2020-02-06 Exh C New Cingular dba AT&T Mobility USE 19-081

Home

Hawaiian Burial Council regarding this permit application. On another note, the department of fish and game responded to this application belatedly. I just received a copy of their comments yesterday. Jessica, was that yesterday? Where's Jessica? Yeah, I believe I just received those yesterday. I've been asking to be updated all through this process and that, that information just came yesterday from fish and game. Okay, this application process cannot legally proceed until the appropriate experts from [inaudible] have had opportunity to review it. Kamehameha Schools has also expressed concerns about this tower. In my testimony, I will address the Applicant's failure to provide public notice in accordance with the law. It's because of this failure that Ms. `Iaukea and her native contingent weren't able to be here. And on to my testimony. Did I hear correctly that you folks volunteer for this? RAFFIPIY: That's correct. CLARK: Okay [laughing]. I had to go murder Albezia trees during the lunch break just to retain my, regain my sanity after this morning. Anyway, kudos to you. I don't know how you do it. Anyway, now on to my testimony. Ladies and gentlemen of the Planning Commission, today you're being asked to consider application of a multi -national corporation that intends to railroad through, a facility that will cause great material harm to the surrounding community. The Applicant has shown arrogant disregard for the planning process. I am just a farmer, yet my cursory perusal of the documents revealed numerous discrepancies. The sloppy application repeatedly insults this Commission with prevarications and omissions. Doubtless, this is a proven industry strategy. I imagine they are relying on the pressure of the Shot Clock Rule to Shanghai the process. You're all familiar with the Shot Clock Rule in regard to these applications? Okay, I see some nodding heads. Anyway, this is not a nimby complaint. There is no functional reason why the proposed facility needs to be in anyone's back yard. There are so many other options. This is a high-density neighborhood. For your consideration, I would like to bring to your attention the following application discrepancies in the order they appear in the application correspondence. Section 25-2-63 pertaining to public notification of an application. The rule states the sign shall be posted at or near the property boundary adjacent to a public road bordering the property and shall be readable from said public road. So, is everyone clear on the discrepancy there? They hid this sign way down. The Applicants posted their sign on a decrepit private dirt road more than two hundred yards from any public road, in a place that is traveled by less than one percent of the citizens that reside in the area affected by the application. I was told by a County planner that AT&T had initially intended to post a sign on a gated private road that is used by none of the affected parties, North Road, specifically. All of the text that I'm quoting is contained in the application and correspondence. I sited specific sections and the written testimony that each of you have received. First, from Director Yee's October 10h letter to the Applicant. Item number six, regarding the mandated written notification. Mr. Yee had to take the Applicant to task because they omitted 16 parcels from the list of surrounding properties. Next, from Andrew Tomlinson's November 5 response to Director Yee's October 10 letter, item number seven regarding co - location equipment. Mr. Tomlinson's testimony is very interesting. He, I quote him, "We do EXHIBIT C 12