2010-06-04 T-COUNCIL - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

the people who live in those village centers. We felt that it would be logical and completely consistent with the mission statement of the CDP and Action Committee to call for steering committees to be formed, if the areas want to, with existing community groups to review the plans for their subdivisions. And I applaud you all for supporting Orchidland. OrchidlandÓs community might have further things to say about, you know, their subdivisionÓs village center. I believe that somebody like myself who lives in Puna or Phoa should have some input in PahoaÓs Plan, but somebody like me should stay completely away from HPPÓs Plan. HPPÓs Plan is HPPÓs Plan. Volcano is Volcano. Mt. View, each of these areas deserves their own say. Now when we first presented this to the Planning Director in her well, this is really doable, this doesnÓt cost any money. YouÓre talking about working with existing community groups. And we thought we had a supportive moment. WeÓre a little puzzled about why now suddenly itÓs a little too costly to deal with. But the mission statement of the Puna Community Development Plan is to not just take the community input that came in in 2006 and 2007, itÓs to have it be an on-going continuing effort that involves as many people expanding over time as possible. And our village center communi committeeÓs proposal is extremely effective in doing that cheaply. Now when the Puna Community Development Plan cost $360,000 for a that was a chunk of change. Now, right now Kona I believe is doing $600,000 for a consultant. WeÓre not asking for this kind of stuff. We have community groups, we have Main Street Pahoa Association, we have the Volcano Community Association, we have village areas and subdivisions and boards of directors that can look at these village centers and study them, and give the County the benefit of more local participation. Now there are people in HPP who did not have the time and the energy in their life to step out and de CDP as a whole broad issue, you know. But when it comes to their neighborhood, believe me, they will be there and they will have good input for this. But we are concerned about Bill 194 as a single bill as a bundle. ItÓs kind of like looking at Congress going through an appropriations bill and at the same time wrapping in somebodyÓs pork from somewhere else to stuff it through and make it all one moment. Now as we dealt with 194 and looked at it, and we looked at Jay Yoshimoto officeÓs method of dealing with these amendments, which are largely not JayÓs amendments, they were Chris YuenÓs amendments talking to Bill Walter. Cause Jay isnÓt all that conversant with them, to tell you the truth; and IÓve sat down and talked with him about it. Now we felt that the best way we could communicate with the Council and with the Planning Department and with the AC from Friends of PunaÓs Future, feels like months of work on these amendment studies, was to take Bill 194 and redraft it; and we did so. And it took us a lot of time. We went through 150 pages. The stuff that we approved of and we left alone which, are stated in black ink. The things that we thought that we would remove, we removed it in red ink. And the things that we added in, we put in blue ink. So you could kind of chart where things were going through there. We submitted this formally to the Planning Department and AC, and we havenÓt seen or heard from it since. It seems to have been a submission that was ignored, or that it was pushed aside; and it is not on your table right now for consideration. Now whether it 12 EXHIBIT B