HomeMy WebLinkAboutpc 1-10-17 minKAUAI PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
January 10, 2017
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 LYhu`e Civic Center, Mo`ikeha Building, in meeting room
2A -2B. The following Commissioners were present:
Chair Sean Mahoney
Mr. Roy Ho
Mr. Kimo Keawe
Ms. Kanoe Ahuna
Absent and Excused:
Ms. Glenda Nogami Streufert
The following staff members were present: Planning Department —Michael Dahilig, Chance
Bukoski, Leslie Takasaki; Office of the County Attorney — Deputy County Attorney Jodi
Higuchi Sayegusa; Office of Boards and Commissions — Administrator Jay Furfaro, Commission
Support Clerk Lani Agoot
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 Drrector Michael Dahilig: Commissioner Ho?
Mr. Ho: Here.
Mr. Dahili¢: Commissioner Ahuna?
Ms. Ahuna: Here.
Mr. Dahilig: Commissioner Katayama?
Mr. Katayama: Here,
Mr. Dahilig: Commissioner Keawe?
Mr. Keawe: Here.
Mr. Dahilig: Commissioner Streufert?
Mr. Dahilig: Commissioner Apisa?
Mr. Dahilig: Chair Pro -tem Mahoney?
Mr. Mahonev: Here.
Mr. Dahilig: Chair Pro -tem we have five (5) members present.
SELECTION OF CHAIRPERSON AND VICE CHAIRPERSON
APPOINTMENT OF SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE CHAIRPERSON, VICE
CHAIRPERSON AND COMMITTEE MEMBERS
Chair Mahoney: Nominations are now in order for the position of Planning Commission Chair,
the nominations need not be seconded. Commissioner Ho?
Mr. Ho: I move to appoint Mr. Kimo Keawe Chair of the Planning Commission for the year
2017.
Chair Mahonev: Are there any further nominations?
Ms. Ahuna: I move to appoint... Vice Chair?
Chair Mahoney: This is for the Chair, the order of business right now. The Vice Chair will
come next. Are there any further nominations for Chair?
Mr. Katayama: I move that nominations be closed.
Mr. Keawe: Second.
Chair Mahoney:
Nominations are now closed. Kimo Keawe has
It has been moved and seconded, all those in favor say aye.
(Unanimous voice
vote)
Opposed?
(None) Motion carried 5:0.
been nominated to fill the posifion of Planning
Commission Chair. Are there any requests for a secret ballot vote? None, all those in favor of
Commissioner Kimo Keawe as Chair, please raise your right hand (Unanimous show of hands)
Motion carried 5:0.
Kimo Keawe is duly elected to serve as Planning Commission Chair, congratulations. As the
outgoing Chair I would just like to thank all the Commissioners and the department for all the
help, and the staff that has helped me during this and I wish Kimo the best, thank you.
Newly appointed Chair Kimo Keawe took his place as Chair of the meeting.
Chair Keawe: I would like to take this opportunity to thank Chair Mahoney for his leadership
and service this past year and hope that we can continue his fine example. We will do our best in
that effort, thank you. Nominations are now in order for the position of Planning Commission
Vice Chair, nominations need not be seconded. Are there any nominations for the position of
Vice Chair?
Mr. Katayama: Chair Keawe, I would like to nominate Roy Ho.
Chair Keawe: Roy Ho has been nominated, are there any other nominations fox the position of
Vice Chair? If not, nominations are closed. All those in favor say aye. (Unanimous voice vote)
Opposed? (None) Motion carried 5:0.
Nominations are now closed. Sorry, this is new so it will take a while, motion to close
nominations.
Mr. Mahoney: Chair I make a motion to close nominations.
Chair Keawe: Is there a second?
Ms. Ahuna: Second.
Chair Keawe: It has been moved and seconded to close the nominations, all those in favor say
aye. (Unanimous voice vote) Opposed? (None) Motion carried 5:0.
Nominations are now closed. Roy Ho has been nominated to fill the position of Planning
Commission Vice Chair. Are there any requests for a secret ballot vote? Seeing none, all those
in favor raise you right hand.
Ms. Hi uchi Sayegusa: Just to clarify, that was in favor of Commissioner Roy Ho's nomination
for Vice Chair?
Chair
The majority of members have voted in favor of Commissioner Ho an
Keawe: Those in favor of Roy
Ho as Vice
Chair please raise your
right hand.
(Unanimous show of hands) Motion
carried 5:0.
d he is duly elected to
serve as Planning Commission Vice Chair, congratulations. Mr. Dahilig, we are on to the
appointment of Subdivision Committee Chairperson. We need a motion to appoint a Subdivision
Chair. We are looking, as far as Subdivision Chair, Commissioner He, and Vice Chair is
Commissioner Mahoney, and also to appoint Commissioner Ahuna as a temporary member in
order to achieve quorum and to take action in cases where members are absent. Can we have a
motion to approve the slate?
Mr. Katayama: So moved.
Ms. Ahuna: Second.
Chair Keawe: It's been moved and seconded to approve the slate, all those in favor say aye.
(Unanimous voice vote) Opposed? (None) Motion carried 5:0.
APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Mr. Dahili9: Thank you Mr. Chair. We are now on the approval of the agenda for this morning.
Congratulations on your election as Chair, we look forward to working with you and the rest of
the Commission and the Commission's leadership. If we could take items A through H on the
agenda in order and then recess for the 9:00 a.m. and go to second calendar, and then resume
with the calendar with item J, run through the calendar and then handle the executive session
prior to adjournment and adjourn the whole meeting at that point. That would be my
recommendation for this morning Mr. Chair,
Chair Keawe: Do we have a motion to approve the altered agenda?
Mr. Mahoney: Move to approve the agenda as amended.
Mr. Katavama: Second.
Chair: Moved by Commissioner Mahoney and seconded by Commissioner Katayama, all those
in favor say aye. (Unanimous voice vote) Opposed? (None) Motion carried 5:0.
MINUTES of the meetin¢(sl of the Planning Commission
RegulaYMeeting
Minutes
of
November
22,
2016.
Regular
Meeting
Minutes
of December
13,
2016,
Chair Keawe: Can we do those together for both meetings?
Mr. Ho: Move to receive.
Ms. Ahuna: Second.
Chair Keawe: I have a motion from Mr. Ho to approve and seconded by Commissioner Ahuna,
all those in favor. (Unanimous voice vote) Opposed? (None) Motion carried 5:0.
RECEIPT OF ITEMS FOR THE RECORD
None.
HEARINGS AND PUBLIC COMMENT
Continue Agency
HearinE (NONE)
New Agency
Hearin¢ (NONE)
HEARINGS AND PUBLIC COMMENT (Continued)
Continued Public Hearing (NONE)
New Public Hearing (NONE)
CONSENT CALENDAR
Status Reports (NONE)
Director's Report (s) for Project (s) Scheduled for Agency Hearing on 1/24/17.
Class IV Zoning Permit Z -IV -2017-2 and Use Permit U-2017-2 to allow construction of a
new administration building, hanger, parking area, and associated improvements on a parcel
located along the mauka side of Ahukini Road in Lihue, situated at the Lihue Heliport facility
approx. 1/4 mile east of the Kapule Highway/Ahukini Road intersection, further identified as Tax
Map Key: (4)3-5001:148 and affecting a portion of a larger parcel containing 3.67 acres =
Mauna Loa Helicopter Tours, LLC.
Director's Report pertaining to this matter.
Class IV Zoning Permit Z -IV -2016-18 and Use Permit U-2016-15 to allow conversion of
an existing residence into a bed and breakfast operation on a parcel located along the northern
side if Poipu Road, approx. 250 ft. north of the Kipuka Street/Poipu Road intersection and
further identified as 2375 Kipuka Street, Tax Map Key 2-8-023:040, and containing a total area
of 10,570 sq. ft. = Rebecca Smith-Mapdaleno. [Director's Report received 7/12/16, hearing
postponed 7/26/16 due to applicant's failure to meet the requirements of Section 8-3.1 (f) of the
Kauai County Code, 1987, as amended.]
Mr. Dahilig: The department would recommend receiving the consent calendar at this time.
Chair Keawe: Can we have a motion to receive the Consent Calendar?
Mr. Mahoney: Move to receive the Consent Calendar.
Mr. Ho: Second.
Chair Keawe: All those in favor. (Unanimous voice vote) Opposed? (None) Motion carried
Mr. Dahilig: Mr. Chair, notwithstanding the order, maybe if we could take the Subdivision
Committee Report as a quick matter before going into the recess, this would be item L.
COMMITTEE REPORTS
Subdivision
Mr. Mahonev: Subdivision Committee Report, inial subdivision map approval S-2016-20,
Kukuiula Development Company, LLC, TMK 2-6-016:088 and 2-6-020:031, approved 3:0.
That was all the business of the Subdivision Committee this morning Chair.
Chair Keawe: Can I have a motion to approve?
Mr. Mahonev: Move to approve.
Mr. Ho: Second.
Chair
Keawe:
It's been moved and seconded, all those in favor.
(Unanimous
voice vote)
Motion carried
5:0.
Commission recessed this portion of the meeting at 9:12 a.m.
Meeting resumed in Open Session at 9:52 a.m.
GENERAL BUSINESS MATTERS
Hearing Officer's Report and Recommendation of Contested Case Hearing; Certificate
of Service relating to appeal of the Planning Director's Decision Regarding Application for Non -
Conforming Use Certificate CC -2015-5, TVNCU #1122, Tax Map Key No. (4) 5-8-011:010 =
Laura Bancroft Living Trust and David Bancroft,
Ms. Higuchi Sayegusa: The options at this point, the Hearing Officer did submit his report and
recommendation on the contested case. The options at this point are to render the Commission's
decision upon the record. The decision could either be adopting the Hearing Officer's Report
and Recommendation as is, adopting the Hearing Officer's Recommendation with any
modifications that you folks want to consider, or issue a wholly different original order
according to your own views and recommendations in how to proceed with the contested case.
Another option that you folks may want to consider is the oral argument. If you folks want to
entertain oral argument you folks can motion/second and vote on whether to allow for the oral
argument subsequent to that. Then you will have the same options, i.e. to adopt the Hearing
Officer's Report and Recommendation, adopt the Hearing Officer's Report and
Recommendation with modifications, or adopt something wholly different. You also have the
option to reopen the docket and take further evidence or take any other disposition to the case
that is necessary under the circumstances. You can send it back to the Hearing Officer for
further contested case if there is any particular issue that you wanted to flush out a little bit more.
Those are some options you can consider at this point.
Chair Keawe: Any discussion on this part
icular item?
Ms. Ahuna: So those are not guidelines but they are rules by the County, correct Jodi?
Ms. Hieucm Sayegusa: Yes that is the Commission rules at this point.
Ms. Ahuna: I believe that the Hearing Officer did do his due diligence in regards to hearing all
the evidence brought forth as well as the Exceptions were heard. So in that regard I think it is
only fair to listen to Mr. Chun's three (3) minutes or give him that opportunity to allow him the
three (3) minutes to respond or to share with us anything further. This has gone through a
Hearing Officer already, there has been recommendations made, the timelines have been put
forth and that is where we are at. I do think since Mr. Chun is here we should allow him his
three (3) minutes to share.
Chair Keawe: Ms. Ahuna expressed her desire to have Mr. Chun have his opportunity to
present.
Mr.
Ahuna:
Katal
would
Since we have both attorneys here I would like to
listen
to them make arguments
supporting their
conclusions of law/findings of fact as it compares
to the
Hearing Officer,
Chair Keawe: Mr. Mahoney.
Mr. Mahoney: I am willing to accept the Hearing Officer's report. It went through the Hearing
Officer. If we wanted to hear it we could have heard it but we chose to send it to him and I
respect the Hearing Officer's decision. That is how I feel.
Chair Keawe: Commissioner Ho.
Mr. Ho: I concur with Ms. Ahuna's suggestion.
Chair Keawe: Anybody want to make a motion to that effect?
Ms. Ahuna: I would like to make a motion to listen to Mr. Chun, give him his three (3) minutes.
Is that the correct way to say that?
Ms. Higuchi Sang sa: Allow for oral argument by both parties.
Ms.
Ahuna:
I
would
like to make a motion to allow for oral arguments by both parties,
County
as well as Mr.
Chun.
Chair Keawe: Do I have a second?
Mr. Katal Second,
Chair Keawe: If this motion is approved I would like to limit the amount of time, maybe Ten (10)
minutes max. I don't think it will take that long but just to give proper time to present your
argument. Is it okay if we amend the motion to that?
Ms. Ahuna: From my understanding Mr. Chun said three (3) minutes so I will hold him to that.
Ms. H guchi Sayeeusa: That is within your discretion, Chair, on now you want to conduct the
oral arguments.
Chair
eawe:
Let's try for three (3)
-minutes, if you are
going to go four (4)
or five (5) minutes
that is
fine but
no longer than that.
Ms. er or not to amend
the motion.
______-____Ch_ar_Keawe�_Any_discussioriQn this_particularmotiosi?__D-oesaverybody_understandihe_motion---------------
on the floor?
Mr. Ho: Is there a motion on the floor?
Ms. Hi ue chi Sayegusa: Yes, to allow for argument.
Chair Keawe: Any other discussion? Can we call for the vote, all those in favor? (3 ayes)
Opposed? (2 nays) Motion not carried 3:2.
Ms. Higuchi Sa�gusa: Maybe we can do it on roll call just for the sake of the record.
Mr. Dahilie: The motion on the floor is to allow for three (3) minutes of oral argument on item J
(1) by both parties, Commissioner Ho.
Mr. Ho: No.
Mr. Dahilie: Commissioner Ahuna.
Ms. Ahuna: Aye.
Mr. Dahilie: Commissioner Katayama.
Mr. Katayama: Aye.
Mr. Dahilie: Chair Keawe.
Chair Keawe: Aye,
Mr. Dahilie: Commissioner Mahoney.
Mr, Mahoney: No,
Mr. Dahilie: 3:2, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Chun: Mr. Chair, if I may, just to raise a formal objection that by preventing a person or a
member of the public, including an applicant, from speaking on an agenda item is a violation of
HRS 92-3 and will be forming a basis of our appeal also. 92-3, as your counsel will inform you,
basically states that any interested person may be allowed or must be allowed to present written
and oral testimony in front of the Commission on any agenda item. This is an agenda item. I
don't believe the Commission has the option of not allowing anybody to speak on an agenda
item. That is just for the record so when we do appeal this matter it will be on the record.
Ms. Higuchi Sayeausa: If I may just clarify, under Chapter 92, HRS, Sunshine Law, the public
and all persons shall be permitted to attend and be afforded an opportunity to present oral
testimony on any agenda item. Mr. Chun is a party or representative of a parry so it gets a little
muddybecauseonihe_onehandhe-is_natjustany_member_of_the_public>_butthenagainhe_isarL
interest person so that might be an issue going forward. Chair, it is an issue. On the one hand he
is a party, a representative, but then again that makes him an interested person as well.
Chair Keawe: Is there any reconsideration?
Ms. HiQuchi Sayegusa: My former advice was strictly pursuant to our rules, but 92, since the
decision has to be done in open session pursuant to our Charter which requires all decisions to
held in open, it is subject now to Chapter 92. However I would I guess try to clarify that oral
argument is arguing the respective positions related to the contested case. Public testimony is
sort of...
Ms. Ahuna: So technically this is not public testimony then, this is requesting oral argument.
Ms. Hiauchi Sayer I would say under 92, it is oral testimony on an agenda item.
Ms. Ahuna: And Mr. Chun is requesting based on 92.
Ms. Higuchi Sayegusa: To testify as a member of the public, as an interested person on an
agenda item.
Mr. Mahoney: Chair, just to clarify, if they are going to argue the case again or if it were just
public, I am a little bit confused on that connection.
Chair Keawe: Mr. Chun, can
you clarify what you would like to do?
Or. Chun: I just want to make it clear; a member of the publi
c or interested
person has three (3)
minutes, period.
They
can do whatever they want in the three (3) minutes as long it relates to the
agenda item. I am not
talking about arguing because if you allow argument,
in other words you
have three (3) minutes
from this party and then somebody else comes in and
argues, that is an
argument and I am
not
asking for that because it is not an argument. It is an
opportunity of an
interested person
to present views to the Commission. If another parry comes in and offers
counter then you
have
an argument and I am not asking for that.
Chair Keawe: So you are clarifying Mr. Chun that your comments will not be arguments to this
issue.
Mr. Chun: It is a view on the agenda item and the Commission can consider it or not consider it.
It is not an argument because we don't have two parties in front of you; you only have at this
point in time one member of the public. So it is not an argument per say. To have an argument
you need two people.
Chair Keawe: Mr. DahiligI
Mr. Dahilie: If I could just state for the record, should the Commission choose to provide three
(3) minutes ofpublic testimony to Mr, Chun the _d_eparhnent would_ have no objections _to_I
Chair Keawe: The deparhnent has no objections to that, any objections from any of the
Commissioners? Mr. Chun, could you please sign the testimony list.
Ms. Ahuna: Jodi, can you clarify my motion on the table, what was it? We need to clarify that
motion because I believe I did state in my motion that the County would be able to provide an
opportunity.
Ms.
Higuchi
Sayegusa:
That motion and the second
did not pass so that is off the table so we
are
now
looking
at
the
public testimony under 92 issue
and whether to allow for testimony.
Chair Keawe: Any objections to Mr. Chun testifying as a member of the public on this issue
with the clarification?
Mr. Mahonev: Chair, no objections.
Chair Keawe: Mr. Chun.
Mr. Chun: Good morning, Jonathan Chun on behalf of the Bancrofts on this matter. You have
before you the proposed Findings of Fact Conclusions of Law of the Hearing Officer, The
Bancrofts would incorporate by reference and hereby submits as part of its public comments the
Exceptions that they filed. Without reading the Exceptions, the Bancrofts would like to
emphasize to the Commission when it reviews this matter it involves a situation where the
Planning Department has totally failed in providing adequate notice to the Bancrofts. The
Bancrofts filed an application. There is no doubt about that, no dispute. There is no dispute also
that six (6) years, six (6) years after they filed the application the County came back six (6) years
later and said "we denied it." Between the time they filed the application and the time they
denied it the Planning Department sent and inspector, assigned a TVNC number, put it on the
website, and then took no action other than to say six (6) years later they denied it.
What happened in the six (6) years? What happened in the six (6) years are two importan
t things
the Commission should consider which we argued. One is that the statute was amended by the
County Council to extend the application deadline. That was done, no argument there. That is a
matter of fact, a matter of law. What else happened? Within that six (6) years the County
10
Council also amended the ordinance by saying even if you were late, the original ordinance said
if you were late you can always file an appeal to the Planning Commission and the Planning
Commission can grant the TVNC as long as you had proof that you were operating. The County
Council took that out because it extended it. The important thing that happened is, because the
department did not inform the applicant until six (6) years after the application was filed, it was
actually denied, the applicant lost its ability to appeal to the Commission and the Commission
lost its ability to grant the TVNC under the ordinance. That is what happened and the Hearing
Officer totally ignored it by saying there is no requirement to file.
Just to give an application (inaudible) the Commission an understanding of what that means. For
example, if you filed an exemption for real property tax or homeowners exemption, the
ordinance provides__that you have to_file-an-exemption and the ordinance also_Rrovides the_
----------
criteria for it. You file the exemption. The Finance Department doesn't notify you that they are
going to deny the exemption they just send you a bill and say here are your taxes. They never
tell you they denied the exemption. After you get your bill you find out they denied the
exemption, they file the appeal and then the Finance Department says, sorry, you didn't file your
appeal within the proper time. So that is what we have here in this situation. We have an
application, no notice of it being denied. After it was denied the Planning Department comes
back and says you should have told me earlier so you could have appealed, too late, the appeal is
too late.
Chair Keawe: Thank you Mr. Chun. With regard to this matter, any further discussion? Before
us is the Hearing Officer's Report and our review this morning is to either accept the Hearing
Officer's Report or not accept it or alter it and issue our own, any discussion in regard to that?
Ms. Ahuna: The Hearing Officer's Report was provided to us and like Commissioner Mahoney
said it is more than two thousand pages of reading. I believe he did his due diligence and
timelines were set and they were not met and if this appeal was to ... they were given the
opportunity to appeal that in seven (7) days and they took over a month or about a month. If it
was of their interest to do so why not have done it in the seven (7) days? We probably wouldn't
be in this situation right now because we would have to respond to that seven (7) days. I think
that is where it stands.
Chair Keawe: Thank you, Commissioner Mahoney?
Mr. Mahoney: I concur with Commissioner Ahuna.
Chair Keawe: Commissioner Ho.
Mr. Ho: I concur also.
Chair Keawe: Mr. Katayama.
Mr. Katayama: I think what needs to be clearly understood or at least further clearly articulated
is the responsibilities of the department to any applicant and the applicant's responsibility in
completing the action. Now having said that there is some ambiguity because the laws at that
11
time, the statutes at that time were in a process of evolving in addressing an issue. It comes to
the point where who is responsible for completing the application. At the end of the day, to me,
the party with the interest needs to be responsible but I think the Exceptions, as noted by the
Petitioner, in this case sort of brings out some of that ambiguity. But at the end of the day I think
this Commission needs to again, articulate who is responsible, what is the department's
responsibility and what their actions constitute within the scope of their work. And so again, I
think moving forward, what we decide here this morning and what we adopt in terms of decision
and order and conclusions of law will help move that forward in other kinds of cases that come
before us.
Chair Keawe: Any other comments? If not, are we ready to make a decision, anybody offer a
Mr. Katayama: What are we adopting?
Chair Keawe: We are adopting the Hearing Officer's Report in its entirety.
Ms. Higiichi Sayegusa: You would have to have a motion for that.
Mr. Mahoney: I will make a motion to accept the Hearing Officer's, in its entirety, for Non-
conforming Use Certificate CC 2015-5, TVNCU #4122, Tax Map Key (4) 5-8-011:010, Laura
Bancroft Living Trust and David Bancroft,
Chair Keawe: Do I have a second?
Mr. Ho: Second.
Chair Keawe: It has been moved and seconded, any discussion on the motion, roll call vote.
Mr. Dahilia: The motion on the floor is to accept the Hearing Officer's Recommended Findings
of Fact, Conclusions of Law, Decision and Order as it relates to Contested Case Hearing No.
2015-5, Transient Vacation Rental Non -Conforming Use Certificate #4122, Tax Map Key (4) 5-
8-011:010, Laura Bancroft Living Trust and David Bancroft, Vice Chair Ho.
Mr. Ho: Aye.
Mr, Dahili¢: Commissioner Ahuna.
Ms. Ahuna: Aye,
Mr. Dahilie: Commissioner Katayama.
Mr. Dahilig: Chair Keawe.
Chair Keawe: Aye.
12
Mr. Dahilig: Commissioner Mahoney.
Mr, Mahoney: Aye.
Mr. Dahilig: 5:0 with a silent vote Mr. Chair.
Chair Keawe: Thank you, motion adopted.
Mr. Dahilig: Thank you Mr. Chair, we are not on item M.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS (for Action)
None.
NEW BUSINESS
None.
ANNOUNCEMENTS
Tonics for Future Meetings
The following scheduled Planning Commission meeting will be held at 9:00 a m or
shortly thereafter at the Lihue Civic Center, Moikeha Building Meeting Room 2A-213 4444
Rice Street, Lihue, Kauai, Hawaii 96766 on Tuesday, January 24 2017.
Mr. Dahilig: We circulated the on deck sheets for the next few meetings for the Commission's
information. I would also note that what is not on there that will be coming in terms of public
hearing notice that will come out next week Monday as the Commission is aware of the
scheduling; we are looking at a Special Meeting Workshop on January 31" concerning the
General Plan. That hearing notice will also be coming forth as well so that should be also noted
along with these pending hearings that are coming up. The department would recommend going
into executive session and recommend that the meeting be adjourned at the conclusion of the
executive session. I will turn it over to the attorney.
Pursuant to Hawaii Revised Statutes Sections 92-5(a)(2 and 4) the �urnose of this
executive session is to discuss matters pertaining to the evaluation of the Planning Director over
the past and current fiscal year. This session pertains to the Planning Director's evaluation
where consideration of matters affectingrn ivacy will be involved. Further, to consult with legal
counsel regarding powers, duties, privileges and/or liabilities of the Planning Commission as it
relates to the evaluation of the Planning Director.
Deputy County Attorn
ey Jodi Higuchi Sayegusa read item I (1) Executive Session item.
13
Ms. Higuchi Savegusa: I would recommend a roll call vote on whether to go into executive
session.
Chair Keawe: I will entertain a motion to go into executive session.
Mr. Mahoney: Chair, move to go into executive session with adjournment following the
executive session.
Mr. .
Chair Keawe: Moved and seconded, any discussion, roll call vote, Mr. Dahilig.
Mr. Dahilig: The motion
on
the floor is
to go into executive session
pursuant to
item I (1), and
adjourn
the meeting after
the
conclusion
the executive session, Vice
Chair Ho.
Mr. Ho: Aye.
Mr. Dahilie: Commissioner Ahuna.
Ms. Ahuna: Aye.
Mr. Dahilig: Commissioner Katayama.
Mr. Katal Aye.
Mr. Dahilie: Chair Keawe.
Chair Keawe: Aye.
Mr. Dahilie: Commissioner Mahoney.
Mr. Mahoney: Aye.
Mr. Dahilie: Motion carried 5:0, Mr. Chair.
The Commission recessed this port
ion of the meeting at 10:17 a.m.
The meeting resumed in Executive Session at 1033 a.m.
ADJOURNMENT
Chair Keawe adjourn
ed the meeting at 11:09 a.m.
14
OApproved as circulated (add date of meeting approval)
as amended. See minutes of
15
Respectfully Submitted by:
rzz IA_
Lani Agoot
Commission Support Clerk