may request the Commission, on behalf of the Department, maintain the adversarial process as a means of trying to create the appropriate record and modification unlike when you saw this morning, when you saw the Somers situation, which was turned into a non - adversarial process. I would like to reserve that right at this point because I think it does require more discussion than I think can be matured by the time the May 10`h meeting does roll around because I think there are, at least in my mind, additional assurances that we're going to need to weave into the current conditions to try to ensure that certain things that the County's insisting on being completed be completed. Mr. Pang: And just ... I did have those conversations with Director Dahilig, and I think that's very fair for him, and I do think, you know, we'd be happy to be able to provide him and his department with assurances that the demolition is progressing, you know, that kind of thing, so... Chair Mahoney: Okay, so just kind of... Mr. Dahilig: I do want to say, also, that we do ... you know, in anticipation of this discussion, we do have venues available for Friday, as well as Monday, should the Commission want to do either a recess or Special Meeting during those periods. And if not, you know, we do have the regular 10 "', so the logistics are there should the Commission all wish to hold an interim meeting in the 2 -week period. Mr. Pang: May I suggest something? If it doesn't make a difference, in my experience, lenders do not like to fund on Friday because they don't get interest, so they find a way. So I think, if it's possible, Monday is pretty clear. I think that would be a lot more comfortable. Just to let you know. Mr. Abrams: Gee, and I was thinking the Friday. (Laughter in background) Chair Mahoney: They don't like Friday. They don't (inaudible). Mr. Pang: No, but ... and that's fine. Mr. Abrams: I mean, I get what you're saying. Mr. Pang: We'll push them for Friday. Chair Mahoney: How about Monday? Mr. Abrams: Well that's not committed. Is it? (Laughter in background) 32 Ms. Higuchi Sayegusa: And just kind of in the back of my mind here is, of course, Chapter 92 Sunshine, right? If it's a Friday, it'll be more of a continued meeting, which would not necessarily, under the current case law ... I think its Kanahele Case ... doesn't necessarily need that notice, formalized notice, but, you know, it's still the balance of allowing the public an opportunity to be able to come and weigh in on this matter, this agenda item. But that's kind of the overarching, as far as (Chapter) 92. Just to keep in mind allowing the public an opportunity to come and to listen. Mr. Abrams: So you are saying Friday we could barely? Or not? Ms. Higuchi Sayegusa: Could, I mean, could. We just got to make sure and you know, we are clear that that's when it's happening, and you know, it's just ... yeah. Mr. Katayama: Is Monday... Ms. Higuchi Sayegusa: If it's on Monday, I would suggest that we post notice. Mr. Katayama: I guess, Mr. Chair, from my perspective, you know, given the frailty of this project, what would be really helpful is for the applicant to get to the first gate before we decide on the process. From a timing perspective, I think I'm open to what the reasonable time period would be. But again, based on the Director's position on that, you know, I tend to agree that we need to resolve the future of this site. And we've been ... we've gone through sort of the continuation of Iniki statutes and that, I think, was a ... you know, if you ask for County support and community support for a project, extending the conditions from a 20+ year old event says something. So again, I'm open to what the window... probably next week, based on that, but I view that as critical. And if that doesn't materialize, I think the Department and the Commission has a decision point. Chair Mahoney: Okay. Commissioner Ho. Mr. Ho: Mr. Dahilig, would now be the time to ask for assurances from Prudential that this is all in the making? That it's in cement it's going to happen? Mr. Dahilig: There is a representative from Prudential that is here, but as they are not an admitted party to the proceedings and they're asking for separate recognition as an intervenor, we could proffer the question, but it may be difficult for them to answer given that they also have a contested case interest in this as well. They are still the fee owner of the property and they are, on the receiving end, going to be the party that receives items as part of the escrow that is currently open, so they are aware and contractually bound per the escrow agreements to receive certain items in exchange for the fee property that is there. So unless the story that Ms. Lim may bring up is different than what Mr. Pang and Mr. Greene is saying, but if they are in an agreement to have escrow open, you'd probably hear the same items again. Mr. Pang: Can I just ... on Friday actually, we went with the seller's counsel to escrow and deposited all the sales documents, the signed sales documents. So the sales documents are already in, and they went with us to ... we were there together. 33 Chair Mahoney: Okay, so can we kind of review our options? What's available to us and what direction we want to move? Mr. Dahilig: So again, Chair, the options are that the Commission can recess the meeting to Friday, defer the items to Monday with a new posted meeting, or wait 'til May I O'h, or the Commission can choose to set a contested case hearing date now, upon which my recommendation would be to handle the intervention first. So I think there's four (4) items, again, that would be the Friday recess, Monday repost, deferral to May 10`x', or set the contested case hearing now and handle the intervention now. Chair Mahoney: Okay. Maybe we'll go around starting with Commissioner Ho, and if you have anything or preference to a Friday or Monday. Ms. Higuchi Sayegusa: Etc. Mr. Ho_ My feeling would be to do it Friday. Mr. Abrams: That's the recess part, which doesn't ... or may not trigger, right? Okay, so the other one is a notice, right? Mr. Dahilig: It's pretty perfunctory anyway, I mean, we just have to just draft something. We have enough time to run it over to the Clerk's Office and get it over, so... Mr. Abrams: I can go Friday or Monday, but I don't think I would want to wait much further. Chair Mahoney: Commissioner Katayama. Mr. Katayama: The least desirable would be defer this to the 10`x' because the Director will not be here. Friday, based on testimony, I don't think we'll have much more concrete, literally, evidence. So I would ... my two (2) choices ... mine would be either to establish a Monday meeting date, or take action to start the process rolling and in the event there is funding available or, you know, some of the conditions are met, that we can always terminate that process. Chair Mahoney: Commissioner Keawe. Mr. Keawe: Yeah, I would think that, based on what Mr. Pang said, I'd probably go with the Monday date. Chair Mahoney: And I would go with Monday. I would support a Monday date. So now if we can narrow it down to... Mr. Abrams: Well, enough Mondays. So... Chair Mahoney: Enough consensus to move forward. Would somebody have to make a motion, so there would be a motion on the floor? 34 Mr. Abrams: And the motion would be... Mr. Dahilix My suggestion would be to defer these items to a Special Meeting on Monday. We'd probably want a time certain. Let me just double - check. It would be... Ms. Higuchi Sayegusa: Is this room available? Mr. Dahilig: No, it would be at the ... okay, it would be... If you want 2A/2B, it would be available at 1:00 p.m. If you want it anytime of the day, we have the Liquor Commission Room open. Or if not, we have Piikoi B available after noon. So... Mr. Abrams: Does this all have to be televised? Mr. Dahilig: It's Special Meeting, so... Ms. Higuchi Sayeg isa: Well, I think the television is kind of a service, but mainly it's to notify the public of when and the opportunity to come and testify should they want to. Mr. Dahilig: We do, also, have the Boards and Commissions Administrator as well, so if we do need to arrange that, then... Mr. Keawe: Monday at what time? Mr. Dahili . I think we are amenable to any time. We do have facilities open as early as 8 o'clock in the morning, so we could meet in the Liquor Commission Room. But if you do want this specific room, it's ... we can get it after 1:00 p.m. Mr. Abrams: After 1 o'clock? Mr. Dahilix After 1 o'clock. So it's up to the Commission. Chair Mahoney: Get something earlier? Mr. Abrams: Okay. Mr. Dahilig: So if you do want something earlier, then we would have to be... Mr. Abrams: We'd be in a different room? Mr. Dahilig: In the Liquor Commission Room. Chair Mahoney: Whatever... Mr. Ho: Keep it here, 1 o'clock. Chair Mahoney: What's the timeframe you got? Everybody available? Or...? 35 Mr. Dahilig: Sorry. Actually it's available until 1:00. My apologies. Chair Mahoney: This room is available? Mr. Dahilig: So this room is available in the morning. Mr. Abrams: Okay. Mr. Keawe: On Monday? Mr. Dahilig. On Monday. Mr. Abrams: So at 9 o'clock? Mr. Keawe: 9 o'clock? Same time? Mr. Dahilig: 9 o'clock. Chair Mahoney: 9 o'clock. Mr. Dahilig: Okay, so I guess, the suggested motion would be to defer this item to Monday at 9:00 a.m. in this room and require that a Special Meeting be posted for that deferral. Mr. Abrams: And that's May what? Mr. Ho: 2 "d Ms. Higuchi Sayegusa: May 2 "a Chair Mahoney: Okay, so the Chair will entertain a motion. Mr. Abrams: Mr. Chair, I move to defer this meeting to May 2 "d, 1:00 p.m., where we have... Mr. Dahilig: No, 9:00 (inaudible). Chair Mahoney: 9:00 a.m. Mr. Abrams: 9:00 a.m., excuse me, where we will have a Special Meeting. Ms. Higuchi Sayegusa: Sorry, defer this item. Mr. Abrams: This item, yes, this item to a Special Meeting at 9:00 a.m. on May 2nd in this room. Chair Mahoney: Okay. Do we have a...? Mr. Keawe: Second. 36 Chair Mahoney: It's been moved and seconded to defer this item to Monday, 9:00 a.m., in this room. Any discussion? Hearing none. All in favor say aye. (Unanimous voice vote) Opposed? (None) The motion carries 5:0. Mr. Dahilig: Thank you, Mr. Chair. We are now on... Mr. Pang: Thank you very much. Chair Mahoney: Thank you. Mr. Greene: Thank you. NEW BUSINESS Mr. Dahilix We are now on Item M, New Business. We have no action for today. ANNOUNCEMENTS Topics for Future Meetings The following scheduled Planning Commission meeting will be held at 9:00 a.m., or shortly thereafter at the Lihu`e Civic Center, Mo`ikeha Building, Meeting Room 2A -213, 4444 Rice Street, Lihu`e, Kauai, Hawaii 96766 on Tuesday, May 10, 2016. Mr. Dahilig: Item N. Topics for Future Meetings. I have circulated the batting order for the next few meetings going into May and June. I will ... I guess as part of the announcements, Mr. Chair, if I could maybe make... Chair Mahoney: (Gavel) The meeting's still in order, please. Mr. Dahilig: Mr. Chair, I guess, before I announce the final announcement, I just wanted to make, if possible, make a note concerning, I guess, Commissioner Kanoe Ahuna. You notice she still has not been seated yet, and that's because her son is in the Bay Area going through a surgery concerning a tumor at the base of his brain. I'm sure many of you have heard some of the public outreach concerning that, but I just wanted to bring that to light. Kaikea's surgery is scheduled for the 28th, so I just wanted to share and let everybody know that our thoughts and prayers are with the Ahuna family as they are probably going through this very scary and difficult time. With that, Mr. Chair, besides the Special Meeting on May 2nd at 9:00 a.m. in this room, the next scheduled meeting would be on Tuesday, May 10th, in this room. And that's all I have for announcements, Mr. Chair. Chair Mahoney: Okay, thank you. Any further business? Hearing none. We need a motion to adjourn. 37 Mr. Keawe: Move to adjourn. Mr. Abrams: Second. Chair Mahoney: Moved and seconded. All in favor? (Unanimous voice vote) Meeting adjourned. ADJOURNMENT Chair Mahoney adjourned the meeting at 11:16 a.m. Respectfully submitted by: arcie Agaran, Commission Support Clerk ( ) Approved as circulated (add date of mceting approval) ( ) Approved as amended. See minutes of meeting. 38