2020-02-20 Leeward Exh E (SMA 19-074 & SPP 19-210)

Home

VAN PERNIS: And if they violate that? KAY: So, again, the way that in a case of our permits, if there is a suspected violation of conditions of the permit, we would follow a similar process where we would investigate a complaint; if it's found that the applicant is in violation of their permit, we work with them to try and come into compliance; if that does not work,then there is the ability for the Director to bring the permit back to the Planning Commission for revocation. VAN PERNIS: And what are the conditions? KAY: I'm sorry VAN PERNIS: What are the conditions issued for the job there? KAY: There are multiple conditions in your recommendation reports VAN PERNIS: The same as the Director's report? KAY: Yes, at the end of each recommendation report, there is a statement that says, "Based on the proceeding findings, it is recommended that this permit request be approved subject to the following conditions." In the case of the Special Permit, that starts on Page 15. In the case of the SMA Permit, that starts on Page 10. I should mention, too, I apologize, since we sent out our background and recommendation to you, there have been a few other pieces of correspondence that have come in. First and foremost, there was a set of questions on our recommendation from the applicant. We sent a response to those. And there was one other correspondence in response to our response. And then today you received a, pardon me, a written comment from a Wanda Carey. I just want to point out, it's on a Petition for Standing in a Contested Case Hearing, Ms. Carey was contemplating filing a petition last week. She decided not to but asked to just submit this because this is where all of the kind of written justification for her complaint is, or her testimony is. So those are the documents that have come in since. VAN PERNIS: Have you received a letter from someone representing themselves as attorney Mauck? KAY: Yes. That was part of the application packet that we submitted in the background. It was a twelve-page legal memorandum around the Religious Land Use and Incarcerated Persons Law. VAN PERNIS: I want to point out and preface that, as an attorney in Kona for forty years, the letter of Mr. Mauck is a standard publication and is not at all applicable to this proceeding in that no church is being denied here, no monastery, no church, and that reasonable conditions as the Planning Department has recommended is certainly applicable under any version or any argument of the laws that Mr. Mauck refers to—Mr. Mauck is not a Hawaii attorney by the way. And, have you got the opinion of Corporation Counsel on this? 6 EXHIBIT E