|
in that area. But it still maintains its shape for the most part and goes up into the center of
<br /> the island. And it does encapsulate P6hakuloa Training Area. But as you can see, and as
<br /> you zoom in on your maps, and you see the maps,this does follow the district lines that
<br /> people are very familiar with, that they are comfortable with, and just makes slight
<br /> changes around the edge. So, that kind of reverts back there. So, it kind of keeps—and
<br /> I'll revisit the north side of the island in a little bit. But, for a lot of the testimony we
<br /> received on Tuesday night, about the proposed map, this one here brings Kalaoa back in
<br /> to District 8. So, all of Kalaoa, everything north of Kaiminani, is back into District 8.
<br /> And there's a very clearI know it's a jagged line, but it's a very clear line that breaks 8
<br /> and 9. It would just be on the north side of the Pu`u Anahulu area. So, that's where the
<br /> clear line is on this proposed. That line does shift down. You can see the yellow line.
<br /> That is the current one. And this map shows this one a little bit further south here. And
<br /> it's not really much of a change in that area, but it is maybe a cleaner line, and welcome
<br /> to thoughts on that. We've had—and moving into the urban core of Kona, we had—and I
<br /> do need to change the color of the ocean out here to be more yellow to match its land
<br /> counterpart. But this does incorporate most of—and thank you, Chair, for submitting the
<br /> business district plan for Kona. I know the current map goes a little bit further along Old
<br /> A's, old Kona airport. This map proposed here, brings back Kona Bay and Alii Drive
<br /> into Council 7 as we've heard testimony on. Now moving just a little further south, this is
<br /> where it does change a bit. In trying to get those numbers for Council 6, and at least
<br /> bringing them back a little bit, that Council 6 took Kealakekua. Now that being said,
<br /> because it shifted further into Kona, and we had conversations and testimony about that.
<br /> About Ka`u district being more aligned with the Kona side and some of the water sheds
<br /> and so forth, and the mountain ranges. That allowed to give Council 5 most of its current
<br /> boundary and more back. So, this area outside Glenwood, if I'm not mistaken, this area
<br /> here, could go back into Council 5 as the previous commission wasn't able to do. There
<br /> could be some slight changes around here, like this area could go back into Council 5. As
<br /> you see the current boundary and it crosses over. Now as our commissioner from Puna
<br /> said that trying to keep all of Council 4 together, and Kalapana and Kapoho. Welcome to
<br /> some thoughts about Wao Kele O Puna Forest Reserve and shifting that again to give
<br /> Pahoa its two council members. That's a possibility. I'd have to look at the numbers
<br /> again. And HPP, it is split. This is a change that needs to be made here, and we need to
<br /> talk about this as a possibility about they'd have to cross back into another district to get
<br /> back into the district. So, we need to make a slight change there. And then lastly, going
<br /> back around, this brings Pana`ewa back into Council 3. So, Pana`ewa, Keaukaha, are all
<br /> in one district. The last thing I want to say about this, and I'll bring up the numbers here
<br /> so you can see the deviations. They're pushing it a little bit on some areas, but giving
<br /> Council I primarily, and if we could give Council I a little bit more wiggle room too, as
<br /> well as Council 6, these areas are very rural areas, communities are spread out. So, it may
<br /> be best to keep them at a negative count just for the reason of representation. So, that
<br /> individuals are more connected with that representative, and that council member. That
<br /> they're not, you know, we're not putting too many in those rural spread-out areas. But
<br /> rather, they are actually a little bit more overrepresented. It's a counterintuitive when it's
<br /> a negative number. When it's a negative number, those individuals would be a little bit
<br /> more overrepresented. Their ratio to their council member is greater. So,just wanted to
<br /> put that out there. Thank you, Chair.
<br /> 7
<br />
|