Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> among those awaiting the decision of the Hawai'i State <br /> Supreme Court on the appeal of the LUC decision. <br /> <br /> Though lawful, it seems a fracturing of sequence, to begin <br /> this County process before the State process is concluded. <br /> <br /> Serious questions were raised in the State case regarding <br /> the collection and analysis of data, particularly with regard <br /> to the evaluation of impacts to culture Iri-this case Hawaiian <br /> and of Ka'upulehu in particular. <br /> <br /> What new rules or protocols have been duly authorized and <br /> <br /> adopted to afford confidence in this process to properly <br /> evaluate impacts upon traditional and cultural practices as <br /> expressed at Ka'upulehu? <br /> <br /> As was noted by then LUC Chair Alan Hoe, the Kohanaiki / <br /> PASH decision raised more questions than it answered with <br /> <br /> regard to the land use application and permitting process as <br /> it relates to traditional and customary practices. The case <br /> presently being appealed before the Hawaii Supreme <br /> Court, may nudge us towards some of those much needed <br /> answers. <br /> <br /> <br /> In this county, a new rule germane to the process requires <br /> citizens to apply for intervenor status and pay the attendant <br /> filing fee before the first hearing of the issue before the <br /> County Planning Commission. The questions of data <br /> collection and analysis remain unanswered. <br /> <br /> <br /> A well reasoned and prepared Integrated Resources <br /> Management Plan has been provided by the applicant. <br /> However this addresses the management of resources <br /> which they have self-identified and validated, not the <br /> systematic analysis and evaluation of impacts to cultural <br /> <br /> resources and practices. <br />