Warning: Table 'drup_cache' is marked as crashed and should be repaired
query: SELECT data, created, headers, expire, serialized FROM drup_cache WHERE cid = 'variables' in /home3/waimeahi/public_html/margaretwille/home/includes/database.mysql.inc on line 128
Warning: Table 'drup_cache' is marked as crashed and should be repaired
query: UPDATE drup_cache SET data = 'a:206:{s:13:\"theme_default\";s:10:\"artistsC01\";s:13:\"filter_html_1\";i:1;s:18:\"node_options_forum\";a:1:{i:0;s:6:\"status\";}s:18:\"drupal_private_key\";s:64:\"F9rMLIyOFJPSoQmqhaldAFyFGCYj0m5IPsjOD6BtblAWXrGb9DzFegANrk1V1UPB\";s:10:\"menu_masks\";a:26:{i:0;i:127;i:1;i:125;i:2;i:63;i:3;i:62;i:4;i:61;i:5;i:59;i:6;i:58;i:7;i:56;i:8;i:31;i:9;i:30;i:10;i:29;i:11;i:25;i:12;i:24;i:13;i:22;i:14;i:21;i:15;i:15;i:16;i:14;i:17;i:13;i:18;i:12;i:19;i:11;i:20;i:7;i:21;i:6;i:22;i:5;i:23;i:3;i:24;i:2;i:25;i:1;}s:12:\"install_task\";s:4:\"done\";s:13:\"menu_expanded\";a:2:{i:0;s:10:\"navigation\";i:1;s:13:\"primary-links\";}s:9:\"site_name\";s:21:\"www.margaretwille.com\";s:9:\"site_mail\";s:21:\"margaretwille@mac.com\";s:21:\"date_defa in /home3/waimeahi/public_html/margaretwille/home/includes/database.mysql.inc on line 128
Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home3/waimeahi/public_html/margaretwille/home/includes/database.mysql.inc:128) in /home3/waimeahi/public_html/margaretwille/home/includes/bootstrap.inc on line 709
Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home3/waimeahi/public_html/margaretwille/home/includes/database.mysql.inc:128) in /home3/waimeahi/public_html/margaretwille/home/includes/bootstrap.inc on line 710
Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home3/waimeahi/public_html/margaretwille/home/includes/database.mysql.inc:128) in /home3/waimeahi/public_html/margaretwille/home/includes/bootstrap.inc on line 711
Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home3/waimeahi/public_html/margaretwille/home/includes/database.mysql.inc:128) in /home3/waimeahi/public_html/margaretwille/home/includes/bootstrap.inc on line 712 www.margaretwille.com
http://www.margaretwille.com/home
KOHALA BLOG: A Kohala point of view by one of its residents: Margaret Wille. In my opinion...
enDLNR- Proposed Conservation District Rules (9/7); Underfunding DLNR; Hannemann takes Cheap Shots With No Suggested Remedy
http://www.margaretwille.com/home/?q=node/577
<div style="text-align: center;"><img alt="" style="width: 480px; height: 360px;" src="/home/sites/default/files/u1/dlnrhead.JPG" align="middle" border="0" hspace="" vspace=""><br><br><br><div style="text-align: justify;">[The above photos was taken at the August meeting of the Natural Resources Section of the Hawaii Bar Association. Here Jesse Souki welcomes Laura Thielen to the meeting.] <br><br style="font-weight: bold;"><br style="font-weight: bold;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">LAST CHANCE TO SUBMIT COMMENTS TO DLNR RE PROPOSED RULE CHANGES TO CONSERVATION DISTRICT.</span><br style="font-weight: bold;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">IMPORTANT: If you want to submit comments to help protect the Conservation District (especially the mauka mountain watershed areas) the deadline to postmark your comments is September 7 -- this Tuesday: Read the proposed rule changes HERE</span><img style="font-weight: bold;" src="file:///Users/margaretwille/Library/Caches/TemporaryItems/moz-screenshot.png" alt=""><span style="font-weight: bold;">. Your written comments should be sent to DLNR Office of Conservation and Coastal Lands P.O. Box 621 Honolulu Hi 96809 </span><br><br>No, everything in these porposed rules is bad --- but that is part of the problem -- this is 50 or so pages of rules that are up for major changes throughout the document-- but the rationale for the proposed changes is not provided. Yes the reasoning for some proposed changes is obvious, but even then there are many "hidden" agendas. So unless you are a hired consultant for folks who want to conduct business in the Conservation District -- or you regularly consult for residential owners along the shoreline, you are likely one of the general public who will be very affected by these rules, but who will not know enough to venture to comment. HOWEVER here are a few points you could make without knowing all the intricacies of these proposals:<br><br>1. DLNR should not change the rules to allow, and essentially promote commercial forestry or other commercial businesses in our conservation districts. [Alternatively would you prefer to watch the developers handled by top name consultants - rape our watershed forests under the guise of a "comprehensive management plan" in which a few pathways for endangered birds will be carved out and a few cultural sites thrown in for cosmetic looks.-- and the rest is a cut and run theme of commercial logging. There should be no commercial use of the Conservation District. Period. (And if you want to know why -- read the mission of this District and consider the reforestation needs for watersheds and watershed buffer preservation.] Keep in mind that the quantity and quality of our forests in the watershed areas affects the water absorption ability of the watershed - so our water resources are adversely impacted by logging in this District.<br><br>2. The proposed change to subsection 13-5-31(g) would modify the "standing" requirements (a person's right to seek judicial review) to only allow standing to those who have a specific property interest in that area of the conservation district i.e. those who will be directly affected such that their interest is clearly distinguishable from that of the general public. Well that sure will eliminate the possibility of an appeal by anyone who is likely to be concerned but is not a neighboring property owner. I am told that this change really isn't a change because in practice they don't grant standing to anyone who doesn't meet this standard anyway! HOW WRONG. What happens in the Conservation District impacts us all -- regardless of whether it is directly or indirectly. <br><br>3. Selective Removal of trees where each tree is replaced on one to one basis with a trees that are "appropriate" to the site location.[Pg 5-24 P-11 B-1] So under this rule -- anyone can cut a row of kiawe - that are good for stablizing the shore -- or other mature trees forming a windbreak - so they can add or enlarge some area of impermeable concrete --and replace any significant tree with a a token "native" trees to justify the removal. <br><br>4. Certainly there should be a public hearing to put anything on the invasive species list. Seems as if "invasive species" is a good way to label whatever anyone doesn't want on his property --- this should not be a vague easily designate-able category... See page 5-19 P-4 (a-1) which would now allow for any species that the department whats to name on its own without any public hearing. For example, how in the world could anyone want to eliminate the beautiful red vented bulbul bird (because it eats invasive species seeds - I am told)?<br><br>I could go on and on.... but you get the idea.. Even if you just submit one or two comments, it is helpful. <br style="font-weight: bold;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXxxxxxxxxxxXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX</span><br style="font-weight: bold;"><br>So as you can see I have my criticisms against DLNR and these draft Conservation District rules. In addition I have a lawsuit on going with the Department -Wille v. BLNR et. al. [Third Circuit 3CC10-1239K ] . <span style="color: #FF0000; font-weight: bold;">However, at the same time, I recognize that one of the biggest problems is that this agency is way underfunded given the breath and depth and complexity of its responsibilities. Over the past couple years, this Department lost a lot of good staff thanks to this Republican administration. I sat through several State Senate hearings concerning funding of various DLNR programs -- all being gutted of funds and staff. </span><br><br>Currently DLNR receives less than less than one percent of the total state budget -- yet has 13 or so departments each with major responsibilities. [I have attached a copy of the Department's January 2010 budget statement submitted to the State legislature]. <br><br>Recently Gubernatorial candidate Neil Abercrombie made some criticisms of DLNR's handling of some issues, but to Neil's credit he pointed out that DLNR is underfunded -- and he made a very good suggestion --- that millions of dollars should be moved from the top-heavy bureacratic out-of-touch Hawaii Tourism Authority funding. On the other hand arrogant Mufi Hannemann (who no doubt is buddy buddy with the folks at Hawaiian Tourism Authority) recently took some cheap shots at DLNR -- without ever mentioning how underfunded and understaffed this Department is now. For example, given that the Department's budget has been gutted -- can you blame the Department from requesting some fees be paid by those who benefit from special uses at DLNR faciliities, e.g. for parking at Honokohau Harbor? BELOW SEE the August 27, 2010 West Hawaii Today article in which Director Laura Thielen takes on arrogant Mufi Hannemann for his over-the-top criticisms of DLNR programs. <br><br></div><br><div style="text-align: justify;"><span style="color: #FF0099; font-style: italic;">The following are photos of the August 9th Kona public hearing about the proposed new conservation rules. Sam Lemmo is the DLNR Rep -- he is head of the DLNR's Conservation District. Mel Mason is testifying in the top photo --- pointing out the lack of concern for cultural Hawaiian issues in the proposed rules.</span> <br></div><br><br><img alt="" style="width: 480px; height: 360px;" src="/home/sites/default/files/u1/dlnrmason.JPG" align="middle" border="0" hspace="" vspace=""><br><br><br><div style="text-align: justify;"><br></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span style="color: #CC0099; font-style: italic;">More pictures of the August 9th hearing. Chuck Flaherty sitting in front. </span><br></div><br><div style="text-align: justify;"><br></div><img alt="" style="width: 480px; height: 360px;" src="/home/sites/default/files/u1/dlnrchuck.JPG" align="middle" border="0" hspace="" vspace=""><br><img alt="" style="width: 480px; height: 360px;" src="/home/sites/default/files/u1/dlnraudience.JPG" align="middle" border="0" hspace="" vspace=""><br><br><br><br><br><br style="color: #CC0099;"><div style="text-align: justify;"><span style="color: #CC0099; font-style: italic;">HERE is the January 2010 State Budget testimony for DLNR:</span><br></div></div><iframe src="https://docs.google.com/present/embed?id=dc7drvb6_37c3q239dw&size=l" frameborder="0" height="559" width="700"></iframe><br><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Arial; color: #000000; background-color: transparent; font-weight: normal; font-style: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;" id="internal-source-marker_0.6261016485688757"> </span><br><div style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Arial; color: #CC0099; background-color: transparent; font-weight: normal; font-style: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="font-style: italic;">Here is the WEST HAWAII TODAY LETTER TO THE EDITOR FROM DLNR DIRECTOR THIELEN IN RESPONSE TO MUFI HANNEMANN'S REMARKS ABOUT HONOKOHAU HARBOR: </span> </span><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Arial; color: #000000; background-color: transparent; font-weight: bold; font-style: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="color: #CC0099;"> </span> </span><br></div><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Arial; color: #000000; background-color: transparent; font-weight: bold; font-style: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;"> </span><br><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Arial; color: #000000; background-color: transparent; font-weight: bold; font-style: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">DLNR Director Thielen responds to Hannemann remarks regarding Honokohau Harbor </span><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Arial; color: #000000; background-color: transparent; font-weight: normal; font-style: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;"></span><br><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Arial; color: #000000; background-color: transparent; font-weight: normal; font-style: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;"> </span><br><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Arial; color: #000000; background-color: transparent; font-weight: normal; font-style: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">Article from West Hawaii Today Friday, August 27, 2010 8:42 AM HST</span><br><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Arial; color: #000000; background-color: transparent; font-weight: normal; font-style: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;"></span><br><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Arial; color: #000000; background-color: transparent; font-weight: normal; font-style: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">Some
boaters in Honokohau Harbor have questioned the state's management.
They want to keep all the revenues from the harbor - including lease
rent from lands near the harbor - for exclusive use at Honokohau at the
expense of our statewide system of harbors.</span><br><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Arial; color: #000000; background-color: transparent; font-weight: normal; font-style: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;"></span><br><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Arial; color: #000000; background-color: transparent; font-weight: normal; font-style: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">And
Mufi Hannemann, in his campaign bid to outdo his opponent and take
shots at the current administration, has jumped on the bandwagon to
support these demands without knowing the facts.</span><br><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Arial; color: #000000; background-color: transparent; font-weight: normal; font-style: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;"></span><br><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Arial; color: #000000; background-color: transparent; font-weight: normal; font-style: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">Their
proposal would unfairly benefit a select group of boaters who are
already being subsidized, and come at the expense of about 13,000 other
boaters, hundreds of canoe paddlers, ocean recreation activities, and
coral reefs across the state.</span><br><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Arial; color: #000000; background-color: transparent; font-weight: normal; font-style: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;"></span><br><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Arial; color: #000000; background-color: transparent; font-weight: normal; font-style: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">How
is that possible? Honokohau boater fees do not cover the cost of
operating Honokohau. Not one of the state's 20 small boat harbors is
fully supported by boater fees. Every single slip holder in every small
boat harbor is subsidized by revenues that don't come solely from the
pockets of boaters in the harbors, but from a combination of sources
such as lease rents paid by restaurants patronized by the general
public, the general public parking in harbors, a small percentage of the
state fuel tax, and federal grants.</span><br><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Arial; color: #000000; background-color: transparent; font-weight: normal; font-style: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;"></span><br><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Arial; color: #000000; background-color: transparent; font-weight: normal; font-style: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">Honokohau
boaters are arguing that the rents from lands near Honokohau are
"theirs." But that is simply false. The lands around the harbors were
not paid for by boaters. They are public lands dedicated by the state
for the public purpose of the statewide boating and ocean recreation
program. Those lands belong to all of us and are for the public benefit -
not just the select few who have slips in one harbor.</span><br><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Arial; color: #000000; background-color: transparent; font-weight: normal; font-style: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;"></span><br><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Arial; color: #000000; background-color: transparent; font-weight: normal; font-style: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">The
state's policy has always been that everyone in Hawaii should have
access to the ocean. Accordingly, the rents from lands near the four
commercially viable harbors subsidize all 20 small boat harbors, the 25
boat ramps, piers and landings outside of harbors, and the ocean
recreation program.</span><br><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Arial; color: #000000; background-color: transparent; font-weight: normal; font-style: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;"></span><br><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Arial; color: #000000; background-color: transparent; font-weight: normal; font-style: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">This
is no different than the way we have been able to operate our statewide
system of airports that have enabled all islands to have quality
facilities that they would otherwise not be able to afford.</span><br><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Arial; color: #000000; background-color: transparent; font-weight: normal; font-style: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;"> </span><br><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Arial; color: #000000; background-color: transparent; font-weight: normal; font-style: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">
If we used the land rents from the four commercially viable harbors
exclusively for those four harbors and their few hundred slip holders,
we would have to shut down or severely reduce the 41 other facilities
across the state.</span><br><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Arial; color: #000000; background-color: transparent; font-weight: normal; font-style: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;"></span><br><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Arial; color: #000000; background-color: transparent; font-weight: normal; font-style: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">However,
these 41 places are virtually the only ocean access for the bulk of
Hawaii's 13,000 boaters and hundreds of canoe paddlers. In addition,
these non-boater revenues support the removal of abandoned boats on
reefs, managing ocean events such as canoe races, and operating the
boating safety program.</span><br><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Arial; color: #000000; background-color: transparent; font-weight: normal; font-style: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;"></span><br><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Arial; color: #000000; background-color: transparent; font-weight: normal; font-style: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">Honokohau
is not mismanaged. During the past seven years, the Lingle-Aiona
Administration has implemented more than $100 million in capital
improvements in small boat harbors across the state. Honokohau is
currently receiving almost $2 million in road, water and electrical
capital improvements this year. The slip holders in Honokohau have seen
the benefit of all their fees put into the harbor and more.</span><br><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Arial; color: #000000; background-color: transparent; font-weight: normal; font-style: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;"></span><br><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Arial; color: #000000; background-color: transparent; font-weight: normal; font-style: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">While
the slip holders complain that their facility does not look like the
private marinas, they need to understand that they are not paying market
rates for their slips. This is not mismanagement. Not one of the
boaters with slips in small boat harbors is paying market rate for
slips. DLNR has recently adopted a five-year step increase in slip fees,
but even with the planned increases, these slips will continue to be
subsidized.</span><br><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Arial; color: #000000; background-color: transparent; font-weight: normal; font-style: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;"></span><br><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Arial; color: #000000; background-color: transparent; font-weight: normal; font-style: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">This is only possible through our statewide system of funding.</span><br><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Arial; color: #000000; background-color: transparent; font-weight: normal; font-style: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;"> </span><br><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Arial; color: #000000; background-color: transparent; font-weight: normal; font-style: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">
The charge of mismanagement is merely an attempt to distract people
from the fact that boating fees do not cover the cost of the program and
that boaters do not support paying the same rate as their peers in
private harbors. What the Honokohau boaters are really claiming is that
they are entitled to an even greater subsidy than they already receive -
even if it comes at the expense of the majority of other Hawaii
residents accessing the ocean through the majority of boating
facilities.</span><br><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Arial; color: #000000; background-color: transparent; font-weight: normal; font-style: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;"></span><br><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Arial; color: #000000; background-color: transparent; font-weight: normal; font-style: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">Hannemann
should stop making statements that are simply untrue. He should stop
denigrating DLNR's hard-working employees by calling for a "cleaning
house" of the department. While I will be leaving at the end of the
year, our civil service employees, who have performed admirably, will
stay on and continue executing their jobs.</span><br><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Arial; color: #000000; background-color: transparent; font-weight: normal; font-style: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;"></span><br><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Arial; color: #000000; background-color: transparent; font-weight: normal; font-style: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">Finally,
Hannemann needs a better understanding of this program before making
promises that unfairly benefit a select few and negatively impact so may
people across the state. That is, unless he plans on increasing taxes
or fees on everyone else to offset the increased subsidy to Honokohau.</span><br><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Arial; color: #000000; background-color: transparent; font-weight: normal; font-style: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;"></span><br><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Arial; color: #000000; background-color: transparent; font-weight: normal; font-style: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">Laura Thielen</span><br><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Arial; color: #000000; background-color: transparent; font-weight: normal; font-style: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;"></span><br><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Arial; color: #000000; background-color: transparent; font-weight: normal; font-style: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">Chairwoman</span><br><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Arial; color: #000000; background-color: transparent; font-weight: normal; font-style: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;"></span><br><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Arial; color: #000000; background-color: transparent; font-weight: normal; font-style: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">State Dept. of Land and Natural Resources</span><br>http://www.margaretwille.com/home/?q=node/577#commentsSun, 15 Aug 2010 05:39:55 +0000margaretwille577 at http://www.margaretwille.com/homeMore Lingle Administration Anti-Public Input Environmental Rulemaking: Office of Environmental Quality
http://www.margaretwille.com/home/?q=node/576
So you may have heard the State Laws relating to when and what
developments trigger an environmental study, allowing for public input
into that decision-making, were being reviewed last legislative term and
that review will continue this coming legislative session. Accordingly
one would not expect a lot of rule changes relating to these
environmental studies (Environmental Assessments and Environmental
Impact Study) since the controlling laws are up for review. BUT THAT
IS EXACTLY WHAT IS OCCURRING. And what is the likely result is a whole
scale effort to exempt just about every offensive activity from the
requirement of an environmental study (so that way we most likely will
not have to worry so much about what the law, now or in the future, may
require in the case of covered activities). I assume this critique is
somewhat of an oversimplification of what is going on -- but you get the
picture. <br><br>The comment period for these proposed Office of
Environmental Quality rules in question started July 8th -- so
presumably we have until tomorrow Monday to respond (or perhaps
rulemaking closed yesterday -- Saturday the 7th).<br><br> The State's
M.O. (modus operandi) here, as in the case of the proposed rule changes
discussed in the previous blog, is, in my opinion, to cut out the
opportunity for public input. It also appears the State is closing
loopholes where the public actually had something to say --- such as
with regard to the poisoning of our environment, e.g. toxic poisoning
mangroves around the shorelline.<br><br>I figure these rule changes will
be approved regardless of public comments in opposition. I suggest
rather of spending lots of time writing comments to the Office of
Environmental Quality --- you instead make sure everyone you know votes
for Neil Abercrombie for Governor --- and not for Mufi Hanneman and not
for Duke Aiona.<br><br>Attached below are Syd Singer's comments about
these proposed rule changes: <br><br>To review this amazingly extensive
list of proposed rule changes affecting every DLNR Division lists of
exemptions from environmental studies and public input, see the July 8,
2010 Department of Health Environmental list: Go to links following the
Environmental Quality Council HRS 343- 6 Item on the attached NOTICE
"2010-07-08" attachment. <p><a href="http://www.margaretwille.com/home/?q=node/576" target="_blank">read more</a></p>http://www.margaretwille.com/home/?q=node/576#commentsMon, 09 Aug 2010 06:04:53 +0000margaretwille576 at http://www.margaretwille.com/homeLingle Administration Busy: Wants to Allow Development of Conservation District and Prevent Appeals by Public
http://www.margaretwille.com/home/?q=node/575
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 11pt;">The
Department of Land and Natural Resources is busy gutting many
substantive and
procedural provisions of the Conservation District Regulations: Hawaii
Administrative Rules Chapter
13.5.<span style=""> </span>Reckon there is a rush
to get this passed before the bend-over-for-special-interest
developers/anti-public-participation
Lingle Administration departs. Presumably if Mufi<span style=""> </span>is
elected the current powers-that-be will not be harmed
much less deposed.... but there is always the possibility that
Abercrombie will
be elected.<span style=""> </span>Horrors to be – since
Abercrombie is supportive of local input and public participation in
government
decision-making. Hence this and other environmentally damaging
rulemaking is now in progress. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 11pt;"><o:p> </o:p>So
back to the Conservation District rules that the elite establishment
want changed before the
elections: <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 11pt;"><o:p> </o:p>Public
hearings here in County of Hawaii from 6 to 8 pm: <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 11pt;"><o:p> </o:p>August
9th Hearing in Kona <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 11pt;">Mayor’s
Conference Room 75-5706 Kuakini Highway Room 103<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 11pt;"><o:p> </o:p>August
10th hearing in Hilo <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 11pt;">State
Office Building 75 Aupuni Street Conference Room C </span><span style="font-size: 11pt;"><br>
</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 11pt;">IF YOU CAN NOT
ATTEND ONE OF THESE
HEARINGS, YOU CAN SUBMIT COMMENTS BY MAIL TO:</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 11pt;">DEPARTMENT OF LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCES<br>
</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 11pt;">KALANIMOKU BUILDING</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 11pt;">1151 PUNCHBOWL
STREET RM 131</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 11pt;">HONOLULU HAWAII
96813. <br>
</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 11pt;">OR BY EMAIL to:
dlnr.occl@hawaii.gov</span><br>
</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 11pt;">Written
comments<span style=""> </span>must be submitted by
September 7, 2010.<o:p> <br></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 11pt;">HERE is the rough
draft of my<span style=""> </span>testimony: <br>
</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 11pt;">XXXXXXXXXXXX<br>
</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 11pt;"></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 11pt;">To:
State of Hawaii Department of Land and Natural Resources</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 11pt;">Fr: Margaret Wille,
Attorney at Law, Waimea, Hawaii 96743<br>
</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 11pt;">Re:
Comments on Proposed Amendments to Administrative Rules Chapter 5
of Title 13<span style=""> </span>“Conservation
District”. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 11pt;">Date:
August 9, 2010 [To be submitted at the Kona public hearing]<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 11pt;"><o:p> </o:p>General
Position:<span style=""> </span>OPPOSITION TO THE
PROPOSED RULE CHANGES<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 11pt;">1.
These are complicated rules and the reasons for many of the proposed
changes
are not obvious. Before these changes are voted on – they should be made
available to the public listed individually with the corresponding
rationale
for each and every change. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 11pt;">2.
Here is an example of one proposed rule change that is designed simply
and
solely, in my opinion to keep public input and participation from being
considered.<span style=""> </span>The Conservation
District is critical to all of our well-being on this island ecosystem,
and
“standing” should be broadly permitted and not unduly restricted – as is
being
proposed in Rule 13-5-31(g).<span style=""> </span>This
one rule change alone violates the intent of Hawaii Constitution’s
Public Trust
Doctrine (Section XI, subsection 1) – because it prevents the public
from
protecting what is an essential part of our public trust natural
resources –
the land and waters of our Conservation District). This proposed rule
change
also undermines basic principles of state and federal due process.<span style=""> </span><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 11pt;">To
be specific: <span style=""> </span><o:p></o:p>DLNR
Conservation District Rule #13-5-31(g) now provides that “<u>any person”</u>
may appeal the chairperson’s decision relating to a proposed development
activity on land in the Conservation District.<span style=""> </span><o:p><br></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 11pt;">DLNR
now proposes to change this rule in order to limit those who can
challenge an
agency permit decision in general to the developer-applicant and if
perchance there is a
neighbor to these immediate landowners, in other words the folks who
more than likely are those
supporting, not opposing, the proposed development). <o:p><br></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 11pt;">The
proposed rule is as follows:<span style=""> </span><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 11pt;">13-5-31(g)
<s>Any person</s> <u>The permit applicant or any person who has some
property
interest in the land, who lawfully resides on the land, or who otherwise
can
demonstrate that they will be so directly affected by the use that their
interest is so clearly distinguishable from that of the general public </u>may
appeal
the chairperson’s decision by filing a written appeal to the department
no later than fourteen days after the date of the department’s
determination of
the departmental permit.<span style=""> </span>(on page
5-38 of the proposed rules)<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 11pt;"><o:p> </o:p>We
are all impacted by what happens in the conservation district. It is the
watershed for everyone --which watershed requires preservation of the
forest
and undergrowth and is where the most endangered species are to be
found. It is
our most vulnerable ecosystem.<span style="">
</span>Therefore harm to the conservation district ecosystem adversely
affects everyone.Yet
this rule change will undermine the public’s
ability to seek administrative and judicial review of activities that
should
not be approved.<span style=""> </span><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 11pt;"><o:p> </o:p></span><span style="font-size: 11pt;"></span>Examples of
substantive proposals that allow for abuse: <o:p></o:p></p><span style="font-size: 11pt;"></span><p class="MsoNormal">
</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 11pt;"><span style=""> </span>1.
<span style="font-style: italic;">(Allowing for)</span> Selective
Removal of individual trees
for non-commercial purposes provided that each tree is replaced on a
one-to-one-basis with trees that are appropriate to the site location
with
preference to trees that are endemic or indigenous to Hawaii. [ Pg 5-24
at P-11
“Tree Removal”<span style=""> </span>B-1]<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 11pt;">2. <span style="font-style: italic;">(Allowing for) </span>New Telecommunications
facility.<span style="">
</span>Pg 5-25<span style=""> </span>at P-14: D-1 ] <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 11pt;">3. <span style="font-style: italic;"> </span>And check out
the new all encompassing definition of a “public purpose”
project: <o:p></o:p></span><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: CourierNewPSMT;"><br></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: CourierNewPSMT;">Public Purpose Uses (D-1) <s>[Land
uses undertaken by the State of Hawaii<o:p></o:p></s></span><s><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: CourierNewPSMT;"> or the counties
to fulfill a mandated<o:p></o:p> governmental
function, activity, or service<o:p></o:p> for public]</span></s><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: CourierNewPSMT;"> <span style="font-style: italic;">(Allowing for)</span> Land uses undertaken
in support<o:p></o:p> of a public
service by an agency of the<o:p></o:p> county, state,
or federal government, or by<o:p></o:p> an independent
non-governmental entity.<o:p></o:p> Examples of
public purpose uses include but<o:p></o:p> are not limited
to public roads, marinas,<o:p></o:p> harbors,
airports, trails, public water works<o:p></o:p> and other
utilities, energy generation from<o:p></o:p></span> renewable
sources, communication systems,<o:p></o:p> watershed and
conservation projects, flood or<o:p></o:p> erosion control
projects, recreational<o:p></o:p> facilities, and
community centers intended to<o:p></o:p> benefit [and]
the public in accordance with<o:p></o:p> public policy
and the purpose of the<o:p></o:p> conservation
district. [Such land uses may<o:p></o:p> include
transportation systems, water<o:p></o:p> systems,
communications systems, and<o:p></o:p> recreational
facilities.<span style=""> </span><o:p></o:p>Pg 5-20
§13-5-22 P-6 “Public Purpose Uses” </p><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: CourierNewPSMT;"></span><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 11pt;"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 11pt;"><br>
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<!--EndFragment-->
<p><a href="http://www.margaretwille.com/home/?q=node/575" target="_blank">read more</a></p>http://www.margaretwille.com/home/?q=node/575#commentsMon, 09 Aug 2010 05:05:50 +0000margaretwille575 at http://www.margaretwille.com/home8/7 County of Hawaii Charter (Revision) Commission Update: Plans to Educate the Voting Public about Proposed Amendments
http://www.margaretwille.com/home/?q=node/574
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 11pt;"><o:p></o:p>Recently
the<span style=""> </span>2009-2010 Hawaii County
Charter [revision] Commission finalized the proposed Charter Amendments
to be
placed on the ballot this November for consideration by the voting
public . <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 11pt;"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 11pt;">The
County’s Charter is its “Constitution” – allocating power among the
executive
and legislative branches and defining the kuleana (scope of power and
responsibilities, and key qualifications) of the various officers and
departments, and sets forth the key procedural mandates for these
positions of power.<span style=""> </span></span><span style="font-size: 11pt;"><span style=""> </span>It also includes some important
obligations to the public – such as relating to requirements for public
notice.
The Commission only meets once every 10 years.<span style=""> </span><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 11pt;"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 11pt;">The
Commission is now embarking on its “educational” phase – so that folks
have the
opportunity to learn about these proposed amendments before they enter
the
voting booth in November and have no idea why these amendments are being
proposed. <span style=""> </span><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 11pt;"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 11pt;">The
most controversial amendment being proposed was the Open Space-Public
Access
land fund amendment – which proposed amendment will set a minimum for
annual
deposits to this fund (1% of property taxes). The Kenoi administration
opposed
mentioned of the fund in the Charter – so those in office (those in
power)
would have more control over whether and to what extent the Land fund
would be
funded.<span style=""> </span>There was a lot of public
testimony in support of memorializing this fund in the Charter, many
requesting
that the minimum be set at 2% (consistent with the referendum passed
ordinance
fixing the annual deposit at 2% of property taxes). However because that
percentage is contained in an ordinance<span style="">
</span>(think County statute), the County was able to eliminate those
deposits
by way of a County Council passed subsequent ordinance.<span style=""> </span>If
the land fund minimum is in the
Charter, the County Council will be able to modify the percentage – BUT
will no
longer be able to cut deposits below that 1% percentage.<span style="">
</span>As you may surmise, inclusion of
the land fund at this 1% figure was a compromise. I believe it was an
admirable
compromise – balancing all of the concerns and balancing the political
pressures from all sides. The Commission vote was unanimous in favor of
this
compromise.<span style=""> </span><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 11pt;"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 11pt;">I
suggested quite a number of amendments – only a few of which survived in
one
form or another: for example – providing for internet notifications to
the
public (notices which up to now are only required to be in the
newspapers), and
also memorializing the Hawaii Constitution’s public trust doctrine
(which in
2006 the Hawaii Supreme Court concluded applies to the Counties and is
not just
the responsibility of the State).
Rather than
my paraphrasing these amendments – read them for yourself CA 23
(Relating to
Publication of Notices via Electronic Medium) CA-9 (Electronic Notice of
Special Meetings); CA-26 Preservation of Natural and Cultural Resources.
</span><span style="font-size: 11pt;">This CA-26 encourages thinking about
future generations, not just
our own well-being; being stewards, and not just users, of our island
resources. The Court's generally refer to the corresponding Hawaii
Constitutional provision as "the Public Trust Doctrine".</span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 11pt;"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 11pt;">See
Minutes of the Commission's 7/23/10 Meeting BELOW ”0723-10-4” (including
my testimony in the
Statements of the Public) Note that I mention CA-9 about Electronic
Notice to the Public<img alt="" src="edit" hspace="" border="0" vspace=""> -- that reference should have included both CA 9
and CA 23. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 11pt;"><o:p> <br>
</o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 11pt;">Link
to the Commission’s website <a name="" target="" classname="" class="" href="http://www.co.hawaii.hi.us/council/2010_charter_commission/meetings.htm">HERE</a>
(including the agenda for the next Commission
meeting scheduled for August 13, 2010<span style="">
</span>in Hilo in the Council Chambers ) <br>
</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 11pt;"><br>
</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 11pt;">And to go directly
to</span><span style="font-size: 11pt;"> the list of proposed Charter
Amendments see attachment BELOW “COMM258-6”</span></p>
<span style="font-size: 11pt;"><o:p></o:p></span>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 11pt;"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<!--EndFragment-->
<p><a href="http://www.margaretwille.com/home/?q=node/574" target="_blank">read more</a></p>http://www.margaretwille.com/home/?q=node/574#commentsSun, 08 Aug 2010 07:32:27 +0000margaretwille574 at http://www.margaretwille.com/home8/2 Lalamilo Connector Road Litigation Update (Waimea, South Kohala, Hawaii)
http://www.margaretwille.com/home/?q=node/573
<p><br /><br /><iframe src="https://docs.google.com/present/embed?id=dc7drvb6_3gdr6v6kj&size=l" frameborder="0" height="700" width="700"></iframe></p>
<p><a href="http://www.margaretwille.com/home/?q=node/573" target="_blank">read more</a></p>http://www.margaretwille.com/home/?q=node/573#commentsMon, 02 Aug 2010 23:56:18 +0000margaretwille573 at http://www.margaretwille.com/homeDLNR's Agenda to Limit Public Participation in Environmental and Land Use Decisions &To Minimize Opportunity for Judicial Review
http://www.margaretwille.com/home/?q=node/569
<span style="font-size: 10pt;">HAVE
YOU NOTICED THE TREND? The Executive Branch of our State government, at
least the Department of <br>Land and Natural Resources, is moving
forward on its manifest agenda to limit public input on important land
<br>and
conservation decisions. </span><span style="font-size: 10pt;"></span><p><a href="http://www.margaretwille.com/home/?q=node/569" target="_blank">read more</a></p>http://www.margaretwille.com/home/?q=node/569#commentsSun, 01 Aug 2010 19:45:23 +0000margaretwille569 at http://www.margaretwille.com/homeFavorite Big Island Political Blogsites
http://www.margaretwille.com/home/?q=node/568
<p><br /></p>
<p><a href="http://www.margaretwille.com/home/?q=node/568" target="_blank">read more</a></p>http://www.margaretwille.com/home/?q=node/568#commentsMon, 26 Jul 2010 00:14:50 +0000margaretwille568 at http://www.margaretwille.com/homeSUNDAY BLOGS: Limited Blogging Schedule to Continue Through July and Possibly August -- But At Least on Sundays
http://www.margaretwille.com/home/?q=node/566
I continue to need to block out time to address daughter's medical condition and therefore will continue to blog on a limited basis. At minimum I will post a blog each Sunday for the next month or two.<br><br>For those interested in medical mysteries, we have been seeking a diagnosis why my 20-year old daughter has been so ill (bedridden most of the time). We are finally getting some answers with the assistance of physicians at UCLA Medical Center: "dysautonomia". It is a malfunction of the autonomic nervous systems. There are various constellations -- including "POTS" (Postural Orthostatic Tachycardia Syndrome). Anyway not a good illness to have, but at least we finally have a diagnosis. <br><p><a href="http://www.margaretwille.com/home/?q=node/566" target="_blank">read more</a></p>http://www.margaretwille.com/home/?q=node/566#commentsSun, 18 Jul 2010 16:27:29 +0000margaretwille566 at http://www.margaretwille.com/home7/9 PARKER SCHOOL USE PERMIT: Board of Appeals Rejects Appeal By Waimea Community Members
http://www.margaretwille.com/home/?q=node/565
At its February 2010 meeting the Planning Commission approved Parker School's use permit application to increase enrollment and expand its Kapiolani Road campus. The Board however excluded the supplemental conditions that had been agreed to and submitted by Headmaster Carl Sturges on behalf of Parker School. The supplemental conditions were agreed to in response to concerns voiced by community members and neighbors.<br><br>On April 12, 2010 four Waimea community members appealed the Commission's decision -- solely with respect to the Commission's decision to exclude these supplemental use permit amendments. <br><br>On July 9, 2010 the Board of Appeals denied the appeal on "jurisdiction grounds". The appeal from the Planning Commission's use permit decision to the Board of Appeal was made pursuant to the Planning Commission's Rule 7-9 which permits appeals from Planning Commission use permit decisions to the Board of Appeals. The Planning Commission however argued that this Planning Commission Rule 7-9 was inconsistent with the County Charter and therefore void. The Board of Appeals agreed with the Planning Commission and therefore granted its Motion to Dismiss the appeal. <br><br>At a later date I will post the public documents in this case.<br>http://www.margaretwille.com/home/?q=node/565#commentsSun, 18 Jul 2010 16:15:19 +0000margaretwille565 at http://www.margaretwille.com/homeTaking a Break From Blogging Until After the 4th of July
http://www.margaretwille.com/home/?q=node/563
I am taking a break from blogging until after the 4th of July -- to address some family medical issues. <br>http://www.margaretwille.com/home/?q=node/563#commentsThu, 17 Jun 2010 16:16:19 +0000margaretwille563 at http://www.margaretwille.com/homeBLNR Denies My Request For Contested Case Hearing In Matter of Release of Road Reservation for Lalamilo Connector Road
http://www.margaretwille.com/home/?q=node/562
Re: Lalamilo Connector Road: Attached below -- <br>1. My Request for a Contested Case Hearing in the Matter of the Board of Land & Natural Resources Approval of Landowners' Request for the State To Release the Road Reservation and Remove Deed Restrictions from their Deeds; and,<br><br>2. Board of Land and Natural Resources' Denial of My Request for Contested Case Hearing; and the Board's Denial of County of Hawaii's Request to Join My Request for Contested Case Hearing. [The Staff's submittal recommendation is attached. This recommendation was approved at the Board's June 10, 2010 hearing. <br><br>There are 30 days before this decision becomes "final" -- in other words, 30 days if filing any appeal. <br>http://www.margaretwille.com/home/?q=node/562#commentsSat, 12 Jun 2010 21:56:50 +0000margaretwille562 at http://www.margaretwille.com/homeStatus of Appeal of Planning Commission Decision to Exclude Use Permit Conditions that Applicant Parker School Had Agreed To
http://www.margaretwille.com/home/?q=node/561
Here is what has happened in this appeal since May 29:<br><br>Saturday May 29: Appellants receive copy of County's Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction [meaning that the County contends the Board of Appeals does not have authority to hear this case ]<br><br>Sunday May 30: Appellants learn that witness (who had been subpoenaed by Appellants) plans to be off island on June 10th- the date of the Board of Appeals hearing;<br><br>Tuesday June 1: Appellants file motion for continuance of Board hearing because this witness is not available to attend the June 10th hearing;<br><br>Tuesday June 1: Appellants file Memorandum In Opposition to the County's Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction based on Planning Commission's Rule in effect when the appeal
was filed that provided for Appeals Board review of Use Permit decisions made by the Planning Commission;<br><br>Thursday June 3: The Board grants Appellants Motion for a Continuance;<br><br>Friday June 4: Appellants file Motion for new Board of Appeals Member Rodney Watanabe to be recused from participation and voting on this matter (he was on the Planning Commission when this case was decided by the Commission);<br><br>Sunday June 6: Appellant informed that on Friday afternoon June 4th, the Board received County's Memorandum in Opposition To Appellants Motion for Continuance; Board asks Appellants to hold off notifying surrounding property owners of continuance until Board reviews this matter);<br><br>Sunday June 6: Appellants advise Board that Counsel/Appellant Margaret Wille has now made other commitments for June 10 based on assumption that June 10th hearing had been continued;<br><br>Monday June 7: Appellants Receive copy of County's (Planning Commission's) Memorandum in Opposition To Appellants Motion for Continuance.<br><br>Monday June 7: Appellants notified that Chairman of Board affirmed that Appellants' Motion for Continuance was granted. <br><br>HEARING ON THIS CASE NOW SCHEDULED FOR JULY 9TH IN HILO AT THE AUPUNI CENTER CONFERENCE ROOM. <br><br>TO READ COUNTY'S MOTION TO DISMISS AND APPELLANTS' MEMORANDUM IN OPPOSITION TO COUNTY'S MOTION TO DISMISS SEE PREVIOUS BLOG POSTING <a name="" target="" classname="" class="" href="/home/?q=node/556">HERE</a><br><br><br>http://www.margaretwille.com/home/?q=node/561#commentsThu, 10 Jun 2010 17:56:41 +0000margaretwille561 at http://www.margaretwille.com/homeWCA's Planning and Design Review Committee Recommends Some Conditions on Verizon's Proposed Tower in Center of Waimea
http://www.margaretwille.com/home/?q=node/560
<i><br>
Here is the Planning & Design Review Committee's
Recommendations to the
Planning Director based on the <st1:place w:st="on">South
Kohala</st1:place>
Community Development Plan and the Waimea Design Plan.
</i><br>
<br>
<br>
<span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Arial;">To:
<st1:place w:st="on"><st1:placename w:st="on">Hawaii</st1:placename> <st1:placetype w:st="on">County</st1:placetype></st1:place>
Planning Director c/o Rosalind
Newlon<u1:p></u1:p></span><o:p></o:p><p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Arial;">cc: Daryn Arai, Supervisor of
Permitting<u1:p></u1:p></span><span style="font-family: Arial;"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Arial;">Fr: WCA Waimea Planning & Design
Review Comm. (PRDC) Margaret Wille
co-chair<u1:p></u1:p></span><span style="font-family: Arial;"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Arial;"><br style="">
<!--[if !supportLineBreakNewLine]--><br style="">
<!--[endif]--></span><span style="font-family: Arial;"><u1:p></u1:p><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Arial;">Re: Proposed 50+ foot <st1:placename w:st="on">Verizon</st1:placename> <st1:placename w:st="on">Cell</st1:placename>
<st1:placetype w:st="on">Tower</st1:placetype> at the
<st1:place w:st="on"><st1:placename w:st="on">Parker</st1:placename> <st1:placename w:st="on">Ranch</st1:placename> <st1:placetype w:st="on">Shopping Center</st1:placetype></st1:place>
<u1:p></u1:p></span><span style="font-family: Arial;"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Arial;">Date: June 8, 2010.<u1:p> <br style="">
<!--[if !supportLineBreakNewLine]--><br style="">
<!--[endif]--></u1:p></span><span style="font-family: Arial;"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 11pt;">
I<u1:p></u1:p></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 11pt;">
<b>RECOMMENDATION
SUMMARY<u1:p></u1:p></b></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><b><span style="font-size: 11pt;"><u1:p> </u1:p></span></b><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><b><span style="font-size: 11pt;">In summary, The Planning & Design Review Committee
recommends that Verizon be required to
:<u1:p></u1:p></span></b><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><b><span style="font-size: 11pt;"><u1:p> </u1:p></span></b><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><b><span style="font-size: 11pt;">1. At minimum commit to the “real tree” mitigation
plan set forth in this recommendation at its proposed <st1:place w:st="on"><st1:placename w:st="on">Parker</st1:placename> <st1:placename w:st="on">Ranch</st1:placename> <st1:placetype w:st="on">Center</st1:placetype></st1:place> location,
or else
locate a less conspicuous site for its cell
tower;<u1:p></u1:p></span></b><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><b><span style="font-size: 11pt;">2. Minimize the height of this structure in this
center of Waimea location, to no more than 54
feet.<u1:p></u1:p></span></b><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><b><span style="font-size: 11pt;">3. Provide independent monitoring of the levels of
electromagnetic radiation in the immediate area of this cell phone
tower.
<u1:p></u1:p></span></b><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><b><span style="font-size: 11pt;">4. Remove the tower from whatever location when the
tower is no longer in use.
<u1:p></u1:p></span></b><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 11pt;"><u1:p> </u1:p></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 11pt;">
<b>II.<u1:p></u1:p></b></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><b><span style="font-size: 11pt;">
EXPLANATION
OF
RECOMMENDATION<u1:p></u1:p></span></b><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 11pt;"><u1:p> </u1:p></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 11pt;">Based on the criteria in the South Kohala Community
Development Plan (SKCDP) and the Waimea Design Plan (WDP), the Waimea
Planning
and Design Review Committee (WPDRC) recommends as
follows:<u1:p></u1:p></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 11pt;"><u1:p> </u1:p></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><b><span style="font-size: 11pt;">Recommendation: FAVORABLE , BUT ONLY IF A “REAL TREE”
LANDSCAPING MITIGATION PLAN CAN BE ARRANGED AT PARKER RANCH CENTER:
</span></b><span style="font-size: 11pt;">Although
inconsistent with an important SKCDP policy
“Preserving Sense of Place”, the Waimea Planning and Design Committee
is
recommending the proposed Verizon Cell Tower plan application be
approved at
the proposed Parker Ranch Shopping Center location,
<u>PROVIDED</u> Verizon
implements an on-site “real tree” landscaping mitigation plan to
counter the
visual impact of the proposed 50-60 foot cell. The Committee asks that
this
mitigation plan require the planting of at least 50 trees in the now
empty
“tree islands” located around the various shopping center parking lots.
This
additional landscaping will mitigate the visual impact of
this commercial
cell tower in the center of Waimea town.
<u1:p></u1:p></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 11pt;"><u1:p> </u1:p></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 11pt;">Verizon’s local representative previously indicated
Verizon would be willing to pay all costs and do all of the
installation of
these trees at this property where the tower is to be
constructed. The
Verizon representative also stated that this is the type of mitigation
plan
that has been implemented in other communities.
</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<u1:p></u1:p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 11pt;"><u1:p> </u1:p></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><b><span style="font-size: 11pt;">WITHOUT THIS LANDSCAPE MITIGATION
PLAN</span></b><span style="font-size: 11pt;">: The application should not be approved
without Verizon’s agreement to this landscape mitigation plan
(which by
implication requires agreement by the <st1:place w:st="on"><st1:placename w:st="on">Parker</st1:placename> <st1:placename w:st="on">Ranch</st1:placename> <st1:placetype w:st="on">Shopping Center</st1:placetype></st1:place>).
Otherwise, Verizon can seek an alternate location where the tower would
have
less impact on Waimea’s visual beauty and viewplanes of the surrounding
mountains. For example, Parker Ranch has indicated it has available
locations
available within Verizon’s search area, which presumably are less
conspicuous.
<u1:p></u1:p></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 11pt;"><u1:p> </u1:p></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 11pt;">Additionally the WPDRC recommends the height of the
tower be limited to 50 feet (54 feet with the antennae)
because it will
be in this conspicuous center of Waimea location. (Therefore no
“co-location”
for another carrier be
permitted).
<b>
</b><u1:p></u1:p></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><b><span style="font-size: 11pt;">
III.<u1:p></u1:p></span></b><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><b><span style="font-size: 11pt;">
PROPOSED “REAL
TREE” MITIGATION
PLAN<u1:p></u1:p></span></b><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><b><span style="font-size: 11pt;"><u1:p> </u1:p></span></b><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 11pt;">There are approximately 70 vacant “tree islands”
and border locations in the <st1:place w:st="on"><st1:placename w:st="on">Parker</st1:placename> <st1:placename w:st="on">Ranch</st1:placename> <st1:placetype w:st="on">Shopping Center</st1:placetype></st1:place>
parking lots where trees could be planted
of a cellphone tower Verizon should be required to install at least 50
trees.
We recommend the State Tree Nursery and the <st1:street w:st="on"><st1:address w:st="on">Waimea Outdoor
Circle</st1:address></st1:street> be consulted in
selecting appropriate species. (Committee members suggested a diversity
of tree
species.)<u1:p></u1:p></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 11pt; color: red;"><u1:p> </u1:p></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 11pt;">Specifically, Verizon needs to make the appropriate
commitment to ensure that these trees are maintained for the duration
of the
period this cell tower is located at this site. [Too often
landscaping is
required, put in place but then ignored, and dies.] For example, if any
irrigation system is needed, the installation and/or watering cost
should be
also be addressed
.<u1:p></u1:p></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><b><span style="font-size: 11pt;">
IV.
<u1:p></u1:p></span></b><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><b><u><span style="font-size: 11pt;">
BASIS
FOR RECOMMENDATION: PUBLIC TRUST FRAMEWORK FOR ANALYSIS
<u1:p></u1:p></span></u></b><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 11pt;"><u1:p> </u1:p></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 11pt;">In
the case of balancing beneficial private commercial
interests that negatively impact cultural and natural resources, use of
the
following “Public Trust” decision-making framework is appropriate. As
stated in
the
SKCDP:<u1:p></u1:p></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 11pt;"><u1:p> </u1:p></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 11pt;">
“...the
constitutionally mandated “Public Trust Doctrine”
<u1:p></u1:p></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 11pt;">
imposes
upon the Counties the stewardship responsibility
<u1:p></u1:p></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 11pt;">
to
‘future generations’ to conserve and protect <st1:state w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">Hawai’i</st1:place></st1:state>’s
<u1:p></u1:p></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 11pt;">
natural
beauty and all natural resources”. SKCDP at page 9.
<u1:p></u1:p></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 11pt;"><u1:p> </u1:p></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 11pt;">The
SKCDP incorporates the Public Trust Doctrine
in the context of its responsibility to current and future
generations to
conserve and protect <st1:state w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">Hawaii</st1:place></st1:state>’s
natural beauty and natural resources. The Public Trust
Doctrine is a
decision-making tool for considering beneficial commercial
interests that
impact our natural resources, including <st1:state w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">Hawaii</st1:place></st1:state>’s natural
beauty. See SKCDP at page
9.
<u1:p></u1:p></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 11pt;"><u1:p> </u1:p></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 11pt;"> The SKCDP also requires compliance not only with
the Plan’s mandatory directives but also with guidelines
which
should be followed “unless a determination is made that under
certain
circumstances, or because of specified reasons, that general guideline
is found
to be inappropriate, ill-advised, or impossible,” SKCDP at page
4<s>. </s></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<u1:p></u1:p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 11pt;"><u1:p> </u1:p></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 11pt;">In
the case of <u>In the Matter of the Contested
Case Hearing on the Water Use Permit Application Filed by Kukui
(Molokai) Inc. </u>116
Haw 481, 174 P.3d 320 (2007), the Hawaii Supreme Court sets forth a
good
example of how this public trust doctrine should be applied when
evaluating a proposed development project . In its
discussion, the Court
points out that when public trust resources are impacted, the
government
reviewing
agency:<u1:p></u1:p></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 11pt;"><u1:p> </u1:p></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0.5in;"><span style="font-size: 11pt;">1. Should not simply be an
umpire for competing interests, but instead should advance public
rights and
protecting public
resources;<u1:p></u1:p></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0.5in;"><span style="font-size: 11pt;"><u1:p> </u1:p></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0.5in;"><span style="font-size: 11pt;">2. Should not compromise
public rights unless by way of a “decision made with a level of
openness,
diligence, and foresight” commensurate with the high priority
of the relevant
public
right;<u1:p></u1:p></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0.5in;"><span style="font-size: 11pt;"><u1:p> </u1:p></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0.5in;"><span style="font-size: 11pt;">3. Should hold the applicant
to its burden of demonstrating the absence of other practical
alternatives –
including the determination of whether there is no practical
alternative.
<u1:p></u1:p></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0.5in;"><span style="font-size: 11pt;"><u1:p> </u1:p></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0.5in;"><span style="font-size: 11pt;">4. Should provide a
means to revoke the permit should the reviewing entity determine that
the
requirements and conditions are not being met.
<u1:p></u1:p></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 11pt;"><u1:p> </u1:p></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 11pt;">
V.
<u1:p></u1:p></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 11pt;">
<b>REVIEW OF THE
VERIZON
PROJECT<u1:p></u1:p></b></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 11pt;"><u1:p> </u1:p></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 11pt;">Consistent with this “public trust” framework for
analysis, and the appropriate balancing of interests, the relevant
questions
regarding the proposed Verizon project
are:<u1:p></u1:p></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 11pt;"><u1:p> </u1:p></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 11pt;">A.
<b><u>Beneficial/Reasonable Use
Consistency</u>:</b>
Is the purpose and scope of the proposed development beneficial to the
community -- based on the policies of the South Kohala Community
Development
Plan and the Waimea Design
Plan?<u1:p></u1:p></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 11pt;"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<u1:p></u1:p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0.5in;"><span style="font-size: 11pt;">YES. The Verizon cell tower is
a beneficial commercial development proposed to be located in
Waimea.
Those who benefit from the facilities should be willing to be burdened
by its
presence – at a reasonable
location.<u1:p></u1:p></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 11pt;"><u1:p> </u1:p></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 11pt;">B.
<b><u>Location/Design</u>
<u>Consistency:</u></b><u>
</u>Is the location and design of the proposed development
consistent with the
policies of the South Kohala Community Development Plan and the Waimea
Design
Plan, including the public trust mandate? Alternatively, has
the
applicant demonstrated substantial consistency by way agreeing to all
reasonable measures available to mitigate the adverse impact of the
proposed
development?
<u1:p></u1:p></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 11pt;"><u1:p> </u1:p></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0.5in;"><b><span style="font-size: 11pt;">NO</span></b><span style="font-size: 11pt;">. As proposed, with respect to protecting
Waimea
natural beauty (in this case its visual beauty – its viewplanes) and
promoting
a sense of place (village rural paniolo ambiance), a 50-60 foot cell
tower in
the very center of Waimea is <u>inconsistent</u>
with the SKCDP.
<u1:p></u1:p></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 11pt;"><u1:p> </u1:p></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 11pt;">Community members stated that they did not believe
Verizon had demonstrated that there is not another less conspicuous
location
that would satisfy Verizon’s requirements. The burden of
demonstrating
that there is not an alternative location that would be consistent with
the
County General Plan and the SKCDP is on the Applicant, not on the
community.
<u1:p></u1:p></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 11pt;"><u1:p> </u1:p></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 11pt;"> Community members were generally not satisfied
with Verizon’s offer to spend additional funds (which might run an
additional
$50,000) to construct a “stealth tower” disguised as a pine tree
because it
would require additional height (add to the disruption of the view
plane) and
look out of place tucked up against a shopping center
building.<u1:p></u1:p></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 11pt;"><u1:p> </u1:p></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 11pt;">Community members want the tower limited to 54 feet to
prevent any future increase in the height of the tower. Therefore
co-location
with another carrier (which would require additional height) should be
prohibited
in this conspicuous location. Should Verizon cease using this tower in
the
future, it should be responsible for its timely removal.
<u1:p></u1:p></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 11pt;"><u1:p> </u1:p></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 11pt;">There was also substantial community concern about the
cumulative health impact of this cell tower and the likelihood of more
being
located in this area in the future.
<u1:p></u1:p></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 11pt;">They stressed that there should be a requirement for
regular monitoring of the electromagnetic radiation levels and that the
monitoring reports be done by an independent entity and submitted to
the
Planning Department at least annually.
<u1:p></u1:p></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 11pt;">Other municipalities make this monitoring
requirement of cell phone companies.
<u1:p></u1:p></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 11pt;"><u1:p> </u1:p></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><u><span style="font-size: 11pt;">In summary, The Planning & Design Review Committee
recommends that Verizon be required to
:<u1:p></u1:p></span></u><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 11pt;"><u1:p> </u1:p></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><u><span style="font-size: 11pt;">1. At minimum commit to the “real tree” mitigation
plan set forth in this recommendation at its proposed <st1:place w:st="on"><st1:placename w:st="on">Parker</st1:placename> <st1:placename w:st="on">Ranch</st1:placename> <st1:placetype w:st="on">Center</st1:placetype></st1:place> location,
or else
locate a less conspicuous site for its cell
tower;<u1:p></u1:p></span></u><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 11pt;"><u1:p> </u1:p></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><u><span style="font-size: 11pt;">2. Minimize the height of this structure in this
center of Waimea location, to no more than 54
feet.<u1:p></u1:p></span></u><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 11pt;"><u1:p> </u1:p></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><u><span style="font-size: 11pt;">3. Provide independent monitoring of the levels of
electromagnetic radiation in the immediate area of this cell phone
tower.
<u1:p></u1:p></span></u><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 11pt;"><u1:p> </u1:p></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><u><span style="font-size: 11pt;">4. Remove the tower from whatever location when the
tower is no longer in use.
<u1:p></u1:p></span></u><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 11pt;"><u1:p> </u1:p></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 11pt;">
<b> VI<u1:p></u1:p></b></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><b><span style="font-size: 11pt;"> ZONING CONSISTENCY
VERSUS GENERAL PLAN/CDP
CONSISTENCY</span></b><o:p></o:p></p>
<u1:p></u1:p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 11pt;"><u1:p> </u1:p></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 11pt;">A
proposed development must be consistent with both
the County’s zoning rules and with the General Plan. This is a
well-settled
legal
principle.<u1:p></u1:p></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 11pt;"><u1:p> </u1:p></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 11pt;">In
this case, the proposed location at the Parker
Ranch center is zoned commercial and therefore available for the
construction
of cell towers. However consistency with zoning is not the only
requirement.
The proposed project must also be consistent with the General Plan—and
therefore consistent with the applicable Community Development Plan.
<u1:p></u1:p></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 11pt;"><u1:p> </u1:p></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 11pt;">
VII.<u1:p></u1:p></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><b><span style="font-size: 11pt;"> IMPORTANT RELEVANT SKCDP AND WAIMEA DESIGN PLAN
REQUIREMENTS<u1:p></u1:p></span></b><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 11pt;"><u1:p> </u1:p></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 11pt;">With
respect to the SKCDP, the key relevant policy is
Preservation of Culture and Sense of Place, which is both a
District-wide and
Waimea town policy.
<u1:p></u1:p></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 11pt;"><u1:p> </u1:p></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 11pt;">With
respect to <st1:place w:st="on"><st1:placename w:st="on">Waimea</st1:placename> <st1:placetype w:st="on">Town</st1:placetype></st1:place>
policies, the #1 policy is “Preservation of Waimea’s Sense of Place” –
including visual open space. More particularly, the SKCDP states
“Together with
the grand views of <st1:place w:st="on">Mauna
Kea</st1:place> to the southeast
of the town, the pu’u define the special landscape ‘sense of place’ of
Waimea”.
SKCDP at pages 67-68. With respect to the choice of
landscaping
mitigation plans, we are guided by the Waimea “Sense of Place” strategy
relating to protection of significant trees:
<u1:p></u1:p></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 11pt;"><u1:p> </u1:p></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 11pt;">
“Preserving
Waimea’s close relationship with
nature<u1:p></u1:p></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 11pt;">
is
critical to preserving its ‘sense of place’. Most people
<u1:p></u1:p></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 11pt;">
in
the Waimea community recognize the need to protect
<u1:p></u1:p></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 11pt;">
and
preserve the quantity and diversity of mature trees
<u1:p></u1:p></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 11pt;">
in
and near the town center....” SKCDP at page 70.
<u1:p></u1:p></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 11pt;"><u1:p> </u1:p></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 11pt;">With
respect to the Waimea Design Plan, the relevant
design policies are: </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><br style="">
<!--[if !supportLineBreakNewLine]--><br style="">
<!--[endif]--><o:p></o:p></p>
<u1:p></u1:p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0.5in; text-indent: -0.25in;"><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal;"></span><span style="font-size: 7pt;">
</span></span><span style="font-size: 11pt;">-To
preserve views toward distant focal points
including <st1:place w:st="on">Mauna Kea</st1:place>. Mauna
Loa, adjoining
pu’u, and <st1:place w:st="on"><st1:placename w:st="on">Kohala</st1:placename> <st1:placetype w:st="on">Mountains</st1:placetype></st1:place>”;
and,<u1:p></u1:p></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0.5in; text-indent: -0.25in;"><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal;"></span><span style="font-size: 7pt;">
</span></span><span style="font-size: 11pt;">-To
enhance the character of Waimea and to encourage
landscaping and landscaping elements, such as signage, paving, and
lighting”;
as well as,
<u1:p></u1:p></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0.5in; text-indent: -0.25in;"><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal;"></span><span style="font-size: 7pt;">
</span></span><span style="font-size: 11pt;">-To
minimize the visual impact of motor vehicles and
associated parking, service and sales facilities” (this Waimea Plan
objective
is not directly linked to the Verizon project but would be benefited
from the
proposed visual mitigation plan).
</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0.5in; text-indent: -0.25in;"><br style="">
<!--[if !supportLineBreakNewLine]--><br style="">
<!--[endif]--><o:p></o:p></p>
<u1:p></u1:p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 11pt;">The above policies are also consistent with the Parker
Ranch 2020 Plan that was the conceptual plan for all the rezoned
<st1:place w:st="on"><st1:placename w:st="on">Waimea</st1:placename> <st1:placetype w:st="on">Center</st1:placetype></st1:place>,
including for the Shopping Center.
<u1:p></u1:p></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 11pt;"><u1:p> </u1:p>
<u1:p></u1:p></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 11pt;">
VIII.<u1:p></u1:p></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 11pt;">
<b>COMMUNITY RESPONSE
TO THE PROPOSED CELL TOWER
LOCATION<u1:p></u1:p></b></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 11pt;"><u1:p> </u1:p></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 11pt;">Other than a few positive comments, the community
response has been overwhelmingly opposed to locating a cell tower in
the center
of Waimea in a location that interferes with Waimea’s
viewplanes.
Petitions opposing the cell tower location are being submitted (with
158
signatures) in conjunction with this Recommendation -- at the request
of those
who gathered the petitions. These Petitions are entitled: “
We the
undersigned are opposed to the Verizon Cell Phone Tower in its proposed
location adjacent to Lex Brodie’s & <st1:place w:st="on"><st1:placename w:st="on">Parker</st1:placename> <st1:placename w:st="on">Ranch</st1:placename> <st1:placetype w:st="on">Shopping Center</st1:placetype></st1:place> or
within
1500 ft of any home or any school”. In particular there are
many who live
in the Holoholo Ku condominium off <st1:street w:st="on"><st1:address w:st="on">Pukalani
Road</st1:address></st1:street> who are opposed to the
tower being approved
at this <st1:street w:st="on"><st1:address w:st="on">Pukalani Road</st1:address></st1:street>
site. Here is an example of a comment from a Waimea
resident:<u1:p></u1:p></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 11pt;"><u1:p> </u1:p></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><i><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Helvetica;">“I STRONGLY feel this is not
well suited for the proposed site adjacent to the Parker Ranch Shopping
Center.</span></i><i><span style="font-size: 11pt;"> </span></i><i><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Helvetica;"> And after standing
30 feet from
this monstrosity [at another on-island cell tower], I had to wonder
what the
owners of the shopping center
could</span></i><i><span style="font-size: 11pt;"> </span></i><i><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Helvetica;"> be thinking in
believing this
would somehow enhance their property. I want to user words like
"massive" and "hulking", "industrial" to describe
this.</span></i><i><span style="font-size: 11pt;"> </span></i><i><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Helvetica;"> Understand please,
I am not opposed to cell phone
towers, because I own, and use daily, a cellphone. I am opposed to
locating
something like</span></i><i><span style="font-size: 11pt;"> </span></i><i><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Helvetica;"> this in the center
of Waimea, a few hundred feet from a
main road with nothing to block the view of
it.”<u1:p></u1:p></span></i><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Helvetica;">
</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<u1:p></u1:p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Helvetica;">
IX<u1:p></u1:p></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Helvetica;">
<b> SUGGESTIONS
RE <st1:place w:st="on"><st1:placetype w:st="on">COUNTY</st1:placetype> <st1:placename w:st="on">REVIEW</st1:placename></st1:place> OF CELL
TOWERS
GENERALLY<u1:p></u1:p></b></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><b><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Helvetica;"><u1:p> </u1:p></span></b><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Helvetica;">There was unanimous support
among community members who attended WPDRC meetings that cell towers
should not
be permitted in any zone without a use permit. Currently cell
tower
applicants are not required to get a use permit if the tower is located
in a
commercial zone. Obviously, this situation fosters applications within
commercially zoned areas, whereas those zones may not be the best
location. Without the requirement of a use permit, cell tower
applications
are not subject to community comments and recommendations, unless
within one of
the few areas where there is a Design Review committee such as the
Waimea
Planning And Design Review Committee or the Kailua-Kona Design Review
Committee. The Committee therefore urges the County Council to consider
passing
an appropriate amendment to the County’s zoning code.
<u1:p></u1:p></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Helvetica;"><u1:p> </u1:p></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><b><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Helvetica;">EXHIBITS</span></b><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Helvetica;"> ATTACHED
BELOW except for
#5 --too large a file):
<u1:p></u1:p></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Helvetica;">1. Diagram of the Verizon
“search area” in the center of
Waimea<u1:p></u1:p></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Helvetica;">2. Diagram of the commercially
zoned areas in the center of
Waimea.<u1:p></u1:p></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Helvetica;">3. Aerial photo of Waimea center
with overlap of future development areas showing proposed location of
the cell
tower off <st1:street w:st="on"><st1:address w:st="on">Pukalani Road</st1:address></st1:street>
<u1:p></u1:p></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Helvetica;">4. Photo showing the test
vehicle for the Verizon tower near to where the tower is proposed to be
located
-showing the visual impact on one of the viewplanes.
<u1:p></u1:p></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Helvetica;">5. Photos of some of the vacant
“tree islands” in the Parker Ranch shopping center.
<u1:p></u1:p></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Helvetica;">6, The Waimea Design Plan, pages
19-20 Re:; “Design
Objectives”<u1:p></u1:p></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Helvetica;">7. SKCDP, page 9 Re:
Precautionary Principle and Public Trust Doctrine; and SKCDP
page 4
Purpose of the CDP and about complying with CDP guidelines.
<u1:p></u1:p></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Helvetica;">8 .SKCDP pages 67-68 Re: Waimea
Policy of Preservation of Sense of
Place<u1:p></u1:p></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Helvetica;">9, Petitions submitted to the
WPDRC opposing the cell phone tower in its currently proposed
location.<u1:p></u1:p></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Helvetica;"><u1:p> </u1:p></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Helvetica;"><u1:p> </u1:p></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Helvetica;"><u1:p> </u1:p></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 11pt;"><u1:p> </u1:p></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 11pt;"><u1:p> </u1:p></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 11pt;"><u1:p> </u1:p></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 11pt;"><u1:p> </u1:p></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 11pt;"><u1:p> </u1:p></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p><a href="http://www.margaretwille.com/home/?q=node/560" target="_blank">read more</a></p>http://www.margaretwille.com/home/?q=node/560#commentsThu, 10 Jun 2010 17:26:09 +0000margaretwille560 at http://www.margaretwille.com/homeJune 7th County Council Budget Meeting Much Lively Discussion -- But Majority Favored Mayor's Mix
http://www.margaretwille.com/home/?q=node/559
<br><img src="file:///Users/margaretwille/Pictures/iPhoto%20Library/Modified/2010/Roll%201034/DSC08275.JPG" alt=""><img alt="" style="width: 480px; height: 360px;" src="/home/sites/default/files/u1/DSC08275.JPG" border="0" hspace="" vspace=""><br><br>Below are Council Member Greenwell's Comments.<br>I agree with him that there is much money available and we aren't doing a good job applying for the federal funds.... I suggested that every month someone from Research and Development testify to the Council listing all grants available and whether we have applied for the funds. <br><br>I am not categorically opposed to new taxes -- rather discretion should be used [Although there are some budget items that could be trimmed ---- but but but I am opposed to cutting to the bone, so to speak.... We need some cushion and we need funds to provide for efforts to create more revenue initiatives (more income) so that over the long run our taxes can be lower and our island more prosperous -- e.g. hire a stable full of grant writers.]<br><br>I agree no furloughs.... add more income streams instead <br><br>--- There is insufficient effort being made by the Kenoi Administration e.g.missing many outside funding opportunities by not applying for the funds and by not referring to outside entities such as non-profits for grants they could qualify for) ; and by the County Counsel e.g. not passing an impact fee bill --- which is like a water hook up fee for each developer/person who increases the need for additional infrastructure, rather than leaving existing taxpayers to shoulder that burden entirely.<br><br><span style="font-weight: bold;">Councilmember Greenwell speaks:</span> [The following from the Office of Councilmember Greenwell]<br><br>To understand the solution to fixing our budget woes, we must first accept that we can no longer think of government as a business. Government process is not based on the typical business model. In fact, government draws on an entirely different reason for being. Beyond the assurance of justice, public safety, and welfare, the responsibility of government is to ensure an economic setting wherein private business can succeed. While responsible accounting is certainly necessary, balancing the county budget, which has dominated our efforts for 6 months, is merely a part of the accounting process and cannot be considered as a required goal. Therefore, before we concern ourselves any further with what is really the Mayor’s budget, we need to focus on reviving our county’s business climate. In our present situation the only realistic way to do this is to enhance our financial situation. Since the level of government that creates money is federal, and since they have largely recognized that more cash is needed in the overall economy, and are providing it through the ARRA, we at county need to make the effort to obtain our share.<br><br>Our County’s share of the ARRA has presently been determined to exceed $500 million on a per capita basis but so far we have received only about 20% of that. To illustrate our reluctance to seek ARRA funding, had I not insisted that U.S. Representative Mazie Hirono research our eligibility to receive federal assistance in building the Ane Keohokalole Highway in Kona ($35 million) we might not have gotten it at all. Certainly it was secured by the Mayor and his staff who in a timely fashion met the requirements needed to qualify for the grant, but we as a county were content with Ms. Hirono’s rationale for why we couldn’t qualify until I challenged her thinking – and our thinking as well.<br><br>I challenge your thinking today by again insisting that federal money is available if we frame the request properly and with conviction.<br>The ARRA is intended to be the tool to restart the U.S. economy and like any tool, it only works if we use it − and it works a whole lot better if we learn how. If we continue to follow the current thinking, where will the county’s business environment be a year from now? Will cutting county services and employment by 10% improve things? In this economy? Do we believe the private sector, pressed to manage with reduced services and probably intensified criminal activity based merely on not having enough to eat, is going to rally?<br><br>Do we think that the developers and investors who provide most of our jobs are going to be moved to participate in an extended economic crisis? Fellow Councilors, please understand that we are government, not business, and as such, have quite different responsibilities, goals and objectives. It may be the established path of business to cut back during hard times but the very last thing government does during these same hard times is cut service. Again, like so many businesses have done already, we in government do not have the option to fail. – We can not close the doors, and furthermore our success is not measured by profit – or by loss. Our primary, and perhaps only responsibility right now is to revive the economy, and an economy does not perform if you eliminate its’ ability to grow.—if you take the capacity to earn out of the equation by not spending, the economy will only continue to decline.<br> <br>Where do we think we will be next year? We are significantly worse off this year than last and we will not reverse the trend by down-sizing. The investors and the businesses who can, along with the minds who operate them, will move away and the rest of us will fail, further impacting government services.<br> <br>Crime, as the only occupation that pays under those conditions, will take over, and what is left of Government will be entirely focused in that area, perhaps even, as in so many other similar situations, becoming a partner. We can’t afford to take that risk under any circumstance.<br> <br>We need to return this budget to the mayor with one comment and only one comment: That we will assist his administration in any way possible to secure our share of ARRA funds, so much of which is already being held by the State – that would mean:<br> <br> <br>No Reduction in Service<br>No New Taxes<br>No Furloughs<br> <br><br><p><a href="http://www.margaretwille.com/home/?q=node/559" target="_blank">read more</a></p>http://www.margaretwille.com/home/?q=node/559#commentsWed, 09 Jun 2010 00:56:18 +0000margaretwille559 at http://www.margaretwille.com/home6/5 WCA Talks Anuenue Park: Community Project: All Members of Community asked to Join In This Effort
http://www.margaretwille.com/home/?q=node/558
<br>WCA's Vice President lead the meeting and contributed to the level of community enthusiasm. <br><br>About the keiki playground and park in general -- needs upgrade to be sure.... This was a call to action... Call Sherm Warner 885-1725 if you can contribute time, funds, equipment, enthusiasm.<br><br>.<br><br><br><img alt="" style="width: 480px; height: 360px;" src="/home/sites/default/files/u1/ps65.1.JPG" border="0" hspace="" vspace=""><br><br><br><br><img alt="" style="width: 480px; height: 360px;" src="/home/sites/default/files/u1/ps65.3.JPG" border="0" hspace="" vspace=""><br><br>This is the park that is located across from Parker School -- between Lindsey Road and Kawaihae Road:<br><br><br><img alt="" style="width: 480px; height: 360px;" src="/home/sites/default/files/u1/ps65.4.JPG" border="0" hspace="" vspace=""><br><br><br>Melissa suggested everyone contribute one way or another. Alex Woodbury gave a run down on what will need to be done, to make this park, the park we want it to be. <br><br><img alt="" style="width: 237px; height: 316px;" src="/home/sites/default/files/u1/ps65.5.JPG" border="0" hspace="" vspace=""> <img alt="" style="width: 268px; height: 357px;" src="/home/sites/default/files/u1/ps65.6.JPG" border="0" hspace="" vspace=""><br><br><img alt="" style="width: 208px; height: 278px;" src="/home/sites/default/files/u1/ps65.7.JPG" border="0" hspace="" vspace=""> <img alt="" style="width: 209px; height: 279px;" src="/home/sites/default/files/u1/ps65.8.JPG" border="0" hspace="" vspace=""> <img alt="" style="width: 211px; height: 280px;" src="/home/sites/default/files/u1/ps65.9.JPG" border="0" hspace="" vspace=""><br><br>Bob Fitzgerald, the County Parks and Rec Director, did some cheerleading; and his park maintenance supervisor gave a run down of what it means to upgrade this park.<br><br><br><img alt="" style="width: 208px; height: 277px;" src="/home/sites/default/files/u1/ps65.10.JPG" border="0" hspace="" vspace=""> <br><br><br><br> <img alt="" style="width: 367px; height: 275px;" src="/home/sites/default/files/u1/ps65.11.JPG" border="0" hspace="" vspace=""> <br><br><br>When the question of who was in the audience who helped to build this playground -- Pete Hendricks, may have been the only one who raised his hand (He is Chair of the County Board of Appeals). Kathy Long also gave a historic run down.. Bill Sanborn looks on. <br><br> <img alt="" style="width: 207px; height: 276px;" src="/home/sites/default/files/u1/ps65.12.JPG" border="0" hspace="" vspace=""> <img alt="" style="width: 232px; height: 310px;" src="/home/sites/default/files/u1/ps65.13.JPG" border="0" hspace="" vspace=""> <img alt="" style="width: 194px; height: 259px;" src="/home/sites/default/files/u1/ps65.14.JPG" border="0" hspace="" vspace=""> <br><br><br> I really liked this graphic that Alex Woodbury put together....... only item I saw missing is the new bus shelter. <br><br><br><br><img alt="" style="width: 659px; height: 494px;" src="/home/sites/default/files/u1/ps65.15.JPG" border="0" hspace="" vspace=""><br><br><br><img alt="" style="width: 380px; height: 285px;" src="/home/sites/default/files/u1/ps65.16.JPG" border="0" hspace="" vspace=""><br><br><br>Here is the park at this time. [The following two photos were taken by Sherm Warner]<br><br><br><img alt="" style="width: 480px; height: 360px;" src="/home/sites/default/files/u1/DSC08193.jpg" border="0" hspace="" vspace=""><br><br><br>Here are the new swings going in. <br><br><br><img alt="" style="width: 480px; height: 360px;" src="/home/sites/default/files/u1/IMG_1081_2.jpeg" border="0" hspace="" vspace=""><br><br><br><br>http://www.margaretwille.com/home/?q=node/558#commentsSat, 05 Jun 2010 04:07:24 +0000margaretwille558 at http://www.margaretwille.com/home6/1 Senator Takamine held a Post Session Talk in Waimea; Joined by Rep Cindy Evans; Kawaihae Bypass Discussed; Budget Issus
http://www.margaretwille.com/home/?q=node/557
I like Senator Dwight Takamine. Seems an honest and intelligent and caring person. Throughout he supported the County's retaining the Transient Accommodation Tax revenues. Some of the discussion centered around the budget -- for example where will the State come up with needed revenue for the next budget cycle. <br><br>Key decision --- passed law mandated 180 days of school; consensus that cutting school days is not the way to save money.<br>One question: This year took 67 million or so from the rainy day fund to eliminate furloughs this coming year. So where do we come up with these funds in future years. <br><br>Kawaihae Bypass -- delays due to findings of archeological significance. <br>Discussed public option -- most southerly alignment. <br>Discussed that first phase should begin in Kawaihae -- where all the new design and construction will be occurring.<br>Tentative design phase: 2011-December 2017 (is that length of time unacceptable?)<br>First phase construction begins- 2018. <br><br><br><img alt="" style="width: 550px; height: 412px;" src="/home/sites/default/files/u1/ps62.1.JPG" border="0" hspace="" vspace=""> <br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br> <img alt="" style="width: 480px; height: 409px;" src="/home/sites/default/files/u1/ps62.3.JPG" border="0" hspace="" vspace=""><br><br><br><br><br><br> <img alt="" style="width: 643px; height: 434px;" src="/home/sites/default/files/u1/ps62.4.JPG" border="0" hspace="" vspace=""><br><br><br><br><img alt="" style="width: 643px; height: 428px;" src="/home/sites/default/files/u1/ps62.5.JPG" border="0" hspace="" vspace=""><br><br><br><br>http://www.margaretwille.com/home/?q=node/557#commentsWed, 02 Jun 2010 21:51:54 +0000margaretwille557 at http://www.margaretwille.com/home 6/1 Update: Parker School Use Permit Appeal to Board of Appeals (To Include Permit Conditions that Plan Comm. Excluded)
http://www.margaretwille.com/home/?q=node/556
<span style="font-size: 10pt;">The Board of Appeals hearing is
currently scheduled for June 10th, however a continuance has been
requested because one of the witnesses will be off island at that
time. The Hearing is likely to be continued until July 9, 2010. <br></span><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><o:p><span style="font-style: italic;">Procedural Update</span>:
On Saturday May 29, 2010 I received the Leeward Planning Commission's
Motion to Dismiss for lack of jurisdiction (in other words, the County
is arguing that the Board of Appeals does not have the authority to
hear this appeal of a use permit decision by the Planning Commission).
I today, June 1. 2010, filed an Opposition to that Motion to Dismiss.
Some of these legal issues are rather interesting, so I provide the
following: <br></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><o:p>The County's <span style="font-weight: bold;">Motion </span>and <span style="font-weight: bold;">Memorandum in Support (</span>without attachments) is attached BELOW. (jpg). <br></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><o:p>Appellants' <span style="font-weight: bold;">Opposition </span> (my Memorandum without attachments) is set forth here (html): as well as attached BELOW as jpg -- with proper formatting.<br></o:p></span></p><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><o:p> <br style="font-family: Arial;"></o:p></span>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center; font-family: Arial;" align="center"><span style="font-size: 10pt;">BEFORE THE BOARD OF APPEALS <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center; font-family: Arial;" align="center"><span style="font-size: 10pt;">COUNTY OF HAWAII <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center; font-family: Arial;" align="center"><span style="font-size: 10pt;">STATE OF HAWAII<o:p> <br></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center; font-family: Arial;" align="center"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p style="font-family: Arial;" class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10pt;">In the Matter of Appeal from <span style=""> </span><span style=""> </span>)<span style=""> </span>BOA
Appeal No. 10-000100<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p style="font-family: Arial;" class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10pt;">Decision of the Planning Commission )
<span style=""> </span><span style=""> </span><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p style="font-family: Arial;" class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><span style=""> </span><span style=""></span>) <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p style="font-family: Arial;" class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10pt;">APPEAL OF PARKER SCHOOL USE<span style=""> </span>)<span style=""> </span>MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT
OF<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p style="font-family: Arial;" class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10pt;">PERMIT AMENDMENT USE 05-001<span style=""> </span>)<span style=""> </span>APPELLANTS’ OPPOSITION
TO<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p style="font-family: Arial;" class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><span style=""> </span><span style=""></span>)<span style=""> </span>LEEWARD PLANNING
COMMISSION’S<span style=""> <br></span></span></p><p style="font-family: Arial;" class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><span style=""> </span>MOTION TO DISMISS )<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p style="font-family: Arial;" class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10pt;">Section 7-9 APPEAL<span style=""> </span><span style=""> </span>)<span style=""> </span><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p style="font-family: Arial;" class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><o:p> <br></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center; font-family: Arial;" align="center"><b style=""><span style="font-size: 10pt;">MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF APPELLANTS’
OPPOSITION <o:p></o:p></span></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center; font-family: Arial;" align="center"><b style=""><span style="font-size: 10pt;">TO LEEWARD PLANNING COMMISSION’S MOTION TO
DISMISS <o:p></o:p></span></b></p>
<p style="font-family: Arial;" class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><span style=""> </span><span style=""> </span>I.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p style="font-family: Arial;" class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><span style=""> </span><span style=""> </span><b style=""><span style="">
</span>INTRODUCTION<o:p></o:p></b></span></p>
<p style="font-family: Arial;" class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><span style=""> </span>This
is an appeal from a decision of the Leeward Planning Commission of the County
of Hawaii (hereafter “County” or “Commission”) approving an amendment to a use
permit<a style="" href="#_ftn1" name="_ftnref" title=""><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style=""><!--[if !supportFootnotes]-->[1]<!--[endif]--></span></span></a>
approved in 2005 for Parker School. <a style="" href="#_ftn2" name="_ftnref" title=""><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style=""><!--[if !supportFootnotes]-->[2]<!--[endif]--></span></span></a>
A use permit amendment was requested by Parker School to expand its campus at
its Kapiolani Road location, to increase enrollment, and to add new facilities
including a large gymnasium that would be available to the public for
non-accessory purposes (non-Parker School related activities). <a style="" href="#_ftn3" name="_ftnref" title=""><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style=""><!--[if !supportFootnotes]-->[3]<!--[endif]--></span></span></a><span style=""> </span><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p style="font-family: Arial;" class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><span style=""> </span>Appellants’
appeal does not seek to block Parker School from carrying out the requested
expansion and enrollment increase but instead seeks to reverse the Planning
Commission’s exclusion of certain supplemental use permit conditions that were
agreed to by Parker School (hereafter the “Supplemental Conditions”). <a style="" href="#_ftn4" name="_ftnref" title=""><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style=""><!--[if !supportFootnotes]-->[4]<!--[endif]--></span></span></a>
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p style="font-family: Arial;" class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><span style=""> </span>At
the Commission’s hearing, without reservation Headmaster Sturges on behalf of
Parker School, affirmed Parker School’s agreement with these Supplemental
Conditions<a style="" href="#_ftn5" name="_ftnref" title=""><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style=""><!--[if !supportFootnotes]-->[5]<!--[endif]--></span></span></a>
and in fact lauded their importance.<a style="" href="#_ftn6" name="_ftnref" title=""><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style=""><!--[if !supportFootnotes]-->[6]<!--[endif]--></span></span></a><span style=""> </span>These Supplemental Conditions
specifically addressed key community concerns – especially with regard to
traffic congestion on the adjacent roads, pedestrian safety accessing the
campus area, non-accessory use of the proposed gymnasium, and a number of other
conditions that implemented policies in the recently enacted South Kohala
Community Development Plan, County Ordinance #08-159. <a style="" href="#_ftn7" name="_ftnref" title=""><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style=""><!--[if !supportFootnotes]-->[7]<!--[endif]--></span></span></a>
Parker School submitted the Supplemental Conditions to the Planning Department
following meetings with community members and groups, including the Waimea
Community Association’s Planning and Design Review Committee, the South Kohala
Traffic Safety Committee, and in particular with Margaret Wille, an Appellant
in this case. <a style="" href="#_ftn8" name="_ftnref" title=""><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style=""><!--[if !supportFootnotes]-->[8]<!--[endif]--></span></span></a><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p style="font-family: Arial;" class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><span style=""> </span>At
its February 26, 2010 hearing, the Commission voted to approve the use permit
application but without these Supplemental Conditions – referred to by the
Commission as the “Sturges/Wille Agreement”.<a style="" href="#_ftn9" name="_ftnref" title=""><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style=""><!--[if !supportFootnotes]-->[9]<!--[endif]--></span></span></a>
Following a behind closed door “executive session”<a style="" href="#_ftn10" name="_ftnref" title=""><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style=""><!--[if !supportFootnotes]-->[10]<!--[endif]--></span></span></a>,
the Commission explained that its decision to exclude the subject use permit
conditions was based “on advice of counsel” and described the document
containing the Supplemental Conditions as a “third party agreement”. <a style="" href="#_ftn11" name="_ftnref" title=""><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style=""><!--[if !supportFootnotes]-->[11]<!--[endif]--></span></span></a>
Likewise in its Memorandum in support of its Motion to Dismiss, the Commission
describes these Supplemental Conditions that were agreed to by Parker School as
a “private contract between Appellant Margaret Wille and Carl Sturges,
Headmaster of Parker School”.<a style="" href="#_ftn12" name="_ftnref" title=""><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style=""><!--[if !supportFootnotes]-->[12]<!--[endif]--></span></span></a><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p style="font-family: Arial;" class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><span style=""> </span>Appellants
disagree with the Commission’s decision to exclude the agreed to Supplemental
Conditions that were submitted by Parker School, and therefore filed this
appeal. <a style="" href="#_ftn13" name="_ftnref" title=""><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style=""><!--[if !supportFootnotes]-->[13]<!--[endif]--></span></span></a><span style=""> </span><o:p></o:p><span style=""><br></span></span></p><p style="font-family: Arial;" class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><span style=""> </span><b style=""><o:p></o:p></b></span></p>
<p style="font-family: Arial;" class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><span style=""> </span><span style="">
</span>II. <o:p></o:p></span></b></p>
<div style="font-family: Arial;">
</div><p style="text-align: center; font-family: Arial;" class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><span style=""> </span><span style=""></span>APPELLANTS
FOLLOWED THE COMMISSION’S OWN<span style=""></span></span></b></p><p style="text-align: center; font-family: Arial;" class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><span style=""> </span><span style=""></span>RULES IN
FILING THIS APPEAL WITH THE BOARD <o:p></o:p></span></b></p><div style="text-align: center; font-family: Arial;">
</div><p style="text-align: center; font-family: Arial;" class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><span style=""> </span><span style=""> </span><span style=""> </span>OF APPEALS AND DISMISSAL OF
THEIR APPEAL FOR<span style=""> </span><span style=""> </span><o:p></o:p></span></b></p><div style="text-align: center; font-family: Arial;">
</div><p style="text-align: center; font-family: Arial;" class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><span style=""> </span><span style=""></span>DOING SO
WOULD BE IMPROPER AND UNJUST.<o:p></o:p></span></b></p>
<p style="font-family: Arial;" class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><o:p> </o:p></span></b></p>
<p style="font-family: Arial;" class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><span style=""> </span></span></b><span style="font-size: 10pt;">Procedurally, this appeal is made pursuant to the Planning
Commission’s<span style=""> </span>Use Permit Rule 7-9: <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<br style="font-family: Arial;">
<p style="font-family: Arial;" class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><span style=""> </span>Within
thirty (30) calendar days after the date of the <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p style="font-family: Arial;" class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><span style=""> </span>Commission’s
written decision, any person aggrieved by <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p style="font-family: Arial;" class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><span style=""> </span>the
decision may appeal the Commission’s action to the <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p style="font-family: Arial;" class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><span style=""> </span>Board
of Appeals in accordance with (Appeals) Section <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p style="font-family: Arial;" class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><span style=""> </span>25-2-20
of the Zoning Code.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p style="font-family: Arial;" class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p style="font-family: Arial;" class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10pt;">Planning Commission County of Hawaii
Rules of Practice and Procedure, <o:p></o:p>Rule 7 “Use Permits”, Section 7-9 “Appeals”<span style=""> </span>(2006).<a style="" href="#_ftn14" name="_ftnref" title=""><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style=""><!--[if !supportFootnotes]-->[14]<!--[endif]--></span></span></a><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p style="font-family: Arial;" class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><span style=""> </span>In
its Motion to Dismiss, the Commission now asks that this appeal be dismissed,
in effect, arguing that its own Use Permit Rule 7-9 was illegal and
inoperative. The Commission’s arguments are without merit. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p style="font-family: Arial;" class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><span style=""> </span>Hawaii
County’s Planning Commission’s Rule 7-9 “Appeals” expressly provided for an
appeal to the Board of Appeals from a Planning Commission decision in the case
of a Use Permit decision. This<span style="">
</span>Rule 7-9 was in effect when the Planning Commission hearings for Parker
School’s<span style=""> </span>use permit application
were held in 2009 and 2010 and was still in effect when Appellants filed this
appeal on April 12, 2010.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p style="font-family: Arial;" class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p style="font-family: Arial;" class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="font-size: 10pt;">A. The County Zoning Code does not bar Appellants’ Appeal. <o:p></o:p></span></b><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><o:p> <br></o:p></span></p>
<p style="font-family: Arial;" class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><span style=""> </span>Appellants
acknowledge that Hawaii County Planning Commission Rule 7-9 co-existed with
Hawaii County Zoning Code Section 25-2-66, which section provides for appeal
from the Planning Commission directly to the Third Circuit Court. <span style=""> </span>The County of Hawaii Zoning Code
provides: <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p style="font-family: Arial;" class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><span style=""> </span><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p style="font-family: Arial;" class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><span style=""> </span>Within
thirty days after the date of the commission’s <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p style="font-family: Arial;" class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><span style=""> </span>written
decision, any person aggrieved by the decision <o:p></o:p><span style=""></span></span></p><p style="font-family: Arial;" class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><span style=""> </span>may
appeal the commission’s action to the third circuit court <span style=""> </span><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p style="font-family: Arial;" class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><span style=""> </span>pursuant
to chapter 91, Hawaii Revised Statutes. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p style="font-family: Arial;" class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10pt;">Hawaii County Code Chapter 25
(Zoning) Section 25-3-66 (Appeal of a Use Permit Decision) 1983 (2005 Edition).
<a style="" href="#_ftn15" name="_ftnref" title=""><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style=""><!--[if !supportFootnotes]-->[15]</span></span></a></span></p><p style="font-family: Arial;" class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><a style="" href="#_ftn15" name="_ftnref" title=""><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style=""><!--[endif]--></span></span></a>
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p style="font-family: Arial;" class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><span style=""><br></span></span></p><p style="font-family: Arial;" class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><span style=""> </span>There
is however nothing in this Zoning Code section to indicate this is the
exclusive route to appeal from a decision of the Planning Commission. Therefore
there is nothing in the County Code that precluded Appellants from appealing to
the Board of Appeals pursuant to Planning Commission Use Permit Rule 7-9 ”Appeals”.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p style="font-family: Arial;" class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><span style=""> </span>Appellants
contend there was a choice of avenues for an appeal available.<span style=""> </span>By choosing the administrative route
for this appeal, Appellants sought to avoid several potential preliminary
challenges: <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p style="font-family: Arial;" class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<ul style="font-family: Arial;"><li><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><span style="">·<span style="font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; font-size: 7pt; line-height: normal; font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal;">
</span></span></span><!--[endif]--><span style="font-size: 10pt;">Primary
jurisdiction issue: Whether questions of primary jurisdiction are applicable</span><span style="font-size: 10pt;"></span><span style="font-size: 10pt;"></span><span style="font-size: 10pt;"></span></li></ul><span style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Arial;"> in
this case (when there is jurisdiction in the judicial forum, but the matter is
better left to </span><br style="font-family: Arial;"><span style="font-family: Arial;"> initial review by the administrative agency);</span><o:p style="font-family: Arial;"></o:p><span style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Arial;"></span><ul style="font-family: Arial;"><li><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><span style="">·<span style="font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; font-size: 7pt; line-height: normal; font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal;">
</span></span></span><!--[endif]--><span style="font-size: 10pt;">Exhaustion/ripeness
for judicial review issues: Whether failure to pursue and exhaust <br></span></li></ul><span style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Arial;"> all available
avenues of administrative recourse would rt in the case being dismissed; <o:p></o:p></span><ul style="font-family: Arial;"><li><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><span style="">·<span style="font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; font-size: 7pt; line-height: normal; font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal;">
</span></span></span><!--[endif]--><span style="font-size: 10pt;">Contested case
issue: Whether the Planning Commission’s hearing on this Special Use <br></span></li></ul><span style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Arial;"> Permit
application was a “contested case” hearing within the meaning of the State’s <br></span><br style="font-family: Arial;"><span style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Arial;"> Administrative Procedures Act, Definitions HRS 91-1 (5) “Contested case”; <o:p></o:p></span><ul style="font-family: Arial;"><li><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><span style="">·<span style="font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; font-size: 7pt; line-height: normal; font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal;">
</span></span></span><!--[endif]--><span style="font-size: 10pt;">Participation at
commission hearing issue: Whether Appellants McCain, Walker, and </span></li></ul><span style="font-family: Arial;"> Wooddell would
be barred from a direct appeal to the Court because they did not testify </span><br style="font-family: Arial;"><span style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Arial;"></span><br style="font-family: Arial;"><span style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Arial;"> at the
Planning Commission’s hearing. <o:p></o:p></span><br style="font-family: Arial;"><span style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Arial;"><o:p> </o:p></span>
<p style="font-family: Arial;" class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><span style=""> </span>Absent
the prospect of facing these threshold issues, Appellants certainly would have
preferred to appeal directly to the Circuit Court rather than to another County
of Hawaii administrative agency which is represented by the same Office of
Corporation Counsel, and incur considerable additional costs to do so.<span style=""> </span><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p style="font-family: Arial;" class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p style="font-family: Arial;" class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="font-size: 10pt;">B. The County Charter Does Not Bar This Appeal to the Board of
Appeals. <o:p></o:p></span></b></p>
<p style="font-family: Arial;" class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><span style=""> </span>The
Commission argues that its Use Permit Rule 7-9 “Appeals” was inconsistent with
the scope of the Board of Appeals’ authority prescribed in the County Charter,
and that this commission Rule 7-9 was therefore inoperative.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p style="font-family: Arial;" class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p style="font-family: Arial;" class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10pt;">Hawaii County Charter, Section 6-9.2,
provides in pertinent part: <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p style="font-family: Arial;" class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><span style=""> </span>The
Board of Appeals shall establish its rules of procedure and shall: <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p style="font-family: Arial;" class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><span style=""> </span>a.)
Hear and determine appeals from final decisions of the planning <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p style="font-family: Arial;" class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><span style=""> </span>director
or the director of public works regarding matters within their <span style=""> </span><br></span></p><p style="font-family: Arial;" class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"> respective
jurisdictions;<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p style="font-family: Arial;" class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><span style=""> </span><span style="font-weight: bold;">b.)
</span>Conduct hearings in accordance with Chapter 91, Hawaii Revised <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p style="font-family: Arial;" class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><span style=""> </span>Statutes,
and this charter.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p style="font-family: Arial;" class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10pt;">Hawaii County Charter 2000 (2008
Edition), Section 6-9.2<span style=""> </span>“Board of
Appeals”, subsections (a) and (b). <a style="" href="#_ftn16" name="_ftnref" title=""><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style=""><!--[if !supportFootnotes]-->[16]<!--[endif]--></span></span></a><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p style="font-family: Arial;" class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><span style=""> </span>Appellants
acknowledge that Charter provisions trump inconsistent planning commission
rules. Appellants however believe the County’s Charter section 6-9.2 should be
read consistent with the Commission’s rule in light of Subsection 6-9.2(b). <o:p><br></o:p></span></p>
<p style="font-family: Arial;" class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><span style=""> </span>The
Commission in its Memorandum omits any mention of Charter Subsection
6-9.2(b).<span style=""> </span>Subsection “b”
provides for hearings, and should be interpreted as meaning that the Board of
Appeals can also conduct hearings that are authorized under some other
ordinance or rule. <o:p><br></o:p></span></p>
<p style="font-family: Arial;" class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><span style=""> </span>In
its Memorandum, the Commission misstates when it contends: “Appellants’
reliance upon administrative Rule 7-9 is misplaced since the County Charter
explicitly states that this Board <u>only</u> has jurisdiction to hear and
determine appeals from final decisions of the planning director.” (emphasis
added) <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p style="font-family: Arial;" class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><span style=""> </span>Subsection
“a” of the above Charter section allows for appeals from decisions by the
Planning Director and by the Director of Public Works, but does not include
words of limitation, such as “only”, “exclusively”, or “is limited to”. In
contrast to subsection “a”, subsection “b” is simply a more general
authorization to conduct hearings. (The Commission’s Memorandum makes no
mention of subsection “b”.)<o:p> <br></o:p></span></p>
<p style="font-family: Arial;" class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><span style=""> </span>Admittedly
this Section of the Charter is somewhat vague and ambiguous. Arguably, as
contended by the Commission, this Charter section should be read narrowly such
that only subsection “a” confers Board authority. However given that the County’s
Planning Commission rules provided for a use permit appeal to the Board of
Appeals, the County was in effect holding out to the public that this Charter
subsection “b” allowed for other authorized hearings. It follows that this
Charter section should be interpreted more broadly to confer additional
authorization on the Board of Appeals to hold appeal hearings as otherwise
authorized by ordinance or rule, such as Planning Commission Rule 7-9.<a style="" href="#_ftn17" name="_ftnref" title=""><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style=""><!--[if !supportFootnotes]-->[17]<!--[endif]--></span></span></a><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p style="font-family: Arial;" class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><span style=""> </span>Charter
provisions and agency rules are subject to the same general rules of statutory
construction. See e.g.<u> Save Diamond Head Waters LLC et. al. v. Hans Hedemann
Surf, Inc.</u> et.al.<span style=""> </span>___ Haw.
____,<span style=""> </span>____ P.3d ____ , Sup. Ct.
No. 27804 (July 13, 2009) at pages 17-18.<span style="">
</span><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p style="font-family: Arial;" class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><span style=""> </span>A
government entity cannot promulgate rules consistent with a certain
interpretation, but then argue that interpretation is in error. By virtue of
promulgating Planning Commission Use Permit Rule 7-9, the County has been
acting as if an appeal from the Commission to the Board of Appeals in the case
of use permits is within the Board’s authorized scope of authority, in other
words, within its jurisdiction. The County is therefore estopped from arguing
otherwise. Providing a rule for an appeal in a certain type of case, and then
construing applicable law to say such an appeal should be dismissed because the
appellants followed the agency’s own rule, is absurd.<span style=""> </span>Certainly the law is clear that in the task of statutory
construction, absurd and unjust results should be avoided. See e.g. <u>E &
J Lounge Operating Co. Inc v. Liquor Com’n<span style=""> </span>of City and County of Honolulu </u>118 Haw. 320, 349, 189 P.
3d 432, 461 (2008); <u>Whitlow et. al. v. Jennings et. al.</u> 40 Haw.<span style=""> </span>523, 529 (1954).<span style=""> </span>Hence the County’s legal framework for
affording its citizens the right for review of an agency decision should not be
interpreted in a way that undermines that right.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p style="font-family: Arial;" class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><span style=""> </span>Clearly,
based on equitable principles of estoppel, the Commission is precluded from
arguing that Appellants reliance on the Commission’s own appeal rules, was in
error.<span style=""> </span>As stated in <u>Nakamine v
Board of Trustees of the Employees’ Retirement System</u> 65 Haw 251, 255, 649
P. 2d 1162, 1164-1165 (1982) “Where an administrative agency, by the failure to
follow its rules, prejudices the substantial rights of a party before it, it
may be necessary for the court, to modify the decision and order of the agency,
to fashion relief appropriately remedying the prejudice caused. “65 Haw. 251 at
255, 649 P.2d at 1165.<span style=""> </span>And see <u>Bruins
v. Healy Tibbits Builders Inc.</u> 2005 HI Wrk. Comp. Lexis 31, Case No. AB
2004-503 quoting <u>Rosa v. CWJ Contractors, Ltd</u>., 4 Haw. App. 210, 219 ftn
12 (1983) (In quasi-estoppel or judicial estoppel “[a] party is precluded from
asserting to another’s disadvantage, a right inconsistent with a position
previously taken by him.”); See <u>also Potter v. Hawaii Newspaper Agency</u>,
1997 Wrk. Comp, Lexis 79, Case No. AB 94-005 (1997).<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p style="font-family: Arial;" class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><span style=""> </span>It
is a basic tenet of administrative due process that an agency provide clarity
of appeal procedures that are readily understandable and provide a reasonable
avenue to secure review of an agency’s decision. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p style="font-family: Arial;" class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10pt;">See e.g. <u>Aged Hawaiians v.
Hawaiian Homes Commission et. al</u>. 78 Haw. 192, 212-213, 891 P. 2d 279,
299-300 (1995). (discussion of the adequacy of an agency’s procedures with
respect to whether the procedures satisfy basic due process requirements under
42 USCS § 1983). <br></span></p><p style="font-family: Arial;" class="MsoNormal"><br><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p style="font-family: Arial;" class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="font-size: 10pt;">C. Deletion of Planning Commission Rule 7-9 Subsequent to the
Planning Commission’s Hearings and Decision in This Case, As Well as Subsequent</span></b><span style="font-size: 10pt;"> <b style="">to the Filing of this
Appeal, Does Not Bar Appellants’ Appeal.</b> <o:p><br></o:p></span></p>
<p style="font-family: Arial;" class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><span style=""> </span>Appellants
acknowledge that subsequent to the filing of this appeal, Use Permit Rule 7-9
was deleted from the Planning Commission’s Rules. This appeal was filed on
April 12, 2010 and the effective date for removal of Rule 7-9 was April 18,
2010. <span style=""> </span>As of April 18, 2010, the
Planning Commission’s Use Permit Rules, Rule 7-10<span style=""> </span>“Appeals” provides “The Commission’s decision may be
appealed to the Third Circuit Court.”<a style="" href="#_ftn18" name="_ftnref" title=""><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style=""><!--[if !supportFootnotes]-->[18]<!--[endif]--></span></span></a><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p style="font-family: Arial;" class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><span style=""> </span>In
its Memorandum, the Commission refers to this Rule 7-9 as the “<u>outdated</u>
version of the Planning Commission Rules of Practice and Procedure (2006)”. <a style="" href="#_ftn19" name="_ftnref" title=""><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style=""><!--[if !supportFootnotes]-->[19]<!--[endif]--></span></span></a><span style=""> </span>By implication, the Commission seeks to
retroactively impose on Appellants this change in the Commission’s rules. The
Commission is not at liberty to treat Planning Commission Rule 7-9 as outdated
while it was still in effect. From a practical perspective, the public cannot
be expected to know when an agency’s procedural rules, though still in effect,
are nevertheless “inoperative”.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p style="font-family: Arial;" class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p style="font-family: Arial;" class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><span style=""> </span><span style=""> </span>III.
CONCLUSION <o:p></o:p></span></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center; font-family: Arial;" align="center"><b style=""><span style="font-size: 10pt;">THE BOARD OF APPEALS SHOULD DENY <o:p></o:p></span></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center; font-family: Arial;" align="center"><b style=""><span style="font-size: 10pt;">THE COMMISSION’S MOTION TO DISMISS <o:p></o:p></span></b></p>
<p style="font-family: Arial;" class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><span style=""> </span>The
Planning Commission’s Use Permit Rules of Practice and Procedure that were in
effect at the time this case was heard and decided, and in effect when this
appeal was filed, provided for appeal of a use permit to the County’s Board of
Appeals. Appellants appropriately acted consistent with those rules in filing
this appeal.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p style="font-family: Arial;" class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><span style=""> </span>The
Hawaii County Zoning Code concurrently provided for appeal of a use permit
directly to the Circuit Court. These two avenues of appeal co-existed without
conflict.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p style="font-family: Arial;" class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><span style=""> </span><span style=""> </span>The Planning Commission is equitably
estopped from claiming the County Charter should be narrowly construed so as to
render its own Use Permit Rule 7-9 inconsistent with the County Charter.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p style="font-family: Arial;" class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><span style=""> </span>For
the above reasons, the Planning Commission’s motion to dismiss should be
denied. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p style="font-family: Arial;" class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><o:p><br></o:p></span></p><p style="font-family: Arial;" class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10pt;">DATED: Kamuela, Hawaii<span style=""> </span>June 1, 2010 <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p style="font-family: Arial;" class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><span style=""> </span>_____________________________________<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p style="font-family: Arial;" class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><span style=""> </span>Margaret
Wille <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p style="font-family: Arial;" class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><span style=""> </span>Attorney
for Appellants<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<div style="font-family: Arial;"><hr align="left" size="1" width="33%">
<!--[endif]-->
<div style="" id="ftn">
<p class="MsoFootnoteText"><a style="" href="#_ftnref" name="_ftn1" title=""><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style=""><!--[if !supportFootnotes]-->[1]<!--[endif]--></span></span></a> <span style="font-size: 10pt;">Pursuant to Hawaii County
Code 25-2-60 “Use permits are permits for certain permitted uses in zoning
districts which require special attention to insure that the uses will neither
unduly burden public agencies to provide public services nor cause substantial
adverse impacts upon the surrounding community.”<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div style="" id="ftn">
<p class="MsoFootnoteText"><a style="" href="#_ftnref" name="_ftn2" title=""><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><span style=""><!--[if !supportFootnotes]-->[2]<!--[endif]--></span></span></span></a><span style="font-size: 10pt;"> Record on Appeal Item #101:
“Letter from Leeward Planning Commission to Carl Sturges/Parker School
approving amendment Request (action at 2/26/10 meeting)” dated 3-16-10, at
pages 724-739<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div style="" id="ftn">
<p class="MsoFootnoteText"><a style="" href="#_ftnref" name="_ftn3" title=""><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><span style=""><!--[if !supportFootnotes]-->[3]<!--[endif]--></span></span></span></a><span style="font-size: 10pt;"> Record on Appeal Item #2
“Transmittal by Island Planning to Planning Director Of request for amendment
to Use Permit 05-001”, dated 8-17-09, at pages 2-108, in particular at pages
7-9.</span></p>
</div>
<div style="" id="ftn">
<p class="MsoFootnoteText"><a style="" href="#_ftnref" name="_ftn4" title=""><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><span style=""><!--[if !supportFootnotes]-->[4]<!--[endif]--></span></span></span></a><span style="font-size: 10pt;"> See Appellants’ Appeal to
the Board of Appeals from the Decision of the Planning Commission Regarding
Parker School’s Application to its Use Permit 05-001 (hereafter referred to as
“Appeal”), at pages 2-3. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div style="" id="ftn">
<p class="MsoFootnoteText"><a style="" href="#_ftnref" name="_ftn5" title=""><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><span style=""><!--[if !supportFootnotes]-->[5]<!--[endif]--></span></span></span></a><span style="font-size: 10pt;"> Record Item #80 “Email by
Carl Sturges attaching Official Agreement w/Margaret Wille”, dated 2/18/10, at
pages 641-647 (the “Supplemental Conditions”).<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div style="" id="ftn">
<p class="MsoFootnoteText"><a style="" href="#_ftnref" name="_ftn6" title=""><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><span style=""><!--[if !supportFootnotes]-->[6]<!--[endif]--></span></span></span></a><span style="font-size: 10pt;"> Record on Appeal Item # 100
“Hearing Transcript”, dated 2/26/10, at pages 694-699, in particular at pages
694-695 (Testimony of Carl Sturges, Headmaster of Parker School). <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div style="" id="ftn">
<p class="MsoFootnoteText"><a style="" href="#_ftnref" name="_ftn7" title=""><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><span style=""><!--[if !supportFootnotes]-->[7]<!--[endif]--></span></span></span></a><span style="font-size: 10pt;"> Appeal at pages 4-5, and
attached Affidavits generally.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div style="" id="ftn">
<p class="MsoFootnoteText"><a style="" href="#_ftnref" name="_ftn8" title=""><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><span style=""><!--[if !supportFootnotes]-->[8]<!--[endif]--></span></span></span></a><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><span style=""> </span>Appeal at page 3 and Affidavits attached thereto, as
well as the Additional Exhibits Submitted to the Board of Appeals on May 11,
2010, including sections of the South Kohala Community Development Plan,
Exhibit B Nos. 1-5. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div style="" id="ftn">
<p class="MsoFootnoteText"><a style="" href="#_ftnref" name="_ftn9" title=""><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><span style=""><!--[if !supportFootnotes]-->[9]<!--[endif]--></span></span></span></a><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><span style=""> </span>Record Item # 99 “Record of Voting Leeward Planning
Commission County of Hawaii” for Parker School USE 05-001 dated 2-26-10, at
page 689<span style=""> </span><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div style="" id="ftn">
<p class="MsoFootnoteText"><a style="" href="#_ftnref" name="_ftn10" title=""><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><span style=""><!--[if !supportFootnotes]-->[10]<!--[endif]--></span></span></span></a><span style="font-size: 10pt;"> Record Item # 99 “Leeward
Planning Commission Voting Sheets” page 687 for “Executive Session”. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div style="" id="ftn">
<p class="MsoFootnoteText"><a style="" href="#_ftnref" name="_ftn11" title=""><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><span style=""><!--[if !supportFootnotes]-->[11]<!--[endif]--></span></span></span></a><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><span style=""> </span>Record Item # 100 “Hearing Transcript” dated 2/26/10, pages
690-723, in particular at pages 721-722) (Statement of Commissioner
Watanabe).<span style=""> </span>That the Commission’s
deliberations were carried out “behind closed doors”, in an executive session,
raises additional concerns under the “exclusiveness principle”, in other words,
that the commission’s conclusions must be based on evidence submitted into the
record at the public hearing.” See e.g. <u>Sandy Beach Defense Fund v City and
County of Honolulu et. al.70 </u>Haw. 361, 390-391, 773 P.2d 250, 268 (1989).<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div style="" id="ftn">
<p class="MsoFootnoteText"><a style="" href="#_ftnref" name="_ftn12" title=""><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><span style=""><!--[if !supportFootnotes]-->[12]<!--[endif]--></span></span></span></a><span style="font-size: 10pt;"> See Commission’s
“Memorandum in Support of Motion” at page 2.</span></p>
</div>
<div style="" id="ftn">
<p class="MsoFootnoteText"><a style="" href="#_ftnref" name="_ftn13" title=""><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><span style=""><!--[if !supportFootnotes]-->[13]<!--[endif]--></span></span></span></a><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><span style=""> </span>Appeal at pages 3-5 and attached Affidavits of
Appellants.<span style=""> </span><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div style="" id="ftn">
<p class="MsoFootnoteText"><a style="" href="#_ftnref" name="_ftn14" title=""><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><span style=""><!--[if !supportFootnotes]-->[14]<!--[endif]--></span></span></span></a><span style="font-size: 10pt;"> A copy of the Planning
Commission Rule 7 (Use Permits) Section 7-9 “Appeals”<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoFootnoteText"><span style="font-size: 10pt;">is
attached as Exhibit 1.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div style="" id="ftn">
<p class="MsoFootnoteText"><a style="" href="#_ftnref" name="_ftn15" title=""><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><span style=""><!--[if !supportFootnotes]-->[15]<!--[endif]--></span></span></span></a><span style="font-size: 10pt;"> A Copy of Hawaii County
Zoning Code Section 25-3-66 is attached as Exhibit 2.</span></p>
</div>
<div style="" id="ftn">
<p class="MsoFootnoteText"><a style="" href="#_ftnref" name="_ftn16" title=""><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><span style=""><!--[if !supportFootnotes]-->[16]<!--[endif]--></span></span></span></a><span style="font-size: 10pt;"> A copy of Hawaii County
Charter 2000 (2008 Edition) Section 6-9.2 is attached as Exhibit 3.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div style="" id="ftn">
<p class="MsoFootnoteText"><a style="" href="#_ftnref" name="_ftn17" title=""><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><span style=""><!--[if !supportFootnotes]-->[17]<!--[endif]--></span></span></span></a><span style="font-size: 10pt;"> In the event a government
entity deliberately decides to read its Charter more narrowly or more broadly
concerning an agency’s powers and responsibilities, certainly that in itself is
not wrong. But, in advance of doing so, the proper course of action is to <u>first</u>
change the ordinances and rules that would need to be correspondingly revised,
so that the public can respond appropriately.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div style="" id="ftn">
<p class="MsoFootnoteText"><a style="" href="#_ftnref" name="_ftn18" title=""><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><span style=""><!--[if !supportFootnotes]-->[18]<!--[endif]--></span></span></span></a><span style="font-size: 10pt;"> A copy of the new rule for
appeals in the case of a use permit, Rule 7-10,<span style=""> </span>effective April 18, 2010, is attached as Exhibit 4.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div style="" id="ftn">
<p class="MsoFootnoteText"><a style="" href="#_ftnref" name="_ftn19" title=""><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><span style=""><!--[if !supportFootnotes]-->[19]<!--[endif]--></span></span></span></a><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><span style=""> </span>Commission’s Memorandum at 5.</span></p>
</div>
</div>
<!--EndFragment-->
<p><a href="http://www.margaretwille.com/home/?q=node/556" target="_blank">read more</a></p>http://www.margaretwille.com/home/?q=node/556#commentsWed, 02 Jun 2010 04:30:11 +0000margaretwille556 at http://www.margaretwille.com/homeParker Ranch and Waimea Plaintiffs Agree to Extend Connector Road Settlement Agreement. Road to be Open By August 28
http://www.margaretwille.com/home/?q=node/554
Parker Ranch requested that Plaintiffs January Herron Whitehead and LaVerne Til (represented by Margaret Wille), agree to an extension of the Connector Road Settlement Agreement to allow Parker Ranch additional time in which to complete the Connector Road Project. According to the 2007 Settlement Agreement, the original deadline for completion was May 8, 2010. The new agreed upon date for completion -- opening of the road to the public - is August 28.<br><br>In exchange for extending the road completion deadline, Parker Ranch has agreed to an additional Settlement condition: Concurrent with the opening of the Connector Road on or before August 28th, Parker Ranch will allow public (pedestrian) access onto the section of the Trails and Greenways easement that is located on Parker Ranch property between Kahawai Street and Opelo Road. An additional portion of Parker Ranch property will be included so the public will have access on both sides of the stream bed. This added access area will be permitted until the permanent trail location is opened to the public. <br><br>Attached is a plan showing this added alignment. More information will be made available once the precise terms of the Amendment to the Settlement Agreement are finalized.Mayor Kenoi's administration assisted the parties in reaching this agreement. <font size="1"> </font><br><br>This Amendment to the Settlement Agreement embodies a key objective of Parker Ranch's 2020 Master Plan objectives:<br>
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:OfficeDocumentSettings>
<o:AllowPNG/>
</o:OfficeDocumentSettings>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:WordDocument>
<w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom>
<w:TrackMoves>false</w:TrackMoves>
<w:TrackFormatting/>
<w:PunctuationKerning/>
<w:DrawingGridHorizontalSpacing>18 pt</w:DrawingGridHorizontalSpacing>
<w:DrawingGridVerticalSpacing>18 pt</w:DrawingGridVerticalSpacing>
<w:DisplayHorizontalDrawingGridEvery>0</w:DisplayHorizontalDrawingGridEvery>
<w:DisplayVerticalDrawingGridEvery>0</w:DisplayVerticalDrawingGridEvery>
<w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/>
<w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>
<w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent>
<w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>
<w:Compatibility>
<w:BreakWrappedTables/>
<w:DontGrowAutofit/>
<w:DontAutofitConstrainedTables/>
<w:DontVertAlignInTxbx/>
</w:Compatibility>
</w:WordDocument>
</xml><![endif]-->"<span style="font-size: 12pt;"><font size="2">To create greenways, trails, and additional
park areas to preserve the town’s rural-ranch charm and country lifestyle” <br>and also furthers directives and guidelines contained in the South Kohala Community Development Plan. <br><br> <a name="" target="" classname="" class="" href="http://ahualoa.net/wtg/status.html">HERE</a> is a great website outlining the various segments of this Trails and Greenways trail. The section at issue here is #D on this information sheet <br></font></span>http://www.margaretwille.com/home/?q=node/554#commentsSat, 29 May 2010 03:15:10 +0000margaretwille554 at http://www.margaretwille.com/homeFlicks of Interest Here in Hawaii: Princess Kaiulani and The Descendants
http://www.margaretwille.com/home/?q=node/553
The film, <span style="font-weight: bold;">"Princess Kaiulani"</span>, now showing in local theaters is based on the true story of Hawaiian Princess Ka'iulani. So head to the theater, grab some popcorn and enjoy the film. Back in October I wrote an "angry" blog about the former title to this film: "Barbarian Princess". Glad to see such an insulting title has been renamed (a title that was insulting not just to Princess Ka'iulani but to all Hawaiian people). See my previous blog about this film title here <a name="" target="" classname="" class="" href="/home/?q=node/312">HERE</a>
<link rel="File-List" href="file://localhost/Users/margaret/Library/Caches/TemporaryItems/msoclip/0/clip_filelist.xml">
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:OfficeDocumentSettings>
<o:AllowPNG/>
</o:OfficeDocumentSettings>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:WordDocument>
<w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom>
<w:TrackMoves>false</w:TrackMoves>
<w:TrackFormatting/>
<w:PunctuationKerning/>
<w:DrawingGridHorizontalSpacing>18 pt</w:DrawingGridHorizontalSpacing>
<w:DrawingGridVerticalSpacing>18 pt</w:DrawingGridVerticalSpacing>
<w:DisplayHorizontalDrawingGridEvery>0</w:DisplayHorizontalDrawingGridEvery>
<w:DisplayVerticalDrawingGridEvery>0</w:DisplayVerticalDrawingGridEvery>
<w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/>
<w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>
<w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent>
<w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>
<w:Compatibility>
<w:BreakWrappedTables/>
<w:DontGrowAutofit/>
<w:DontAutofitConstrainedTables/>
<w:DontVertAlignInTxbx/>
</w:Compatibility>
</w:WordDocument>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" LatentStyleCount="276">
</w:LatentStyles>
</xml><![endif]-->
<style>
<!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:Cambria;
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;
mso-font-charset:0;
mso-generic-font-family:auto;
mso-font-pitch:variable;
mso-font-signature:3 0 0 0 1 0;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{mso-style-parent:"";
margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:14.0pt;
mso-bidi-font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-ascii-font-family:Cambria;
mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-fareast-font-family:Cambria;
mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-hansi-font-family:Cambria;
mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;
text-underline:single;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-noshow:yes;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;
text-underline:single;}
@page Section1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in;
mso-header-margin:.5in;
mso-footer-margin:.5in;
mso-paper-source:0;}
div.Section1
{page:Section1;}
-->
</style>
<!--[if gte mso 10]>
<style>
/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:"Table Normal";
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0in;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-ascii-font-family:Cambria;
mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-fareast;
mso-hansi-font-family:Cambria;
mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;}
</style>
<![endif]-->
<!--StartFragment-->See commentary about the the film in terms of facts and omission of related facts and the overthrow of the Hawaiian Kingdom by greedy US businessmen <a name="" target="" classname="" class="" href="http://barbarianprincessmovie.com/Barbarian_Princess.html">HERE </a><br><br>Interesting hearsay: Are you aware "plantation elite" here on the Big Island actively participated in plotting the overthrow of the Hawaiian Kingdom? Not long ago bundles of letters plotting the overthrow of the monarchy were discovered here on the Big Island. I assume those letters have since been destroyed. <br><br>Filming of Kaui Hart Hemmings' novel <span style="font-weight: bold;">"The Descendants"</span> has now arrived on the Big Island. Read about the novel <a name="" target="" classname="" class="" href="http://www.kauiharthemmings.com/">HERE.</a> AND read about the film: <a name="" target="" classname="" class="" href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1033575/">HERE</a>. Perhaps you will catch sight of George Clooney and crew. Read more <a name="" target="" classname="" class="" href="http://www.nileguide.com/destination/blog/hawaii-big-island/2010/04/26/the-descendants-brings-george-clooney-to-hawaii/">HERE</a> Before the Big Island shooting, the crew spent time on Kauai and in Honolulu, read more <a name="" target="" classname="" class="" href="http://www.honoluluadvertiser.com/article/20100524/BREAKING01/100524037/%E2%80%98Descendants%E2%80%99+film+crew+%E2%80%98depressed%E2%80%99+at+leaving+Kauai">HERE</a> Kaui Hemmings is from Hawaii. Her father is politician Fred Hemmings: read more <a name="" target="" classname="" class="" href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/2008/jan/19/familyandrelationships.family">HERE.</a> <br>HEY Mayor Kenoi -- maybe you should arrange for a picture of you with George to put in your scrapbook? Next to the one of you with the Emperor of Japan? Just musing for fun. <br><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 11pt;"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<!--EndFragment-->
<link rel="File-List" href="file://localhost/Users/margaret/Library/Caches/TemporaryItems/msoclip/0/clip_filelist.xml">
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:OfficeDocumentSettings>
<o:AllowPNG/>
</o:OfficeDocumentSettings>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:WordDocument>
<w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom>
<w:TrackMoves>false</w:TrackMoves>
<w:TrackFormatting/>
<w:PunctuationKerning/>
<w:DrawingGridHorizontalSpacing>18 pt</w:DrawingGridHorizontalSpacing>
<w:DrawingGridVerticalSpacing>18 pt</w:DrawingGridVerticalSpacing>
<w:DisplayHorizontalDrawingGridEvery>0</w:DisplayHorizontalDrawingGridEvery>
<w:DisplayVerticalDrawingGridEvery>0</w:DisplayVerticalDrawingGridEvery>
<w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/>
<w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>
<w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent>
<w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>
<w:Compatibility>
<w:BreakWrappedTables/>
<w:DontGrowAutofit/>
<w:DontAutofitConstrainedTables/>
<w:DontVertAlignInTxbx/>
</w:Compatibility>
</w:WordDocument>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" LatentStyleCount="276">
</w:LatentStyles>
</xml><![endif]-->
<style>
<!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:Cambria;
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;
mso-font-charset:0;
mso-generic-font-family:auto;
mso-font-pitch:variable;
mso-font-signature:3 0 0 0 1 0;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{mso-style-parent:"";
margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:14.0pt;
mso-bidi-font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-ascii-font-family:Cambria;
mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-fareast-font-family:Cambria;
mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-hansi-font-family:Cambria;
mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;
text-underline:single;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-noshow:yes;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;
text-underline:single;}
@page Section1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in;
mso-header-margin:.5in;
mso-footer-margin:.5in;
mso-paper-source:0;}
div.Section1
{page:Section1;}
-->
</style>
<!--[if gte mso 10]>
<style>
/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:"Table Normal";
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0in;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-ascii-font-family:Cambria;
mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-fareast;
mso-hansi-font-family:Cambria;
mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;}
</style>
<![endif]-->
<!--StartFragment--><!--EndFragment-->
<link rel="File-List" href="file://localhost/Users/margaret/Library/Caches/TemporaryItems/msoclip/0/clip_filelist.xml">
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:OfficeDocumentSettings>
<o:AllowPNG/>
</o:OfficeDocumentSettings>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:WordDocument>
<w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom>
<w:TrackMoves>false</w:TrackMoves>
<w:TrackFormatting/>
<w:PunctuationKerning/>
<w:DrawingGridHorizontalSpacing>18 pt</w:DrawingGridHorizontalSpacing>
<w:DrawingGridVerticalSpacing>18 pt</w:DrawingGridVerticalSpacing>
<w:DisplayHorizontalDrawingGridEvery>0</w:DisplayHorizontalDrawingGridEvery>
<w:DisplayVerticalDrawingGridEvery>0</w:DisplayVerticalDrawingGridEvery>
<w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/>
<w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>
<w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent>
<w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>
<w:Compatibility>
<w:BreakWrappedTables/>
<w:DontGrowAutofit/>
<w:DontAutofitConstrainedTables/>
<w:DontVertAlignInTxbx/>
</w:Compatibility>
</w:WordDocument>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" LatentStyleCount="276">
</w:LatentStyles>
</xml><![endif]-->
<style>
<!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:Cambria;
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;
mso-font-charset:0;
mso-generic-font-family:auto;
mso-font-pitch:variable;
mso-font-signature:3 0 0 0 1 0;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{mso-style-parent:"";
margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:14.0pt;
mso-bidi-font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-ascii-font-family:Cambria;
mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-fareast-font-family:Cambria;
mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-hansi-font-family:Cambria;
mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;
text-underline:single;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-noshow:yes;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;
text-underline:single;}
@page Section1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in;
mso-header-margin:.5in;
mso-footer-margin:.5in;
mso-paper-source:0;}
div.Section1
{page:Section1;}
-->
</style>
<!--[if gte mso 10]>
<style>
/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:"Table Normal";
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0in;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-ascii-font-family:Cambria;
mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-fareast;
mso-hansi-font-family:Cambria;
mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;}
</style>
<![endif]-->
<!--StartFragment--><!--EndFragment-->
http://www.margaretwille.com/home/?q=node/553#commentsWed, 26 May 2010 18:29:29 +0000margaretwille553 at http://www.margaretwille.com/homeCrunch Time for the County Budget: Councilman Pete Hoffmann Comments
http://www.margaretwille.com/home/?q=node/551
June 7th is the big day for Council input into the Mayor's revised budget proposal. The Council hearing starts at 7:30 am -- Hilo Council chambers...... (so get up early if you want to comment!!).<br><br>A few of my thoughts:<br>1. All in all the Mayor has done a good job on the budget, most particularly in his focused and successful effort to secure the TAT funding.... and do give him a lot of credit here. He has also managed to maintain a relatively good working relationship with County workers. Do not minimize this achievement. (In contrast to Cruella d' Lingle) <br><br>2. Yes there are some good ideas coming from Council members as to where additional cuts can be made. These ideas should be evaluated and appreciated. See Pete Hoffmann's discussion of some ideas: BELOW. <br><br>3. I am opposed however to bringing the income side of our County budget balance sheet down to the barest minimum -- so as to completely avoid any raising of taxes. I assure you the mayor is not lightly proposing raising any taxes. There needs to be some cushion -- a resilience factor so to speak. For example although I totally agree with not allowing top end management to do 89 day holdover contract stints, I oppose a blanket freeze on hiring and believe some funds for unfunded positions should remain in the budget -- instead of forcing the Administration to kowtow and beg for funds from the Council each time it needs to hire someone. <br><br>4. If the Council wants to avoid raising all taxes, then the Council should come up with some ideas as to how to bring in more money in other ways-- not just how how to tighten the budget belt even tighter. I would start with the theme that more money should be collected from those who most directly benefit from government services..... such as by way of impact fees. Impact fees (new development fees) are based on the police power of the County (not a delegated taxing authority). In most municipalities this is a major source of income. Here instead we do minimal fair share exactions and don't do a good job of collection those funds. <br><br>As I recall the County would have raised over 30 million more dollars had a basic impact fee ordinance passed when recommended by the national consultant -- Duncan associates. Not to mention, of the 108 million in fair share fees assessed, only about 8 million has been collected. Shouldn't we do an audit on that account? Or else come up with some other creative idea --- high stakes bingo parlors on off island ferries, for example. <br><br>5. I agree with Councilman Greenwell: We are not obtaining federal and other grant funds that are readily available... To start with the Research and Development Department should report to the Council every month on what grants are available and what effort is being made to pursue each of those grant opportunities (and these lists should be more widely distributed to non-profits and businesses that might also be eligible to secure these grants). Perhaps there should be a citizen advisory committee simply to review grant possibilities and help distribute the information.<br><br>READ more about the budget issues in West Hawaii Today 5/25 "Mayor wants budget transparency, Council wants budget cuts" <a name="" target="" classname="" class="" href="http://www.westhawaiitoday.com/articles/2010/05/25/local/local02.txt">HERE</a><br><br>SEE HOFFMANN'S COMMENTS ATTACHED BELOW: <br>http://www.margaretwille.com/home/?q=node/551#commentsWed, 26 May 2010 07:56:55 +0000margaretwille551 at http://www.margaretwille.com/homeState DOT Wants Your Comments on the Transportation - Road Priorities List for 2011-2014: "the STIP" Ranking.
http://www.margaretwille.com/home/?q=node/550
<br>
<link rel="File-List" href="file://localhost/Users/margaret/Library/Caches/TemporaryItems/msoclip/0/clip_filelist.xml">
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:OfficeDocumentSettings>
<o:AllowPNG/>
</o:OfficeDocumentSettings>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:WordDocument>
<w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom>
<w:TrackMoves>false</w:TrackMoves>
<w:TrackFormatting/>
<w:PunctuationKerning/>
<w:DrawingGridHorizontalSpacing>18 pt</w:DrawingGridHorizontalSpacing>
<w:DrawingGridVerticalSpacing>18 pt</w:DrawingGridVerticalSpacing>
<w:DisplayHorizontalDrawingGridEvery>0</w:DisplayHorizontalDrawingGridEvery>
<w:DisplayVerticalDrawingGridEvery>0</w:DisplayVerticalDrawingGridEvery>
<w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/>
<w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>
<w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent>
<w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>
<w:Compatibility>
<w:BreakWrappedTables/>
<w:DontGrowAutofit/>
<w:DontAutofitConstrainedTables/>
<w:DontVertAlignInTxbx/>
</w:Compatibility>
</w:WordDocument>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" LatentStyleCount="276">
</w:LatentStyles>
</xml><![endif]-->
<style>
<!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:Cambria;
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;
mso-font-charset:0;
mso-generic-font-family:auto;
mso-font-pitch:variable;
mso-font-signature:3 0 0 0 1 0;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{mso-style-parent:"";
margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:14.0pt;
mso-bidi-font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-ascii-font-family:Cambria;
mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-fareast-font-family:Cambria;
mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-hansi-font-family:Cambria;
mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-noshow:yes;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;
text-underline:single;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-noshow:yes;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;
text-underline:single;}
@page Section1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in;
mso-header-margin:.5in;
mso-footer-margin:.5in;
mso-paper-source:0;}
div.Section1
{page:Section1;}
-->
</style>
<!--[if gte mso 10]>
<style>
/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:"Table Normal";
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0in;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-ascii-font-family:Cambria;
mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-fareast;
mso-hansi-font-family:Cambria;
mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;}
</style>
<![endif]--> <span style="font-size: 11pt;"></span><span style="font-size: 11pt;"><o:p><img alt="" style="width: 480px; height: 330px;" src="/home/sites/default/files/u1/CDP" border="0" hspace="" vspace=""> </o:p></span>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 11pt;">The
STIP (Statewide Transportation Improvement Program) is the State’s priority
planning document for traffic <span style=""> </span>(roads
and alternative traffic including bikeways and pedestrian walkways) for the
next four years, with some consideration for options in years five and six.
Only certain qualifying state and county roadways can be included on this list: proposed roadways must be at least "collector roads" (not a neighborhood road) and be
consistent with the County’s regional transportation planning. <span style=""> </span>Compliance with these requirements is
important because the projects that make it to the final STIP list are eligible for
federal funding of 80%. <span style=""> </span>In
previous years DOT tended to allocate a certain percentage of funds for each
district. However the consequence of doing so was that<span style=""> </span>generally only smaller projects were funded in each district.<span style=""> </span>Now DOT has taken a
more functional approach so that pressing large projects also have a chance of
being funded.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 11pt;"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 11pt;">As
part of this process, DOT (Department of Transportation) solicits public input
as one consideration in ranking the list of projects.<span style=""> </span>DOT’s deputy director Jiro Sumata has been holding information
presentation around the County so that folks have some idea of projects are
being considered in their area. This preliminary list includes proposed projects, including the cost
and a general time line, for about double the number of projects that will be on the final list and eligible to
receive funding. At this point the public can also suggest other road or alternative
transportation projects that should be included on this list. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 11pt;"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 11pt;">On
May 19<sup>th</sup>, Deputy Sumada met with Kohala residents (about 20 in attendance)
to discuss the listed Kohala area projects.<span style=""> </span>The first questions asked focused on the Kawaihae to Waimea
regional bypass.<span style=""> </span>Alternative routings for
this road are still under discussion.<span style="">
</span>The entire road will cost more than one hundred million dollars. Only
the first five miles is included on the STIP list – at a cost of 65 million,
including about 13.5 million for acquisition of rights of ways. Based on the
STIP timeline, this initial section will not be constructed until 2016
(assuming it now makes it to the final STIP list).<span style="">
</span><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 11pt;"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 11pt;">So
where is the "first phase" of this Kawaihae to Waimea state bypass, asked the attendees?<span style=""> </span>At first Sumada said it might be the Waimea end.<span style=""> </span>However, after some discussion with the DOT
staff, Stanley Tamura, the DOT Highways Division district engineer, said
current plan is for the Kawaihae section to be completed first– given that this
road is central to the immediate development plans for Kawaihae Harbor. At past meetings attended by Director Morioka, the inclination seemed to be to start the first phase from the Waimea end, not the Kawaihae end -- but the basis for that proposal seemed more political than based on common sense and logic. [This road is # HS18 on the attached list]<br></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><br></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 11pt;">Howard
Hall made a good suggestion: could the State build this state bypass
road to a lesser
standards so that a longer portion could be built during phase 1? Deputy
Sumada
answered that in order to qualify for federal funds, federal design
guidelines
would have to be followed. [I think that suggestion deserves more follow-up.] </span><br><span style="font-size: 11pt;"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 11pt;"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 11pt;"><span style=""> </span>I asked why the Lalamilo Connector Road [from Mamalahoa by the rodeo grounds to the vicinity of the transfer station]
is not on this list.... considering that the County has now spent about
three-quarters of a million completing the required environmental studies<span style=""> for this road </span>-- including completing an
“agricultural buffer” study to determine additional measures that would
be provided to protect the proximately located Lalamilo crop fields.<span style=""> </span>There was no specific answer to this
question. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 11pt;"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 11pt;">Dave
Gomes also raised a good question: why don’t we focus on getting the
final section of the Saddle Road completed -- all the way to Queen Kaahumanu Highway.<span style=""> </span>We also asked whether
additional funding could come from the Federal military budget under DAR (Defense Access Road) funding --which
pays for 100% of the road costs. Sumada explained that the Big Island did well
getting DAR funds for upgrading a major portion of the existing Saddle Road. He
said one of Maui’s roads is now in line for DAR funds, not more on the Big
Island.<span style=""> [This item is confusing on the list -- it is the second part of item HS37 -- and should read from MP 42 , not from MP6.]</span><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 11pt;"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 11pt;">The
other road discussed was Mamalahoa Highway from Waimea to Mudlane, a county project.<span style=""> Deputy </span>Sumada explained the importance
of reconstructing<span style=""> this stretch of road [it is built on dirt with little base, hence doesn't hold up under the current level of traffic. He said we need a third lane so that every time a vehicle wants to turn left (across the other lane) all traffic behind the vehicle is not at a standstill). I was concerned about some of the beautiful trees along this section of roadway -- Deputy Sumada replied that this phase of improvements would all be done within the existing road right of way. [On the attached table this road is listed as HC 11]</span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><br><span style="font-size: 11pt;"><span style=""></span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 11pt;"><span style="">In my opinion there should be an entire section on alternative transportation and pedestrian bike projects on this STIP list. On the list there is HS-31 for National Recreation Trails programs. and bus transit is at HC 13 and 14. <br></span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 11pt;"><span style=""><br></span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 11pt;"><span style="">Deputy Sumada encouraged everyone to fill out a survey form -- to help the department rank the various projects. I have provided the form for comments -- in two different formats BELOW (htm and excel). <br></span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 11pt;"><span style=""><br></span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 11pt;"><span style=""><span style="font-weight: bold;">CHECK OUT THIS STIP LIST AND SEND YOUR COMMENTS to DOT by JUNE 7TH... email address at hwy.stip.projects@hawaii.gov or fax to 808--587-1787 or mail to DOT (address provided on attached Table). </span> </span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 11pt;"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font size="2"><span style="font-size: 11pt;"><span style=""></span><o:p></o:p></span>IF you would like to learn more about the State's STIP process, check out HDOT's website <a name="" target="" classname="" class="" href="http://hawaii.gov/dot/highways/STIP/fy2011-2014.htm">HERE -STIP HAWAII</a></font><!--EndFragment--><!--EndFragment--><br></p><br><br><br><br><br>http://www.margaretwille.com/home/?q=node/550#commentsTue, 25 May 2010 21:51:35 +0000margaretwille550 at http://www.margaretwille.com/homeWAIMEA TRAILS & GREENWAYS Project Moves Forward Toward Completing the EA and NEPA Studies.
http://www.margaretwille.com/home/?q=node/549
The consulting firm working with the Parks and Recreation Department -- Kimura International -- has sent out its initial scoping letter asking for suggestions to complete the preliminary Environmental Assessment plan. Attached BELOW is the consultant's "Early Consultation" letter and a copy of the draft Trails and Greenways Map. If you or your organization want a copy of the initial map plan, request one from:<br> Leslie Kurisaki <lkurisaki@kimurainternational.com>. Suggestions for this preliminary draft are requested by June 14th.<br><br>Photos of Clem Lam -- coordinator/chair/dedicated leader for the Trails and Greenways project. <br><br><img alt="" style="width: 318px; height: 238px;" src="/home/sites/default/files/u1/TGW1.JPG" border="0" hspace="" vspace=""> <img alt="" style="width: 317px; height: 237px;" src="/home/sites/default/files/u1/TGW2.JPG" border="0" hspace="" vspace=""><br><br><br><br><br>http://www.margaretwille.com/home/?q=node/549#commentsTue, 25 May 2010 21:26:08 +0000margaretwille549 at http://www.margaretwille.com/homeSKCDP Action Committee Meets and Discusses Priorities. Hoffmann Makes Presentation on the CIP; Seeks Advice from Action Comm.
http://www.margaretwille.com/home/?q=node/548
Notes from the South Kohala Community Development Plan Action Committee Meeting 5.24.10 and Related Issues,<br><br>THE members are Leonard Librizzi, Jeannie Palermo, Achahn Schulze, Fran Tabor, Robin Inada, Nancy Alvord, Mike Fischer, and Margaret Horwatt. There is one vacancy .(who knows when it will be filled....)<br><br><br><img alt="" style="width: 480px; height: 360px;" src="/home/sites/default/files/u1/cdpac1.JPG" border="0" hspace="" vspace=""><br><br><br>1.One would think this were a secret society -- given how difficult
it is to come by notice of the Action Committee's meeting and the agenda. This information should be
available on the County's Community Planning website; but only info on
the Puna CDP is available <a name="" target="" classname="" class="" href="http://www.hcrc.info/community-planning">THERE.</a> I also tried to get a copy of the agenda from the Planning Department and that did not work (same as last month). <br><br><br>2.Committee officers were selected:
Mike Fischer chair and Jeanne Palermo vice chair. <br><br>3. The
committee's initial priorities were chosen:<br>
a. Kawaihae water issues -- wells and coastal water quality.<br>
b. Puako evacuation route.<br>
c. Waikoloa emergency road.<br>
d. Waimea traffic issues.<br>
e. Preservation and access on to the Puu. <br>
<br>
4. Council member Pete Hoffmann made a presentation<br><br>a. about the Budget and the CIP -- Capital Improvement Projects. The
first thing he said was news to me -- that none of these projects are
funded in the proposed budget. So how are these projects expected to be funded: Answer: General obligation bonds, grants, and facilities improvement
districts (an underutilized funding method according to Hoffmann). The Council will meet on June 7th, starting at 7:30 am to hammer out the Budget. See West Hawaii Today for more information
about the Budget issues<a name="" target="" classname="" class="" href="http://www.hawaii-county.com/cgi-bin/webcal/webcal.pl"> HERE</a><br>
<br>
b. about the Planning Department's power play vis a vis the CDP Action
Committees -- acting as if these committees only have minimal power and can only have input at the discretion and at the
pleasure of the Planning Director. In other words, the Administration's position seems to be that the Action Committee's role is only to advise the Planning Director and the Planning Director will let the Committee know if she wants any advice on
currently proposed South Kohala developments. <span style="font-weight: bold;">Wrong</span> said Hoffmann. He is disturbed by the Planning Director's letter prescribing a lesser (subservient) role for the CDP Action Committees. He encouraged the South Kohala Action Committee to act consistent with the power was granted by ordinance. A copy of the Planning
Director's letter, dated April 12, 2010 to the North Kohala CDP Action Committee chair Robert Martin is provided below. <br><br>In contrast to the Administration's position, the CDP Action Committees
do have some broad powers, for example:<br>"Provide ongoing guidance and
advocacy to advance implementation of the CDP goals, objectives,
policies, and actions." Section 16.6 of the law establishing the Action
Committees. "The purpose of the CDP Action Committee is to be a
proactive, community based steward of the plan's implementation."
Section 16.4.<br><br>The South Kohala CDP explicitly confers on the CDP
Action Committee the authority to:<br>"Review and comment on various
types of development applications including subdivisions, PUD's, plan
developments, and cluster developments, on a timely basis, and provide a
public forum for these reviews". Also as a District-wide Policy, the
SKCDP states: <br>"It is recommended that the Planning Department
provide opportunities and forums for public review and comment on all
subdivisions, PUD's, plan developments and cluster developments,
proposed in the District of South Kohala." SKCDP Section 1.6. <br>Reckon
that provision is written off as a mere recommendation that can be
shelved. My point has always been that the Planning Department should
see the Action Committees as a valuable partner in working towards a
more prosperous County (prosperous here including improving the quality
of live).<br><br>This letter from the Planning Director follows from an opinion written by the Office of Corporation Counsel -- Lincoln Ashida, at the helm, as drafted by Deputy Corporation Counsel Amy Self (the attorney assigned to the Planning Department). Amy Self was formerly with Carlsmith & Ball, generally known for representing developer interests. In my opinion, Corporation Counsel Lincoln Ashida's stance related to transparency and community participation in government decision-making has been decidedly "anti-community". Keep in mind that Lincoln Ashida is not just the attorney for the County, but also a member of Kenoi's cabinet --and as such is a political advocate for certain interests and positions in the Administration.... at least that is how it appears to me. He is one of the status-quo holdovers from the Kim Administration. <br><br><br>A related matter: County Council Planning Committee Communication #796 2009 Annual Report on the County General Plan<br>At the May 18th Council Committee on Planning, the Administration's 2009 Report on the Hawaii County General Plan was discussed. Council member Ford had asked that the Planning Director attend this meeting, but she was unavailable. The report was replete with a lot of interesting raw data -- but not much in the way of planning guidance [e.g. in what way we could do better and how). There was however one subject that was totally and conspicuously absent : Chapter 15 of the General Plan: "Plan Implementation". I did not see any mention of the Community Development Plans or the Community Development Plan Action Committees. Wouldn't it be great if the Planning Department were to forward to the Action Committees the relevant sections of that report and encouraged some community participation in this assessment. Don't forget, as the General Plan provides "Implementation requires translating these broad statements to specific actions, systematically evaluating progress, and active community participation. ..The Community Development Plans are intended to be the forum for community input into managing growth and coordinating the delivery of government services to the community." General Plan Section 15.1.<br><br>Keep in mind the current Planning Director and the Deputy Director are both attorneys, previously in the office of corporation counsel. I believe the Planning Director should instead be "by trade" and or schooling, foremost, a planner. As provided for in the Hawaii County Charter section 6-7.2 "Planning Director", in part, provides: " The planning director shall have a minimum of five years training and experience in a responsible planning position, or a degree in planning, engineering, architecture, geography, or another planning-related field and three years experience in a responsible planning position."<br><br>Another related matter: Lack of Appreciation for Transparency and Public Input in the context of Charter Commission Amendments:<br>Both the Planning Director and Corporation Counsel Lincoln Ashida should be sent to the "dog house" for a time out --- to think about the importance and value of public participation. There were two proposed Charter amendments, which were favored by a majority of the Charter Commission members, until the Planning Director and Corporation Counsel Lincoln Ashida stood in opposition:<br><br>Charter Amendment 25 would have memorialized the Community Development Plans and the CDP Action Committees [The Planning Director commented that the Administration may not want to continue the Action Committees, and therefore better not to include in the Charter -- or words to that effect]. <br><br>Charter Amendment 30 would have required that all Boards and Commissions maintain a public information website. [Lincoln Ashida opposed and directed Research and Development Director Randy Kurahara to oppose this amendment....Randy noted if this Charter Amendment went into effect he would have to have a public information website for the Energy Advisory Committee and for the Food and Sustainability Committee. So? Wouldn't that be a good idea anyway! ? Mass Transit Director Tom Brown also opposed this idea -- totally absurd for that Department to oppose. Basically, Ashida said the County already does provide this public information more or less, and besides it is too much work. My point -- no the County does not already do this, and the website could be built over time starting with just the basic information. <br><br>Another note about the importance of public input and participation in government decision-making. <br><br>
<meta name="Title" content="">
<meta name="Keywords" content="">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
<meta name="ProgId" content="Word.Document">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 2008">
<meta name="Originator" content="Microsoft Word 2008">
<link rel="File-List" href="file://localhost/Users/margaret/Library/Caches/TemporaryItems/msoclip/0clip_filelist.xml">
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:OfficeDocumentSettings>
<o:AllowPNG/>
</o:OfficeDocumentSettings>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:WordDocument>
<w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom>
<w:TrackMoves>false</w:TrackMoves>
<w:TrackFormatting/>
<w:PunctuationKerning/>
<w:DrawingGridHorizontalSpacing>18 pt</w:DrawingGridHorizontalSpacing>
<w:DrawingGridVerticalSpacing>18 pt</w:DrawingGridVerticalSpacing>
<w:DisplayHorizontalDrawingGridEvery>0</w:DisplayHorizontalDrawingGridEvery>
<w:DisplayVerticalDrawingGridEvery>0</w:DisplayVerticalDrawingGridEvery>
<w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/>
<w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>
<w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent>
<w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>
<w:Compatibility>
<w:BreakWrappedTables/>
<w:DontGrowAutofit/>
<w:DontAutofitConstrainedTables/>
<w:DontVertAlignInTxbx/>
</w:Compatibility>
</w:WordDocument>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" LatentStyleCount="276">
</w:LatentStyles>
</xml><![endif]-->
<style>
<!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:Cambria;
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;
mso-font-charset:0;
mso-generic-font-family:auto;
mso-font-pitch:variable;
mso-font-signature:3 0 0 0 1 0;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{mso-style-parent:"";
margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:14.0pt;
mso-bidi-font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-ascii-font-family:Cambria;
mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-fareast-font-family:Cambria;
mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-hansi-font-family:Cambria;
mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi;}
@page Section1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in;
mso-header-margin:.5in;
mso-footer-margin:.5in;
mso-paper-source:0;}
div.Section1
{page:Section1;}
-->
</style>
<!--[if gte mso 10]>
<style>
/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:"Table Normal";
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0in;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-ascii-font-family:Cambria;
mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-fareast;
mso-hansi-font-family:Cambria;
mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;}
</style>
<![endif]-->
<!--StartFragment-->
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10pt;">In the
2006 case of <u>Leslie v. Hawaii County Board of Appeals and Planning
Department</u>, the Hawaii Supreme Court ruled against the County took the Planning Department to task for
giving short-shift to public input on development applications.<span style=""> </span>In that case the Supreme Count found
against the Planning Department and the Board of Appeals for reading the word
“shall” in the Subdivision Code as a discretionary requirement and not a
mandatory requirement. The provision in question <span style=""> </span>concerned whether the Planning Department must require developers
provide information about any proposed development improvements -- so that it would be available to the public. In rejecting
the County’s “its an unnecessary waste of effort” argument, <span style=""> </span>the Court reflected upon the following
exchange from the deposition of Planning Director Chris Yuen:<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><i style=""><span style="font-size: 10pt;">Q: Do you find that the
public can help you and your Department make better decisions by providing
information to the Department? <o:p></o:p></span></i></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><i style=""><span style="font-size: 10pt;">A [by Chris Yuen]: Very
often that true. In some cases though, there is, there is not a statutory means
to implement what people might want. <o:p></o:p></span></i></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><i style=""><span style="font-size: 10pt;">Q: If the public had more
information, could it then provide better information to the Department making
its decisions.? <o:p></o:p></span></i></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><i style=""><span style="font-size: 10pt;">A [by Chris Yuen]: I think
generally, yes. </span></i><span style="font-size: 10pt;">[109 Haw. 384, 126 P. 3d 1071,<span style="">
</span>at 1081]<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10pt;">In
this case the attorney representing the County was <span style=""> </span>BJ Leithead-Todd, the current Planning Director. <span style=""> </span>Following this decision in the <u>Leslie</u>
case, Planning Director <span style=""> </span>Yuen responded
by asking the County Council to immediately delete the subdivision code
provision requiring that the pertinent information be required in the development
<span style=""> </span>application (so that the public could no longer complain that the Planning Department was not providing this information). At the Council
hearing on that proposed Code revision, the Planning Director promised to shortly
follow-up with other amendments to the code including <span style=""> </span>concerning issues relating to pubic
input and participation. Despite that promise, the Planning Department <span style="text-decoration: underline;">never</span>
proposed any such follow-up amendments to the Subdivision code. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<!--EndFragment-->
<br><br>So enough complaining...... time to move along. <br><br>
<br><br>COUNCILMAN HOFFMANN DISCUSSING BUDGET MATTERS WITH THE SKCDP ACTION COMMITTEE. <br><br><img alt="" style="width: 191px; height: 255px;" src="/home/sites/default/files/u1/cdph1.JPG" border="0" hspace="" vspace="">. <img alt="" style="width: 192px; height: 256px;" src="/home/sites/default/files/u1/cdph2.JPG" border="0" hspace="" vspace=""> <img alt="" style="width: 192px; height: 256px;" src="/home/sites/default/files/u1/cdph3.JPG" border="0" hspace="" vspace=""><br><br><br><br><br><br><img alt="" style="width: 480px; height: 648px;" src="/home/sites/default/files/u1/CDPACL1.jpg" border="0" hspace="" vspace=""><br><br><img alt="" style="width: 480px; height: 569px;" src="/home/sites/default/files/u1/CDPACL2.jpg" border="0" hspace="" vspace=""><br><br><img alt="" style="width: 480px; height: 459px;" src="/home/sites/default/files/u1/CDPACL3.jpg" border="0" hspace="" vspace=""><br><br><br><br>The notation at the bottom of this letter indicates it was intended for distribution to both the North and South Kohala CDP. <br><br><br>http://www.margaretwille.com/home/?q=node/548#commentsTue, 25 May 2010 21:21:51 +0000margaretwille548 at http://www.margaretwille.com/homeWaimea Mobilizes to Save Keiki Anuenue Park (at junction of Kawaihae Rd and Lindsey Rd) 6/3 at 5p.m. Call to Action. Can U Help?
http://www.margaretwille.com/home/?q=node/547
<br><img src="file:///var/folders/d4/d4yokR6vFOWo-r7dk+1t6k+++TM/-Tmp-/com.apple.mail.drag-T0x1005208f0.tmp.X9R6eE/DSC08193.jpg" alt=""><img alt="" style="width: 480px; height: 360px;" src="/home/sites/default/files/u1/DSC08193.jpg" border="0" hspace="" vspace=""><br><br><span style="font-weight: bold;">THE FOLLOWING "CALL TO ACTION" PROVIDED BY PATTI COOK: AND BIG THANKS TO ALEX WOODBURY, MEL MACY, SHERM WARNER, AND COUNCILMAN PETE HOFFMANN FOR ORGANIZING THIS EFFORT. <br><br>BUT I ALSO WANT TO THANK BOB FITZGERALD (DIRECTOR OF COUNTY PARKS AND REC DEPARTMENT) -- HE SHOULD WIN A PRIZE FOR BEING MAYOR KENOI'S BEST DEPARTMENT HEAD ABLE TO BUILD COUNTY-COMMUNITY PARTNERSHIPS THAT MAKE THINGS HAPPEN WITH ALOHA. </span><br><br>COUNTY EMPLOYEES AND WAIMEA COMMUNITY VOLUNTEERS SCRAMBLE TO AVOID CLOSURE OF ANUENUE PLAYGROUND AND ENSURE THE SAFETY OF KEIKI BY PUTTING OUT ‘A CALL TO ACTION’: Waimea’s popular, signature Anuenue Playground at Waimea Park, which was conceived, funded and constructed by the community almost 20 years ago, is in serious need of repair and replacement. The original project, piloted by Kathy Long, John Ray and the Waimea Outdoor Circle, involved hundreds of helping hands and donations – from pennies from children to deep-pocketed gifts and thousands of volunteer hours. The agreement from the start with the County was that the community would maintain the playground. The community did so for a number of years and the all-cedar playground weathered “remarkably well,” says Waimea home and construction inspection expert, Alex Woodbury. But many features of Anuenue are no longer safe, and Federal rules governing playground safety have changed. As a result, County Parks & Recreation staff have been pressure washing and resealing playground equipment as well as removing rotted and dangerous features, including the swings. Two replacement swing sets were fabricated, thanks to P&R Superintendent Carl “Deac” deCamp with support from Councilman Pete Hoffmann. Then, last week, because County funds, manpower and equipment dedicated to the repairs are limited, Waimea resident Mel Macy, a public park advocate, secured donation of a truckload of concrete from West Hawai’i Concrete, and volunteers Alex Woodbury and Fred Dickson donated their equipment and time to dig out new footings and help County P&R staff pour concrete to install the swing sets. This was the first of what is expected to be many work days needed to restore Anuenue Playground and bring it up to current safety standards. Work is also planned to improve many other recreational features at Waimea Park. <span style="font-weight: bold;"> <font size="3">The entire community — especially families and sports teams that use the park regularly —is invited to a “Call To Action” Town Meeting at 5:15 p.m., Thurs., June 3, 2010 on the front lanai of Parker School’s historic Barbara Hall</font>.</span> Organized by Waimea Community Association (WCA), working in collaboration with Waimea Preservation Association and the Waimea Outdoor Circle, the meeting will begin with a walking tour of Anuenue Playground and Waimea Park to inspect problem areas, including dead trees. The group will then return to Barbara Hall to discuss priorities, fundraising and to organize volunteers. Leading the Call to Action are a team of volunteers including Alex Woodbury, Waimea Preservation Association’s Bill Sanborn and Laura Dierenfield, Councilman Pete Hoffmann, WCA President Sherman Warner and WCA Board member Alycia Juvik and WOC members led by President Mary Mangarin-Kitchen and Ken Block. Everyone is invited to the Call To Action Town Meeting. Waimea Starbucks is providing hot coffee and potluck snacks are welcome. In the photo above, last week’s work crew includes (L-R) County P&R staff James Auhoon and Cale Yamauchi, volunteer Alex Woodbury, the West Hawai’i Concrete driver, P&R staff member Anthony Corrales and Fred Dickson of Pearl Contracting. Out of range of the camera are West Hawai’i P&R Superintendent Carl "Deac" deCamp and WCA’s Sherman Warner. Donations to help underwrite restoring Anuenue Playground may be made to the not-for-profit Waimea Preservation Association (with a memo that the donation is for the playground) and will be tax deductible to the extent permitted by law. For information, call Sherman Warner (895-6271), email shermw@hawaiiantel.net, or go to www.WaimeaTown.org. <br><br>This photo courtesy of Sherm Warner: <img alt="" style="width: 480px; height: 360px;" src="/home/sites/default/files/u1/IMG_1081_2.jpeg" border="0" hspace="" vspace=""><br>http://www.margaretwille.com/home/?q=node/547#commentsMon, 24 May 2010 08:01:04 +0000margaretwille547 at http://www.margaretwille.com/home Djou the Buffoon Wins: Thanks in Part to Conservative Rags like the Honolulu Advertiser & Helped by Blue Dog Ed Case. Yuk.
http://www.margaretwille.com/home/?q=node/546
If voters really understood and cared about democratic values and wanted to support the middle class values championed by Obama-- they would vote for Hanabusa. But if you are a Republican leaning "blue dog" type democratic -- like those in Washington that have held Obama by the ankles and prevented the democratic majority from making headway -- then you, with your self centered values, would vote for Case.. And if you would rather throw away your vote in disgust and vote for tweedle dee or tweedle dum with their tea party orchestration, you'd vote for Charles Djou... We could all see this election result headed our way... a sad state of affairs.<br><br><br>As an aside, it was way back in the early part of the 20th century that the right wing effort to control the media began implementing this "keep the masses brainwashed" so they will support the interests of the elite ruling class, and even complain about efforts that will help the middle class -- such as health care... This control over major newsprint, including here in Hawaii, is so very apparent. <br><br> Here is the observation of former US Congressman Oscar Callaway back in 1917: <br><br>
<link rel="File-List" href="file://localhost/Users/margaret/Library/Caches/TemporaryItems/msoclip/0/clip_filelist.xml">
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:OfficeDocumentSettings>
<o:AllowPNG/>
</o:OfficeDocumentSettings>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:WordDocument>
<w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom>
<w:TrackMoves>false</w:TrackMoves>
<w:TrackFormatting/>
<w:PunctuationKerning/>
<w:DrawingGridHorizontalSpacing>18 pt</w:DrawingGridHorizontalSpacing>
<w:DrawingGridVerticalSpacing>18 pt</w:DrawingGridVerticalSpacing>
<w:DisplayHorizontalDrawingGridEvery>0</w:DisplayHorizontalDrawingGridEvery>
<w:DisplayVerticalDrawingGridEvery>0</w:DisplayVerticalDrawingGridEvery>
<w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/>
<w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>
<w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent>
<w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>
<w:Compatibility>
<w:BreakWrappedTables/>
<w:DontGrowAutofit/>
<w:DontAutofitConstrainedTables/>
<w:DontVertAlignInTxbx/>
</w:Compatibility>
</w:WordDocument>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" LatentStyleCount="276">
</w:LatentStyles>
</xml><![endif]-->
<style>
<!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:Times;
panose-1:2 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0;
mso-font-charset:0;
mso-generic-font-family:auto;
mso-font-pitch:variable;
mso-font-signature:3 0 0 0 1 0;}
@font-face
{font-family:Verdana;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;
mso-font-charset:0;
mso-generic-font-family:auto;
mso-font-pitch:variable;
mso-font-signature:3 0 0 0 1 0;}
@font-face
{font-family:Cambria;
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;
mso-font-charset:0;
mso-generic-font-family:auto;
mso-font-pitch:variable;
mso-font-signature:3 0 0 0 1 0;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{mso-style-parent:"";
margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:14.0pt;
mso-bidi-font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-ascii-font-family:Cambria;
mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-fareast-font-family:Cambria;
mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-hansi-font-family:Cambria;
mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi;}
@page Section1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in;
mso-header-margin:.5in;
mso-footer-margin:.5in;
mso-paper-source:0;}
div.Section1
{page:Section1;}
-->
</style>
<!--[if gte mso 10]>
<style>
/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:"Table Normal";
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0in;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-ascii-font-family:Cambria;
mso-fareast-font-family:Cambria;
mso-hansi-font-family:Cambria;
mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman";}
</style>
<![endif]-->
<!--StartFragment-->
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Verdana;">"In
March, 1915, the J.P. Morgan interests, the steel, shipbuilding, and powder
interest, and their subsidiary organizations, got together 12 men high up in
the newspaper world and employed them to select the most influential newspapers
in the United States and sufficient number of them to control generally the
policy of the daily press....They found it was only necessary to purchase the
control of 25 of the greatest papers.</span><span style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Times;"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Times;"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Verdana;">"An
agreement was reached; the policy of the papers was bought, to be paid for by
the month; an editor was furnished for each paper to properly supervise and
edit information regarding the questions of preparedness, militarism, financial
policies, and other things of national and international nature considered
vital to the interests of the purchasers." U.S. Congressman Oscar
Callaway, 1917</span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><br></p><p class="MsoNormal">Read more at HuffingtonPost <a name="" target="" classname="" class="" href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/05/23/republican-charles-djou-w_n_586243.html">HERE</a> and <br></p><p class="MsoNormal">Watch videos from the candidates here at the Honolulu Advertiser: <a name="" target="" classname="" class="" href="http://www.honoluluadvertiser.com/">HERE</a><br><span style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Verdana;"></span><span style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Times;"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<!--EndFragment-->
http://www.margaretwille.com/home/?q=node/546#commentsSun, 23 May 2010 10:38:11 +0000margaretwille546 at http://www.margaretwille.com/homeUpdate 5/21 Charter Commission Meeting: Ad hoc Educational Committee Appointed; Organization of Amendments on Ballot
http://www.margaretwille.com/home/?q=node/545
<br style="font-weight: bold;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">5/21 Charter Committee ad hoc education subcommittee formed</span>. Excellent selection of Commisioners volunteered: Scott Unger, Alapaki Nahale-a, Casey Jarman, and Todd Shumway. Casey Jarman to be the chair<br><br>Purpose of the subcommittee: recommend to the full committee how best to educate the public about the proposed amendments that will be on the ballet in November (including consideration of timeline and costs). <br><br>Comment: In my testimony I encouraged the Commission to utilize the Community Development Plan groups (steering committees and action committees) and the Envision Hilo 2025 Committee. These regional community based committee are broadly representative and would provide an appropriate forum for public discussion. <br><br>Also on the agenda-- <span style="font-weight: bold;">the formatting of the amendments on the ballot</span>:<br>The decision was made to keep each amendment separate -- as the commission voted upon them, and not combine any. <br><br>However there was a general sense that they could be organized better on the ballot -- rather than the order in which they were voted upon by the Commission. THIS IS IMPORTANT.. <br><br>Comment: good decision to keep them separate BUT very important to organize them with those that most effect the public first and those that are more esoteric, related to organization in the charter, related to officials' titles, and housekeeping matters, last. <br><br> I would suggest the education committee recommend a certain order -- so that the education of the public is more or less in the same format as will be found on the ballot. <br><br><span style="font-weight: bold;">To read more</span> see West Hawaii Today front page article "Commission Puts 19 Measures on Fall Ballot" <a name="" target="" classname="" class="" href="http://www.westhawaiitoday.com/articles/2010/05/22/local/local01.txt">HERE</a><br><br><br>To read my written testimony -- see previous blog <a name="" target="" classname="" class="" href="/home/?q=node/544">HERE</a> <link rel="File-List" href="file://localhost/Users/margaret/Library/Caches/TemporaryItems/msoclip/0/clip_filelist.xml">
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:OfficeDocumentSettings>
<o:AllowPNG/>
</o:OfficeDocumentSettings>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:WordDocument>
<w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom>
<w:TrackMoves>false</w:TrackMoves>
<w:TrackFormatting/>
<w:PunctuationKerning/>
<w:DrawingGridHorizontalSpacing>18 pt</w:DrawingGridHorizontalSpacing>
<w:DrawingGridVerticalSpacing>18 pt</w:DrawingGridVerticalSpacing>
<w:DisplayHorizontalDrawingGridEvery>0</w:DisplayHorizontalDrawingGridEvery>
<w:DisplayVerticalDrawingGridEvery>0</w:DisplayVerticalDrawingGridEvery>
<w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/>
<w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>
<w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent>
<w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>
<w:Compatibility>
<w:BreakWrappedTables/>
<w:DontGrowAutofit/>
<w:DontAutofitConstrainedTables/>
<w:DontVertAlignInTxbx/>
</w:Compatibility>
</w:WordDocument>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" LatentStyleCount="276">
</w:LatentStyles>
</xml><![endif]-->
<style>
<!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:Cambria;
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;
mso-font-charset:0;
mso-generic-font-family:auto;
mso-font-pitch:variable;
mso-font-signature:3 0 0 0 1 0;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{mso-style-parent:"";
margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:14.0pt;
mso-bidi-font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-ascii-font-family:Cambria;
mso-fareast-font-family:Cambria;
mso-hansi-font-family:Cambria;
mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman";}
p.MsoFooter, li.MsoFooter, div.MsoFooter
{mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-link:"Footer Char";
margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
tab-stops:center 3.0in right 6.0in;
font-size:14.0pt;
mso-bidi-font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-ascii-font-family:Cambria;
mso-fareast-font-family:Cambria;
mso-hansi-font-family:Cambria;
mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman";}
span.FooterChar
{mso-style-name:"Footer Char";
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-locked:yes;
mso-style-link:Footer;
mso-ansi-font-size:14.0pt;
mso-bidi-font-size:12.0pt;}
@page Section1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.25in .8in 1.25in;
mso-header-margin:.5in;
mso-footer-margin:.5in;
mso-paper-source:0;}
div.Section1
{page:Section1;}
-->
</style>
<!--[if gte mso 10]>
<style>
/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:"Table Normal";
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0in;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-ascii-font-family:Cambria;
mso-hansi-font-family:Cambria;}
</style>
<![endif]-->
<!--StartFragment--><b style=""><o:p></o:p></b><!--EndFragment-->
http://www.margaretwille.com/home/?q=node/545#commentsSun, 23 May 2010 01:24:24 +0000margaretwille545 at http://www.margaretwille.com/home5/21 1:30pm Charter Comm. Meets: Re: Ad hoc Committee for Public Outreach/Education & Re: Combining of Proposed Amendments
http://www.margaretwille.com/home/?q=node/544
Here is my written testimony: <br><p class="MsoNormal"><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="">
</span><span style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Times;"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10pt;">To: Charter Commission </span><span style=""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10pt;">From: Margaret Wille</span><span style=""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10pt;">Re: Charter Commission Communications 136 and 252</span><span style=""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10pt;">Date of Commission meeting: May 21, 2010 </span><span style=""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10pt;">Chair Haitsuka and Members of the Hawaii County Charter
Commission</span><span style=""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"> </span><span style=""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"> </span><span style=""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="font-size: 10pt;">A.
</span></b><b style=""><span style="font-size: 12pt;">Communication 136 and 136.1,
136.2, and 136.3</span></b><span style=""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="font-size: 12pt;">Recommendations
re Combining of Charter Amendments</span></b><span style=""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="font-size: 10pt;"> </span></b><span style=""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10pt;">I suggest combining some of the proposed Charter amendments
and suggest that certain proposed amendments stand alone. I have listed
the proposed amendments in the general order that I believe they should be
listed on the ballot. </span><span style=""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"> </span><span style=""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10pt;">1. <u>Re: Increased notice to the public: </u><b style=""><i style="">combine</i>
</b></span><span style=""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="font-size: 10pt;">CA
-23</span></b><span style="font-size: 10pt;"> Electronic Notice with Newspaper Publication</span><span style=""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="font-size: 10pt;">CA
– 9</span></b><span style="font-size: 10pt;"> Special Notice Requirement</span><span style=""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"> </span><span style=""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10pt;">2. <u>Re: Respect for the aina and the culture</u>: <b style=""><i style="">stand
alone</i></b></span><span style=""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="font-size: 10pt;">CA-26</span></b><span style="font-size: 10pt;">
Conservation of Natural and Cultural Resources</span><span style=""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"> </span><span style=""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10pt;">3. <u>Re: Funding of the open space – public access fund: </u><b style=""><i style="">stand
alone</i></b></span><span style=""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="font-size: 10pt;">CA-
15</span></b><span style="font-size: 10pt;"> Land Fund</span><span style=""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"> </span><span style=""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10pt;">4. <u>Re: Expand role of the public prosecutor to include
educational and preventative responsibilities: </u><b style=""><i style="">stand alone</i></b></span><span style=""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="font-size: 10pt;">CA-
29</span></b><span style="font-size: 10pt;"> Prosecuting Attorney Powers</span><span style=""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"> </span><span style=""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10pt;">5. <u>Re: Revisions to procedures to recall elected
officials</u>: <b style=""><i style="">stand alone</i></b></span><span style=""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="font-size: 10pt;">CA-7</span></b><span style="font-size: 10pt;">
Recall Procedures </span><span style=""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"> </span><span style=""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10pt;">6. Re: <u>Clarification concerning drawing election
district lines and requirement of adherence to redistricting criteria and
providing additional time for the redistricting commission to act: </u><b style=""><i style="">stand
alone</i></b></span><span style=""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="font-size: 10pt;">CA-17</span></b><span style="font-size: 10pt;">
Reapportionment to Redistricting </span><span style=""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"> </span><span style=""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10pt;">7. Re: <u>Allowing for Increased Responsibilities for
Department of Environmental Management and additional qualifications for
Director of Department of Environmental Management:</u> <b style=""><i style="">combine</i></b></span><span style=""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="font-size: 10pt;">CA-10</span></b><span style="font-size: 10pt;">
Department of Environmental Management Powers and </span><span style=""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="font-size: 10pt;">CA-11</span></b><span style="font-size: 10pt;">
Department of Environmental Management Qualifications of Director of Department
of Environmental Management</span><span style=""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"> </span><span style=""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10pt;">8. Re: <u> Increased due process procedures provided
prior to removal of director of Human Resources, Director of Water Supply,
Director of Liquor Control, and the Fire Chief</u> <b style=""><i style="">stand alone</i></b></span><span style=""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="font-size: 10pt;">CA-6</span></b><span style="font-size: 10pt;">
Removal of Directors Serving under Commissions</span><span style=""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"> </span><span style=""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10pt;">9. Re: <u>Amendments relating to reorganization of
Boards and Commissions</u></span><span style=""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><i style=""><span style="font-size: 10pt;">To
extent possible combine all of the following</span></i></b><span style=""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="font-size: 10pt;">CA-1</span></b><span style="font-size: 10pt;">
Department of Water Supply [changing titles of positions]</span><span style=""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="font-size: 10pt;">CA-2
</span></b><span style="font-size: 10pt;">Data Systems [relocates the Department]</span><span style=""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="font-size: 10pt;">CA-
3</span></b><span style="font-size: 10pt;"> Fire Department [relocates the Department]</span><span style=""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="font-size: 10pt;">CA-
4</span></b><span style="font-size: 10pt;"> Civil Service Law [changes provisions relating to
Civil Service laws to comply with state law. </span><span style=""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="font-size: 10pt;">CA-5</span></b><span style="font-size: 10pt;">
Merit Appeals Board [provides for staggered terms]</span><span style=""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="font-size: 10pt;">CA-36</span></b><span style="font-size: 10pt;">
Housekeeping Amendment [wording corrections in the Charter]</span><span style=""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"> </span><span style=""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10pt;">10. <u>Re: Board and Commission Compensation: Allows
for discretion whether members to be compensation and reduces the maximum
allowed to two times the state minimum wage </u><b style=""><i style="">stand alone</i></b></span><span style=""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="font-size: 10pt;">CA-
38</span></b><span style="font-size: 10pt;"> Relating to membership <u>and compensation</u> on boards
and commissions </span><span style=""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"> </span><span style=""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10pt;">11. Re: <u>Process to amend the Charter including
increasing the time the Charter Commission has to complete its work</u>
<b style=""><i style="">combine</i></b></span><span style=""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="font-size: 10pt;">CA-
13</span></b><span style="font-size: 10pt;"> Mandatory Charter Review and</span><span style=""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="font-size: 10pt;">CA-
12</span></b><span style="font-size: 10pt;"> Initiation of Amendments or Revisions to Charter</span><span style=""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"> </span><span style=""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="font-size: 10pt;"> </span></b><span style=""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="font-size: 12pt;">B.
RE: Ad hoc Committee to Consider Appropriate Educational Efforts to be Made by
Commission Prior to Election Day</span></b><span style=""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"> </span><span style=""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10pt;">I suggest Casey Jarman, Susie Osborne, and Todd Shumway,
volunteer for this ad hoc committee. They are all currently employed in
educational institutions and have encouraged educational outreach to the
public. There is no one on the Charter Commission who I would object to
being on this ad hoc educational outreach committee. </span><span style=""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"> </span><span style=""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10pt;">I encourage this ad hoc committee to work with the Community
Development Action Committees, and Community Development Steering Committees,
and Hilo Vision Committee</span><span style=""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"> </span><span style=""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10pt;">These regional community committee groups are an appropriate
public forum for these discussions. In this public outreach effort, I
encourage the Charter Commission to be supportive of these community
development plan (CDP) committees. Although a majority of the Charter Commission
members voted to memorialize these Community Development Plan Action Committees
in the Charter at the final vote, there were not enough votes to equal a
majority of the entire commission (as is required in the procedural
rules). Statements have been made by persons in the executive branch that
failure of the Charter Commission to include reference to the Community
Development Plans in the Charter shows a lack of support for these regional
community level organizations and participation by these committees in issues
relating to development in the affected communities. </span><span style=""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"> </span><span style=""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10pt;">Especially in these difficult economic times, the role of
these regional community committees to provide for increased public
participation, and to encourage voting by an informed electorate, is
important. Utilization of these community forums for its public outreach
would show support by Charter Commission members. Generally these CDP and
related groups meet monthly. Two or more commission members could attend each
such regional meeting and assist the committees in facilitating public
understanding of the issues addressed in the proposed Charter Amendments. </span><span style=""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"> </span><span style=""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10pt;">The Commissions website should be used, as well as newspaper
and radio ads, and local blog sites –which can direct residents to the
Commission’s website and to any up coming public presentations. </span><span style=""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"> </span><span style=""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<!--EndFragment-->
</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<!--EndFragment-->
<br><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 12pt;"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 12pt;"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 12pt;"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 12pt;"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 12pt;"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 12pt;"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 12pt;"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<!--EndFragment-->
<br>http://www.margaretwille.com/home/?q=node/544#commentsFri, 21 May 2010 20:03:13 +0000margaretwille544 at http://www.margaretwille.com/homeUPDATE: Parker Ranch Connector Road Settlement Extension Deadline: May 25, 2010
http://www.margaretwille.com/home/?q=node/542
<div style="text-align: center;"><img alt="" style="width: 480px; height: 360px;" src="/home/sites/default/files/u1/PRCR1.jpg" border="0" hspace="" vspace=""><br></div><span style="font-weight: bold;">BACKGROUND -in brief:</span><br> Settlement between Plaintiffs (Waimea residents) and Parker Ranch (September 13, 2007)<br><span style="font-weight: bold;">Parker Ranch</span>: Agreed to complete the Parker Ranch Connector Road by deadline of May 8th 2010<br><span style="font-weight: bold;">Plaintiffs:<br></span>-- Agreed to a complete bar and waiver of all rights to
contest the timing of construction or conditions under which any of the
three phases of the Connector Road are constructed, and,<br>
--Agreed this Settlement was a complete settlement of current,
future, or potential claims or disputes for relief of any nature
relating to Approval for Luala’i Phase III and IV Subdivisions
including the completion and construction of any phase of the Connector
Road, and,<br>
--Agreed to forgo a claim for attorneys fees and costs. <br><br><span style="font-weight: bold;">PARKER RANCH NON-COMPLIANCE WITH SETTLEMENT</span><span style="font-weight: bold;"></span>:<br>Parker Ranch's May 8, 2010 deadline has now passed and the Connector Road is not completed (still some road work and PR would also like to first turn over the road to the County -- but "paperwork" not ready to do so).<br><br><span style="font-weight: bold;">STATUS OF CONNECTOR ROAD SETTLEMENT AMENDMENT</span>:<br>In exchange for Plaintiffs agreeing to remain bound by the above "Plaintiff conditions", Parker Ranch has been asked to agree to one of several additional infrastructure installations (all relating to increased pedestrian access pathways) -- and to amend the Settlement Agreement accordingly by May 25, 2010.<br><br><span style="font-weight: bold;"><br>SEE attachment below diagram of the Parker Ranch Connector Road. </span>It is connector road phases #1 and #3 that Parker Ranch was supposed to complete by May 8, 2010. <br>http://www.margaretwille.com/home/?q=node/542#commentsSun, 16 May 2010 18:35:05 +0000margaretwille542 at http://www.margaretwille.com/homeUpdate: Verizon Cell Tower Application To Be Located Smack in the Center of Waimea: What do you think?
http://www.margaretwille.com/home/?q=node/541
<span style="font-weight: bold;">GOT A SUGGESTION OR COMMENT? RE: THE LOCATION AND REQUIREMENTS FOR THE PROPOSED WAIMEA VERIZON CELL PHONE TOWER? IF SO -- SUBMIT BY FRIDAY MAY 21ST.</span><br><br>There are some who oppose cell towers in the center area of Waimea --
where ever located (especially because too close to schools and hospital). And regardless of what cell tower scientists say there are plenty of folks
still concerned about health impacts in close proximity. Note: The currently proposed location is at Parker Ranch shopping center
near the new Lex Brodies' building at a
height of 54 feet (that is, at least 54 feet tall). <br>
<br>
Many others say if it has to be in Waimea town -- at least find a
better spot than at the shopping center in the view plane of Mauna
Kea: asking aren't we supposed to be moving Waimea towards more of a
pedestrian friendly "village setting" and away from a strip mall intersection (all built out with blocked view planes and
fewer and fewer mature trees).<br><br><br> Quite a few residents of the Holoholoku condominium development are very opposed to the installation-- pointing out that this location is not in the "back" lot for them -- it is right along the entry road to their neighborhood -- and that this will be a heavily trafficked street soon - once the Parker Ranch Connector Road opens for traffic.<br>
<br>
Everyone says -- this is likely to be the first of many more tower
applications -- given the expanding use of cell phones for texting and data transmissions, and so we think in terms of cumulative impact.<br>
<br>
Given these concerns (and there are many who have chimed in --at the
Waimea Design Review Committee meetings, but also <br>
in petitions, in emails, and phone calls), the Verizon rep has been quite accommodating -- seeking to build a good
relationship with the community members who have concerns-- or as best she can under the circumstances. She said she pulled Verizon's application from
the Planning Department process to allow more time to work with the community and consider alternatives.<br>
<br>
Following the Design Review meeting of May 7th, the action plan was 1) check if
there isn't an alternate location that would at least move the tower from the very center of town out of the viewplane that would be do-able for Verizon;
and explore how to mitigate -- offset whatever the resulting negative impact. So we first worked on locating the antennae at the new
District park -- thinking this pole tower could also be used for lights for the playing fields. Parks and Rec got involved and
we pursued this option -- but then found out this was beyond Verizon's search area. We also inquired about locating the pole tower at the
Wamea park -- but for some reason that was not possible because of the existing limitations for use at that park (no commercial
facilities).<br>
<br>
At the same time we explored the idea of some mitigation plan. For
example, could we add a small tree filled park space as an "offset"? Verizon was very receptive to this idea -- but said it should be located
on the same parcel as the tower. No problem, I said, and took photos of where park space could be located at the Parker Ranch Shopping Center--such as in the open grassy area
across from the Post Office and also along Mamalahoa --knock out the row of parking spaces right along the highway and fill
in with a row of trees -- and perhaps some picnic tables. I figured: these parking spaces are rarely needed, this "greenspace" would add to the
attractiveness of the shopping center overall, and would distract from the impact of the cell tower and all the hardscape feeling of the
shopping center -- without blocking the view of the shops. (Actually I got this idea from Mark Fenton, the nationally recognized health consultant brought in by the County several years ago). Likewise trees could be added along Pukalani.The Verizon rep made it sound as if Verizon would buy the trees and install all at the same time as the
installation of the tower. At the same time I was encouraging other to think about other possible win-win solutions. <br>
<br>
I didn't hear back from the Verizon rep prior to the follow-up May 14th
Design Review Meeting -- which signaled to me the "mitigation plan" had run into a road block. Sure enough, Parker Ranch Shopping Center said no. First of
all the grassy area at the end of the parking lot across from the parking lot is an available site for an additional commercial
operation -- so no way that is going to be dedicated as "greenspace". And what about a small park area along the highway? Again Parker Ranch Center said no way --since they don't want to lose any parking stalls and because the stores at the shopping center would not want because the trees would block the view of their shops. Plus the Shopping Center explained they really don't want to encourage
loitering outside -- better for customers to come enjoy the food court. "Humph!" I said in response -- such a short-sighted response. I mentioned Mark Fenton's "wisdom". As mentioned above, Mark Fenton urged us to consider the importance of a pedestrian friendly urban spaces, including more greenways in shopping centers. He presented slides showing the upgrading at some malls that have incorporated these village gathering themes versus those that instead have moved increasingly towards a more industrial feeling mall-scape. I reiterated that Mark Fenton had recommended removing some parking stalls
-- where the parking area is not regularly filled. I also pointed out that Richard Smart's 2020 plan encompassed this same vision of tree lined streets that welcomes pedestrians. <br><br>After the May 14th Planning and Design Review meeting, several of us, including the Verizon rep went over to the shopping center and cased out the area along the highway. We also walked around and looked at all the many small "islands" that were supposed to have trees but at least now are just grass spots. I asked: couldn't we at minimum be able to fill in all the missing trees throughout the parking lot -- and a few along the highway (yes with some type of three that would not block the view of the shopping center stores -- and which would not require removal of parking spaces)?<br><br>So today I did a bit of inquiring --asking some employees who work at the Parker Ranch shopping center how they feel about a cell tower going in next to the shopping center. I got the same responses as at the meeting, in particular: does it have to be at the heart
of Waimea? And also concerns from shop owners -- same negative feedback (not
negative about having a cell tower -- but isn't there a better spot?). <br><br><br><br>Some of the remaining questions are:<br>1) is there a better spot within the central area of town -- preferably on a commercially zoned parcel?<br>2) If the cell tower is going to be built at the Parker Ranch shopping center, should it be the pole tower or the fake pine tree tower?<br>3) Should there be a possibility of "co-location" if it is located at the shopping center? Versus, if located elsewhere? (co-location is code for adding other antennae onto the same tower--but that means making the tower higher into the view plane). <br>4) What about that white vinyl fencing that is being proposed-- can we suggest better than that?<br>5) Where ever it will be located, what mitigation is possible? And if at Parker Ranch Shopping Center -- should we push the Chicago based mall operator to at least allow planting of trees on each of the empty pads around its parking lots (even without removing parking spaces)?<br><br>Based on the objectives of the Waimea Design Plan and the South Kohala CDP our committee clearly has the right to weigh in on the above issues. There are however legal limitations to raising objections related specifically to health issues. Therefore although we want to be cognizant that there are members of our community who strongly believe there are real health concerns about these towers, and that there are individuals who may be hypersensitive to electomagnetic radiation, as a design review committee we are not focusing on this health concern. The Verizon rep did however point out that if people are concerned about electromagnetic radiation -- they should be far more concerned about using cell phones -- that is any wireless apparatus. See for example this explanation about the impact of electromagnetic radiation from using a cell phone <a name="" target="" classname="" class="" href="http://www.cellphone-health.com/?gclid=CKKxxMDC16ECFRFcbQodJ1izJw">HERE</a>, In response to questions about cumulative impact, especially on the more vulnerable members of our community (our keiki in nearby schools and persons will illnesses in the adjacent hospital), the Verizon rep explained that every time a tower is proposed the company must do a cumulative impact study for that location. [My follow-up question was -- if there is no significant impact from these towers, why would a cumulative impact study be required?]<br><br>Consider also: Shouldn't tower installations be subject to obtaining a use permit -- no matter where it will be located? Right now , a use permit is not required in commercially zoned locations -- and so of course it is there that cell tower companies want to locate. Requiring a use permit would mean a Planning Commission public hearing would be held (more transparency and more accountability): the permit would include the conditions that would be required for the duration of use at the designated location. <br><br>FOR MORE INFORMATION SEE MY PREVIOUS BLOG ABOUT THIS CELL PHONE ISSUE <a name="" target="" classname="" class="" href="/home/?q=node/539">HERE</a>. INCLUDING THESE ATTACHMENTS:<br>--NOTES FROM THE 5/7 PLANNING AND DESIGN REVIEW MEETING. <br>-- POWER POINT ABOUT THE KEY LEGAL ISSUES AND ECONOMICS SURROUNDING CELL PHONE TOWERS<br>--VERIZON'S SEARCH AREA FOR WAIMEA TOWN. Below is this attachment of Verizon's search area (plenty of commercial properties within this zone). <br><br><br><br><br><br><br>http://www.margaretwille.com/home/?q=node/541#commentsSun, 16 May 2010 08:00:34 +0000margaretwille541 at http://www.margaretwille.com/homeThe Towers Are Coming! How to Maximize Benefits and Minimize Harm: Waimea Design Review Meeting 5/14 at 5pm Join Us.
http://www.margaretwille.com/home/?q=node/539
Specifically the 5/14 meeting will be about Verizon's proposed new Waimea tower -- however we must be aware that this carrier is but the first of the herd of other carriers to seek additional cell phone coverage -- largely needed to cover the internet use of phones. The Waimea meeting of the Design Review Committee will be held at the Waimea elementary school staff lunch room (accessible from the driveway) at 5 p.m. Our goal is to see if there is a better site that works for Verizon and does not compromise in town view of Mauna KEa. Additionally, what if any conditions should be imposed -- based on legitimate community concerns. <br><br>Now some folks say we can do without better coverage ... but many are supportive YET want to be sure we are locating any tower in the best location with the least aesthetic impact (e.g. not blocking the view plane of Mauna Kea) and achieving the best exchange for the community. At this time Verizon is requesting to locate the facility against the backside of the Parker Ranch Shopping Center. Additional locations are currently being explored --- such as whether we can locate the tower at the new District Park (to combine with use as a lamp post)-- and perhaps obtain some additional Verizon good will there at the park. And if the Shopping Center site is the best -- should the tower be disguised as a tree? All public input will be appreciated. <br><br>Join us for this discussion on Friday at 5pm . For more info:<br><br>1. Read my Meeting notes from the first Waimea Design Review meeting 5/7/10 concerning this Verizon proposal: attached BELOW. <br><br>2. Tune into Sherry Bracken tomorrow on Hawaii Public Radio at FM 90.7, or 94.1, or 91.1--Hilo :HPR time 4:30 or 5:10 or 5:30. If you miss the radio program, you can tune in tomorrow 5/13 here to listen to recorded program anytime thereafter <a name="" target="" classname="" class="" href="http://www.hawaiipublicradio.org/hpr/index.php?option=com_content&task=blogcategory&id=38&Itemid=127">HERE </a>.<br><br>3. Great powerpoint about this invasion of Towers and what municipalities can do to make informed decisions (PRESENTED TO THE HAWAII COUNTY COUNCIL) Attached BELOW.<br><br>4. CHECK OUT the herd of towers already residing in Waimea area <a name="" target="" classname="" class="" href="http://www.antennasearch.com/sitestart.asp?sourcepagename=reportviewer2&prevsessionidnum=734562206&prevordernum=1&previtemnum=1&sectionname=towerreview&pagename=towerreview&pagenum=1&cmdrequest=pagehandler">HERE </a><br>http://www.margaretwille.com/home/?q=node/539#commentsWed, 12 May 2010 06:25:17 +0000margaretwille539 at http://www.margaretwille.com/home