My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2003-05-27 TBLASMAN (3)
PublicDocuments
>
Planning Department
>
Leeward/Windward Planning Commission
>
Minutes & Exhibits Transcripts
>
2003-2022 Exhibits Transcripts
>
2003
>
2003-05-27 TBLASMAN (3)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/13/2011 3:10:47 PM
Creation date
6/13/2011 3:10:34 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
92
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
ISHADO:I would agree with Mr. Vitousek on this point. But, you <br />sure what the Mr. Forman is going to be testifying to. But, generally, you know, I believe you <br />have your own counsel to advise you as to what the law is, and we can, you know, the parties can <br />argue as far as how to apply the law in memorandums and so forth. But it has been my <br />experience that attorneys do not come forward as experts and testify as to what the law is, unless <br />thereÓs a very specialized area such, for instance, you have expert doctors testify as to surgery <br />and so forth. But, you know, on this point, I guess I would agree with Mr. Vitousek. <br />GIFFIN:Maile? <br />DAVID:Yes, maybe I can try to clarify that. IÓm listing Mr. Forman not as an <br />expert to testify about how to apply these laws, but as a person that, in his individual of capacity, <br />his experiences about, past experiences on how these laws, you know, his knowledge, his <br />philosophies of how these laws have come about with respect to the native Hawaiian issues. <br />I donÓt, I agree with Mr. Vitousek that an attorney, in that sense should not, you know, be a <br />testifier. But I believe we can, we can probably get a more clear picture on what he would be <br />testifying to, and maybe to satisfy Mr. VitousekÓs concerns. <br />GIFFIN:Randy? <br />VITOUSEK:Yes, if I may. If someoneÓs going to come and testify <br />philosophies are, itÓs not relevant. In other words, thereÓs no relevance to this application what <br />Mr. FormanÓs philosophies are about anything, what his personal philosophies are. So I, this is <br />not an issue I think that the Commission necessarily has to decide at this time, because the <br />witness is not present and hasnÓt been asked a question. <br />GIFFIN:Yes. <br />VITOUSEK:And so all IÓm trying to do is put the Commission and the parties on notice <br />that I am going to raise these objections if and when the questions are asked -. <br />DAVID:Okay. <br />VITOUSEK:So that we can use that in planning. <br />DAVID:I understand and I agree. <br />GIFFIN:Hannah? <br />SPRINGER:Would it be helpful if Mr. Forman submitted written testimony and be <br />sure thatÓs circulated well beforehand, and then all of his testimony is couched or based on what <br />he has presented in writing? <br />GIFFIN:Mr. Torigoe has another suggestion. <br />4 <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.