Laserfiche WebLink
• <br /> Analysis.of::Evidence . -• , • ' - . <br /> Complainants allege that:State&County officials"deliberately" •undercount residents due to <br /> policy set by State and County officials in favor of large land owners/developers::..Complainants <br /> allege that-State`andCounty officials knowingly zone residential land as:farm.land,:'based upon <br /> r <br /> erroneous:'projected pop�lat'ion gures which cannot be supported-by the;State or. Hawaii <br /> County officials.: . .. : : . <br /> • Complainants;provided data which shows that the'HD OT&Hawaii County are excluding law <br /> none arid Native`;Hawaiians from consideration`in its.HL RTP..based.upon land use-policies. <br /> . <br /> • <br /> Investigation:disclosed:that:Respondent":officials use.:outside consultants.to:'prepare population . <br /> • . • projections,in for nulating::their general:plan. Respondent officials wwereunable to provide ' <br /> • documentation regarding how_t e consultants arrive at their:projected population data for any of <br /> its jurisdictions. 'Investigation disclosed that Respondents''fake'the word of the:consultants • • <br /> • without'verification.,- • • - <br /> • Investigation further disclosed that Respondents are not:collceting:data in accordance with the • <br /> requirements of 23 CFI.,--Part.200..9 (b) (4).and Executive°Order.12`898, Section 3-3. <br /> Investigation also disclosed through•an interview with the Title VI:Specialistfor HOOT that the <br /> • Title VI Specialist only"s ends:5% of his time in the Title VI area. : • <br /> •The_position description•for the Title VI Specialist which:is'.dated^may 8 1,970, addresses only <br /> equal employment":o- artuiuty-(EEO)-duties. •There is.nothing.-in-'the-positiori:description that - <br /> • <br /> .covers-Title.W. <br /> • The Title VI _stated that he_doe not conduct program reviews forcompliance.with`Title <br /> Specialist . <br /> • VI nor does he exercise""oversight,for.Title`VI compliance with`SubreciplentS.: , <br /> Record evidence-shows that=the:latest-Title VI':Plan".submitted:by FOOT to the Division Office - <br /> does riot comply with 49 CFR.21.or 23 CFR 200. . , ' : . - <br /> Conclusion <br /> .Based upon the:information reviewed during.the investigation;the shows that the • <br /> - <br /> Respondents Hawaii Department of Transportation and Hawaii County are:not in <br /> with':the requirements.of;Title'VI ofthe:Civil Rights Act':of: 964:as,outlined..by the procedures <br /> and requirements.at:23`CF200 and 49 CFR 21. •Tue evidence'Yfitti er::shiows that the <br /> re- uir..ements of Exe'cutrve.":Order X12898,Section 3-3.are:not being`followed. . . • <br /> • q <br /> Page 4 of :6 <br />