2019-06-20 Leeward Exh B (Amend Kona CDP)

Home

need to break out our own working groups at the Commission level to look at ways we can refine what we were supposed to do back in 2008 and make it work. I just have one comment on the proposed amendment. I have it in my written testimony. There are provisions where no reference was made to the County Charter 13-29. In 2010 the voters of the county voted this provision, 13-29. It’s our version of the County obligation to protect certain historical and very valuable resources. The voters said we shall do it. Now, you need to examine the proposed amendment against the County Charter; to what degree are these amendments being proposed consistent with the County Charter 13-29? If you don’t address it, there will be another lawsuit. So, that’s why I recommend maybe the Commission should have its own working group, study this discreet issues, especially the planning for the financial plan and for the infrastructure development. Thank you. DAVID: Hi, I’m Shirley David. I’m the Vice Chair of the CDP Action Committee. I was on the sub-committee when we went through the amendments and we took many, many months in order to do that. Oh, and also I live in Kailua-Kona. So, and I was a member – we had just moved here to Kona at the time when the charrettes began, they began soon after we lived there, here, so I was involved in those at those meetings as well – so, and I was a member of the sub-committee that looked at these amendments, and I just want to tell you that there were public members, public members on our sub-committee and we, as Kamuela said, we passed the amendments that we made at one of our meetings, and then it went to the Planning Department and came back with us with these other amendments and we just, that was also a public meeting and there were members of the public there. One of the things that I had issues grappling with the “shall”s and “should”s is when it was appropriate to tell who what to do. And there were some places, especially in Transportation, where it was telling the State what to do when you put, when it said you should do that, and so that was why we changed those to “shall”s because the County cannot tell the State what to do. So I know that’s why some of those changes were made. Others were that it was just so impractical to be able to make some of these things as part of the law; that’s why some of these things were changed. We all, we always don’t agree on everything that the changes were made but we felt at the time of our meeting on a, in May that we wanted to move this ahead to you for you to look at one more time, and we would like to see it move up and actually get County Council approvals. So some of these changes that need to be made can be made so we can move ahead with our, with the Action Plan. Thank you. RUDOLPH: Aloha. My name is Shannon Rudolph and I’ll be testifying for myself and also for Chuck Flaherty who’s caring for his mom and lives in Kealakekua. So his testimony is: “There are” – can you hear me? “There are other issues in the proposed change of the language, the most important of which involves changing the way the environmental reviews occur. I have not had time to determine the real effect of those changes, so I’m focusing on the biggest problem, which is getting rid of ‘shall.’ If you are one of the hundreds of Kona community volunteers who participated in and donated their time to the Kona Community Development Plan process from 2005 to 2008, you should be concerned. If you are a county resident, you should be concerned. “These amendments are being proposed because of a lawsuit, Missler v. County of Hawai‘i, filed against the County for approving a development that neighbors believed violated several laws. 10 EXHIBIT B