Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> fleshed out at the county SMA proceeding. Something obviously happened. <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> Q What is the status of the Land Use Commission proceeding? <br /> <br /> <br /> A The commission entered an order, portions of which describes what the commission <br /> <br /> believed were the cultural resources of the area, their location and the means by which the <br /> <br /> applicant must protect the same. The Coalition appealed the decision, which is now before the <br /> <br /> Hawaii Supreme Court. <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> Q If the Land Use Commission addressed the subject of cultural resources, why is the <br /> Coalition intervening in the SMA proceeding? <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> A I think you need to direct that question to the Coalition itself. However, I did inform the <br /> <br /> applicant's attorney that under certain legal principles, if the Coalition did not intervene, it could <br /> <br /> be "bound" to the Land Use Commission's findings of fact which suggest that the only cultural <br /> <br /> resources of any significance lie in the IRMP 235-acre resource zone (and nowhere else in the <br /> petition area) and which offered no determination of the access and gather rights of native <br /> <br /> Hawaiians. If you read the Land Use Commission's order, paragraph 18, the commission merely <br /> <br /> restates the constitutional provision of Article XII, Section 7, nothing more.' <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> Q Is there anything further which the hearing officers may find relevant? <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> ' A recent memorandum decision of the Hawaii Supreme Court discusses this procedural <br /> question in another case. However, because the decision is a memorandum decision, it cannot be <br /> cited; nor can it be given precedential value at this time. <br /> 6 <br />