|
Hawaii under the bus and make them pay for all the infrastructure improvements that develop
<br /> over the next 10 to 20 years. I think that this is so elementary that there should be no opposition
<br /> to it at all.
<br /> CARR SMITH: Okay, thank you very much. Anyone else have comments or questions? Max,
<br /> go ahead.
<br /> NEWBERG: Thank you, Madam Chair. I don't think, at least what I was gonna comment on, I
<br /> don't know if there is any way for us to shape it or make it better, I've only been on the
<br /> commission a short time, but I think three projects come to mind as far as basically setting
<br /> precedent, one being the project in Keauhou, mauka of End of the World that was granted a time
<br /> extension on the basis that they had made a substantial investment on the egress of their
<br /> property, investing in somewhat around a million and a half--
<br /> CARR SMITH: Can I I'm going to interrupt for just a second. I don't think that Corp Counsel
<br /> wants us talking about specific cases, so let's not refer to them. I should have stopped Mark from
<br /> talking about the one we just heard, but yeah, if you could generalize in any other way,please go
<br /> ahead.
<br /> NEWBERG: Sure, I think everything falls under circumstances. I guess without mentioning the
<br /> titles of any other projects, you know, everything has its own circumstances. You have
<br /> circumstances where you want it to move forward, there wasn't the original owner that created
<br /> an obstruction in an area that we want to see move forward, and then there's also been projects
<br /> where even though we forwarded the recommendation that we did, its been overturned, so I
<br /> don't know, again, more of a comment than anything else, but I don't always see where we're
<br /> setting good precedent to be able to deny anything that comes before us. That's the comment I
<br /> have.
<br /> CARR SMITH: Thank you. Perry or Barbara, did you want to comment on this?
<br /> KEALOHA: I like some of the language added by Mike. Again, as stated earlier, we see this
<br /> come before us quite regularly now, where people have, where 20 years later and so much as
<br /> changed, and so, some kind of a sunset makes sense at some point. Having said that, I've been on
<br /> the opposite end and witnessed the opposite side of this as well, where you're doing
<br /> improvements and you get approvals and entitlements for a project and you go ahead and do all
<br /> the public-value infrastructure, and then the project doesn't pencil. So, you kill it and you come
<br /> up with another idea and you go in and get new entitlements and you make more public
<br /> commitments and at the end of the day it doesn't pencil. So, I've seen the flip side of what we're
<br /> hearing everyone says, as if there's some big intent to defraud the public in some way, but I've
<br /> seen where it's not easy to make a profit, especially close to the shoreline with SMA
<br /> requirements and infrastructure expectations, and you have a, you know, small project. Trying to
<br /> pay for all the community infrastructure and capture it in a small project can be impossible. But,
<br /> that being said, there's gotta be some sunset. There's gotta be an end to, you know, how long can
<br /> we wait as well.
<br /> CARR SMITH: Thank you for those comments Perry, worthwhile. Go ahead Barbara.
<br /> 6
<br /> EXHIBIT D
<br />
|