COM 0349.919 2006-2008 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

stamping the opinions of SM5 proponents. The eleven ~~Findings" are opinions, most of which could be quoted or paraphrased from testimony by SMS proponents. The glaring unsubstantiated attacks on Ka'u Preservation, and silence on the role of OKK, speaks volumes for JKA's bias for major development at Punalu~u. The conclusion that ~~neither of the major options on the table-buying a part of the Sea Mountain land or accepting the Sea Mountain Five proposal in its present state-moves the community to where it wants to go" is wrong! I remind you that the vast majority of the 800 plus pieces of written testimony and oral testimony supported preserving Punalu'u and, in Councilmember Yagong's mailed survey, three of the four communities (Ocean View, Na'alehu, and Volcano National Park residents) supported Resolution 169-07 with twice as many people in favor as opposed. Preserving Punalu~u has been shown to be the overwhelming position of Ka'u, the scientific community and other residents and visitors. For Council Members who voted in favor of the mayor's postponement, it is unfortunate they did not receive a document that helps in this decision. I urge each of my fellow Council Members to reject the contents of the JKA Summary Report and let the overwhelming evidence in support of Resolution 169-07 lead you to this historic opportunity to preserve Punalu~u. BELOW I'VE INCLUDED ONE RESIDENT'S REPLIES TO JKA SURVEYS OF VOLCANO RESIDENTS IN CAPS THAT DEMONSTRATES THE DIFFICULTY IN ANSWERING THEIR QUESTIONS IN ONE'S OWN WORDS. JKA-DO you use Punalu~u for recreation, for fishing, for gathering, etc? RECREATION JKA -How do you feel about the possibility of 1,000 new homes, two resort hotels, a shopping mall and a golf course? THE PROPOSAL WOULD ADVERSELY AFFECT MY RECREATIONAL OPPORTUNITIES AS WELL AS THE NATURAL RESOURCES IN THE AREA. JKA -Would the proposed projects create jobs? SURE, BUT THEY WOULD HURT HAWAII'S ECONOMY IN THE LONG-TERM BY REDUCING ITS ATTRACTIVENESS AS A VISITOR DESTINATION. JKA -IS Kau Preservation's proposal for an international learning laboratory and eco-campus for that area realistic? YUP. JKA-Should the County of Hawaii purchase certain areas around Punalu~u to protect it from development and to preserve it for future generations? ABSOLUTELY. JAMES KENT & ASSOCIATES SHOULD NOT BE ATTEMPTING TO MEDIATE OR NEGOTIATE A SOLUTION HERE. SOMETIMES, MEDIATORS NEED TO ACCEPT THAT FOR CERTAIN COMMUNITIES ANY DEVELOPMENT OF SENSITIVE AREAS IS UNACCEPTABLE; THAT MITIGATION PROPOSALS DO NOT ADDRESS ALL CONCERNS. JKA- What would you see as the best economic future for Kau, given the current trends and economic conditions? 1. KEEP IT WILD! 2. PRODOCE AS MUCH ENERGY LOCALLY AS POSSIBLE (WIND AND PV) 3. ORGANIC AGRICULTURE (INCLUDING ORGANIC DAIRIES) 9. SUSTAINABLE FORESTRY ON PRIVATE LAND 5. EXPAND THE NATIONAL PARK JKA- What is the possible balance between conservation and development in the current Sea Mountain Five proposal? THERE IS NO BALANCE. EITHER YOU KEEP IT WILD, OR YOU SCREW UP THE PLACE WITH DEVELOPMENT. THERE IS NO IN-BETWEEN. YOU CAN REDUCE THE SIZE OF THE DEVELOPMENT, BUT YOU ARE STILL GOING TO DESTROY THE AMBIANCE, THE EXPERIENCE, THE NATURAL RESOURCES, THE BEAUTY. OH, OK, HOW ABOUT JUST LETTING THEM DEVELOP A LITTLE BIT ON THE MAUKA SIDE OF THE HIGHWAY? JKA- What in your view would be a way to improve the Sea Mountain 5 proposal in order to optimize community benefits? WHAT KIND OF LOADED, UNBALANCED QUESTION IS THIS? THE PROPOSAL WOULD BE IMPROVED IF IT WAS DROPPED. COMMUNITY BENEFITS DO NOT MITIGATE THE DESTRUCTION THAT WOULD BE CREATED BY THIS PROJECT. DistrPct 6 - Upper Puna, Ka`H, and South Kona Hawal `i Caunry Ls An Equa[ Opportunuy Provider And Employer