COM 0493.062 2000-2002 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

The Supreme Court has been clear that they do not provide security for a developer's gamble. As the Court has said, "Those who do business in the regulated field cannot object if the legislative scheme is buttressed by subsequent amendments to achieve the legislative end." The courts have specifically supported government regulation of adjacent private land to protect public land and water resources. Ka`awaloa and Kealakekua Bay, as well as Kohanaiki, and the lands near Pu`uhonua O Honaunau, are prime examples of this scenario. In such cases as Just a Marinette County and Audobon Society a Superior Court of Alpine County, regula- tion of development on lands adjacent to public lands such as parks and preserves has been found not to be considered a taking. Extensive lava tube systems lie beneath the surface of Keopuka. I would estimate 60 to 70% of the landmass is riddled with cave systems. Any development in this area would involve collapsing of these systems and the importation of massive amounts of soil to the site, just like what has occurred and continues to occur at Hokulia. These caves are living cultural artifacts that contain evidence of prehistoric habitation, as well as hidden burials and familial artifacts known only to the families who have passed down this knowledge for many gen- erations. Some of these caves are expansive, long caverns with ceilings as high as seventy feet. The destruction of the caves would destroy forever any opportunity for these families to continue to actively conduct their religious and cultural practice. These caves are also used as homes for hundreds of pueo (Hawaiian short-eared owl) who nest on the cave walls. Consider this quote from a recent study by noted historian Kepa Maley. "One consultation participant, a descendent of the Makekau line, spoke with particular concern about proposed development at Keopuka. She explained that for generations her family has been caretakers of impor- tant high-ranking ilina, which remain hidden in cave systems, but which could be impacted by land alteration. Elders of her family regularly walked the trail from Ka`awaloa to Keopuka on visits to care for family sites and she continues to do so today."- A Cultural-~Iistorical Study: Na Ala Hele- Lartds of Keauhou to Kealakekua by Kepa Maley. The archeology survey done for this property in 1989 was done at the same time as the one done for Hokulia by the same company. The Hokulia survey, even though approved by SHPD, has been shown to be grossly inadequate and has resulted in the inadvertent discovery and destruction of numerous burials and important sites. These surveys are the work of "contract" archeologists and, as in any contract, the person paying the bill is the one who decides the extent of the effort to be made relative to budgetary restrictions and the level of interest in finding archeological evidence. It is not in the interest of landowners, whose only interest in the land may be the profits they can glean from its development, to find extensive archeological evidence on their land. Mr. Anderson's well-timed statement that he will donate portions of Keopuka to be put into Conservation must be taken with a grain of salt. Time and again agreements made by Anderson companies, with the commu- nity and lineal and cultural descendents of the Hokulia property, have been left unfulfilled. A case in point is a February 2000 agreement to build a six foot stone wall around the entire base of Pu `u Ohau to protect the Pu`u which as a whole is considered a sacred burial site. That wall has never been built, home lots are planned on the northern flats of the Pu`u and Anderson is now approaching the State Historic Preservation Division to invalidate their original agreement. The members of Keep Kealakekua Wild and Protect Keopuka Ohana encourage the County Council to adopt the General Plan Revision in whole without further delay. Al fy ack Kelly Coordinator, eep Kealakekua Wild Vice President, Protect Keopuka Ohana