Laserfiche WebLink
TORIGOE: Yeah, I think basically what we’re talking about is the stipulated <br />document that’s kind of the, part of the basis of the withdrawal. So we want to make sure that <br />we’re playing with the right, you know, document as we go forward based on the agreement with <br />the Intervenor. <br />LIM: Excuse me. <br />ALAMEDA: Mr. Lim? <br />LIM: The stipulated document had nothing to do with the withdrawal. They <br />have never reviewed it because they weren’t a party. <br />ALAMEDA: Okay. <br />LIM: It is our position that they have now withdrawn and they should be <br />seated in the audience and not being a part in the proceedings. <br />TORIGOE: Okay. <br />ALAMEDA: Okay, that sounds accurate. <br />TORIGOE: Okay, well, I’m sorry. I was mistaken then. <br />ALAMEDA: Thank you. All right. Mr. Sullivan, thank you so much for coming and <br />sitting here with us. <br />HARDY-SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Yuen. Thank you, Commissioners. <br />ALAMEDA: Mr. Lim, could I ask, you know, the notice issue did come up and I <br />wanted to just address it now. Mr. Mooers, could you state your name and address for the <br />record. <br />MOOERS: Greg Mooers, PO Box 1101, Kamuela, Hawaii. <br />ALAMEDA: Okay, go ahead. <br />MOOERS: Yeah, there were several mailings done related to this application. The <br />first mailing on September 9, 2005 there was a notice to 399 neighbors. At that point the <br />proposed mauka-makai connector was adjacent to Alii Park Place. Subsequent to that, the <br />Director asked us to relocate that access point to Alii Lani Way; and at that time we did; and we <br />sent out an additional 689 notices to people who now were within 500 feet of that roadway. So <br />in total over 1,000 people were notified. Then on May 5, 2006, a second notice went out to both <br />groups, so the 399 initially and then the 689. As we started the contested case, there was a <br />question related to the owners, the Intervenors, who lived on a roadway in which we had notified <br />everybody within 500 feet of the project. But since the roadway was owned jointly by the entire <br />organization we were asked to do a fourth mailing, in which we did to all of those roadway <br />owners; and that was done on May 30, 2006. I do have all of the mailing list here and the dates <br />they were mailed. I don’t know what the, the testifiers, what their particular TMK numbers are; <br />EXHIBIT B <br />11 <br /> <br />