Laserfiche WebLink
FROM KPECR R H SCHENKEL PHONE N0. : 8083250435 Feb. Ol 1997 10:04RM P2 <br /> ~ III <br /> ~Ca~ra ~alis~zdes..~'sfates G'a~r,~ru~tity ~4ssac~at~ati <br /> Post Oflice Box 2223 Ka~lua•KOna. Hawaii 96745-2223 <br /> February 1, 197 <br /> RECEIVED ' <br /> Mr. James Y. Arakaki, Chairman _z~~2_________,_.. <br /> HawalI County Council Date_.__._.._- <br /> 25 Aupuni St. ..,,,,,Count' council <br /> Hilo, HL 96720 <br /> Dear Mr. Arakaki: <br /> After returning from a mainland business trip, I read back issues <br /> of West Hawaii Today, and particularly noticed the Glhite Hat developer <br /> article by Jason Armstrong on Page 1 of the January 26, 1997 edition <br /> of the newspaper. ' <br /> L am appalled that the"Council, except only Mr. Tyler, would pro- <br /> ceed to approve relaxing requirements previously imposed in the re- <br /> zoning of the White Hat Development pro~e:ct. The worst of the re- <br /> laxations is the matter of sub-standard roads, of which too many now <br /> exist in various subdivisions in G]est Hawaii.. Obviously, the Council's <br /> actions are favoring a developer at the expense of public safety. The <br /> ridiculous part of this travesty is the meager amount of "savings", <br /> only $250,000 according to the article. is that all that public safety <br /> is worth in the eyes of the Council? Is the concept of favoring devel- <br /> opers who ask for sub-standard approvals and offer Co pay $100,000 for <br /> "area improvements" becoming a new standard practice? That cash offer <br /> Gould be interpreted as a bribe, of course. <br /> Oddly, on January 22, 1997 the Council unanimously approved the <br /> Kalaoa Resolution 20-97 to initiate a comprehensive plan to interlink <br /> and enhance the community of Kalaoa through publicly and privately <br /> funded im~rvvements". Then, iln the afternoon of January 22 the Council <br /> "caved in' Co the White Hat Developer. Why the inconsistency between <br /> the Kalaoa initiative and the White Hat Development? Clearly to ease <br /> requirements £or White Hat Development will set a precedent for all <br /> successive Developers to demand equal treatment. The Council has thus <br /> opened a "Pandoras llox" to allow relaxed requirements in exchende for <br /> a "bribe" of a few measly dollars. T strongly urge you and the Council <br /> to reconsider this matter and reverse the decision at the next Council <br /> meeting. I also request that Chis letter be received as a numbered <br /> communication and read into the record by htr. Tyler. <br /> Si erely, <br /> tto Mushrush <br /> Chairman Government Relations <br /> <br /> cc: C. Tyler Committee O OI <br /> Comm. Dio. <br /> ~,e xa. H S G <br /> Prosenfed c~•~~N~,~ <br /> l~ai. ~t <br /> l3ei. Date FEB 7 t9~ <br /> <br />