COM 0349.919 2006-2008 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

level we create a moderate middle ground where citizen involvement becomes part of the issue-solving process. Through this process we diminish the wind in the sails of the extreme voices." This shows that JKA is not neutral and has an agenda to marginalize those opposed to SM5's development at Punalu~u. JKA has imposed Orwellian wordsmithing in their questioning (lobbying) where `conservation' really means putting in development and `preservation' means denying the public use of a resource. These are part of a not so subtle technique to marginalize the leading organized proponents of protecting the proposed 2,000 foot buffer that Reso 169-07 seeks. I suspect that if their name were Ka'u Conservation, JKA would try to demonize, marginalize and pervert the meaning of the word `conservation' in an equally cynical fashion. The real nature of the law in Hawaii regarding conservation districts would deny the use of such land to resorts, condos and other mega developments. Evidently the mayor and JKA have declared KP an extreme voice and decided to "diminish the wind in the sails of the extreme voices". The Big Island Weekly reported that, `Given the questions they asked, the claim that James Kent & Associates (JKA) began the Ka'u Listening Project, as an "unfiltered, unbiased targeted assessment" is a distortion of their methodology. JKA has worked in over 200 communities around the world preventing, managing and reconciling disputes involving mining projects, logging operations, military base installations, resort developments, power plants, including geothermal, among other "human change initiatives. Some questions were clearly aimed at preserving the possibility of development. "What is the best possible balance between conservation and development in the current Sea Mountain Five proposal? What in your view would be a way to improve the Sea Mountain Five proposal in order to optimize community benefits?" In posing alternative opportunities for Punalu'u, JKA asked, "is Ka'u Preservation's proposal for an international learning laboratory and eco-campus for that area realistic.' As this shows, JKA was not mediating positions or objectively collecting community opinions. Many Kau constituents complained bitterly to me about their experience talking to JKA listeners. Many viewed the questions as the, "Are you still beating your wife?" type questions. Constituents frequently felt that they should not be expected to create all the economic answers to Ka'u when the legislative issue before the Council is to preserve 150 acres of the Punalu'u shoreline. One constituent brought to my attention that, when she asked to see JKA's work (not just the Report Summary) she was told it was confidential. Neither JKA nor the Mayor's office would provide this information and yet taxpayers paid for this report. This is not open government at work and not responsible professional behavior. As another example of the lack of objectivity, at the Discovery Harbor JKA talk story meeting, one of the listeners was reported to have started with the statement that `The Council is leaning toward approving this development'. The decision of the Council is to be made September 19th. Who can say now what that vote will be. JKA's statement certainly is not neutral. Finally, the Report Summary is hugely misleading, lacking in either mediation results or survey results and primarily succeeding in rubber Dislrict 6 - Upper Puna, Ka'A, and Sauth Kona Hawaii County /s An Equal Opportunity Provider And Employer