2019-03-07 Hearing Transcript - Piilani Partners Request for Reconsideration SMA 18-000070

Home

Mahalo again for your consideration, and I ask again that you hold firm to your decision to defer. Mahalo nui. ROHR: I'm Claudia Rohr. I sent a memorandum in opposition to their motion discussing the public trust doctrine. They referred to the wrong section of the Constitution that applies to the County and the Planning Commission. It's Article XI, Section 1 of the Hawaii Constitution that covers the Planning Commission and the County of Hawaii. It also requires not only do you have a duty in scrutinizing the project and its impact on what the Applicant is admitting to, is a very special spiritual, historic two thousand year old accumulation of Mauna Kea rainwater that has significance to our Native Hawaiians. But, you must also look at the impacts on the public lands in the vicinity of this proposal. That would be Wailoa River recreational area. If you read the Big Island Noise Manual, in there you'll see that noise has health effects on humans and wildlife. Back-up beeper noise is not regulated, because it's a safety issue. There's no regulations. The Applicant corrected the background information and said that they would be having six to eight trucks an hour. That means that forklifts will be loading in palettes of water bottles all the time. One of the effects of noise is it angers people, and that can be a safety issue in our Wailoa Park, State Park. People getting angry over the beeping noise, and maybe they don't have good control of their impulses, they're gonna start fights. This, there's plenty of reasons both for the reasons I stated in my memorandum, but also because you have an obligation to scrutinize the project's impact on the public lands 400 feet away. Thank you. CLARKSON: Thank you, all. Any questions for these testifiers? REPLOGLE: I have a question for Ms. Rohr. You have mentioned that Piilani Bottling wants to bottle this water and ship it away as a medicinal or a life-giving liquid, is their idea? Are you comparing it to like rhino horn? ROHR: No, I just mean that if this goes to court, that's just going to be a factual finding that everybody agrees on. That the water has spiritual qualities, and that they're trying to exploit that, market it. And, I think that the Article XII, Section 7 of the Hawaii Constitution in spirit would support a ruling on your part, or a decision on your part to deny the permit because of the impacts on the historic, spiritual water found in the SMA. I don't think this is right. It's an insult to the Native Hawaiians. REPLOGLE: Thank you. ROHR: I have one more question. In thisI just got information yesterday or the day before at 2 o'clock, and it indicates that Piilani Partners just signed an agreement to be able to assume somebody else's position for an option to purchase the property. Could you tell me whether they actually have sufficient vesting to take anyone to court? I don't know if they really have sufficient ownership in the property. CLARKSON: I don't think that's a matter for us here today. EXHIBIT B 18