LIHU‘E — The county Planning Commission on Tuesday failed to act on a proposed bill that would temporarily allow transient vacation rentals on agricultural land, sending the measure back to the Kaua‘i County Council for action without amendment, recommendation or
LIHU‘E — The county Planning Commission on Tuesday failed to act on a proposed bill that would temporarily allow transient vacation rentals on agricultural land, sending the measure back to the Kaua‘i County Council for action without amendment, recommendation or even much discussion.
The commission’s deliberations on Bill No. 2298 ended abruptly on a technicality when Commissioner Paula Morikami’s motion to deny the bill in its entirety and nix the amendments recommended by the Planning Department earned two ayes and three nays, leaving it short of passage and the commission in limbo.
With Commissioners Hartwell Blake and Jan Kimura not in attendance for the afternoon portion of the meeting, the motion could not be disposed and no other motion could be made.
Normally the motion on the floor could be deferred to the next meeting, Planning Director Ian Costa said outside the Mo‘ikeha Building, but the next meeting comes after the July 11 deadline for action by the commission, so the discussion was closed after Deputy County Attorney Ian Jung reviewed Robert’s Rules of Order during a brief recess.
Planning Commission meetings are held on the second and fourth Tuesdays of every month, so June’s calendar layout means there will be three weeks before the next meeting rather than the usual two.
While the bill will be passed back to the council in the same form it was received and without formal recommendation, the council will receive as part of the record the full account of what the commission discussed, so all is not lost.
The motion to deny, which Morikami said was due to her belief that Ordinance 864, passed into law last year, needs improvement to adequately restrict TVRs to so-called visitor destination areas.
“I just have a philosophical difference with where TVRs should be placed,” she said. “I just don’t like the way this ordinance reads. … I think that Ordinance No. 864 needs improvement, and I don’t know if we should be doing it piecemeal like this.”
Draft Bill 2298 would essentially put the related part of Ordinance 864 on hold while the county works on determining important agricultural lands.
Commissioner Caven Raco seconded Morikami’s motion purely for discussion purposes before voting against it, along with Herman Texeira and Camilla Matsumoto. Chair Jimmy Nishida voted aye along with Morikami.
“When this ordinance came out, I had a hard time swallowing it myself,” Raco said of 864, adding that Bill 2298 could serve as “the vehicle that will regulate TVRs on ag land, and it is discretionary.”
Planning Department-recommended amendments would have required applicants to acquire both a non-conforming use certificate and a special permit from the commission in order to continue operating the vacation rental while the important ag land study is conducted.
