2003-07-28 TBLASMAN - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

procedure was agreed upon, and the witnesses were cross-examined fully, it appears from the transcript. And, also, the argument that the testimony is thus accepted and Officers must feel that way, I don't believe is the case in that the evidence, including cross- examination, will be considered and the testimony weighed accord GIFFIN:Thank you. Before I call on you, I'm going to give Maile ahead and respond. DAVID:Thank you. At the pre-hearing conference, I understood for myself what it meant, expediting the testi -, by submitting written testimony. I also agreed to that because knew what it entailed. I can -, I really understand where Mikahala is coming from in the sense that the full meaning of that in a proceeding such as this was not -, you know, she was not aware of. And it is a disadvantage. So how we resolve that? I think people that come to hearings such as this are expected to do a lot, whereas if you had the luxury of an attorney to advise you in these proceedings, your job would be a little bit easier. But as far as my understanding of what it meant to submit written testimony, I understand it, and I also understand Mikahala's position. So in that sense, I am not going to object to her position and leave it at that. GIFFIN:Mikahala, I am going to call on you and give you a last chance to rebut, and then after that, if the Hearings Officers do not have any other questions, I am going to call on Mr. Torigoe. Mikahala. M.ROY:Thank you, Madam Chair. And exactly, in rebuttal to Attorney Vitousek's point on agreement in pre-hearing, the public has a right to testify, and although they do not have the right to cross-examine, they may informally request and discuss issues with the Applicant, the County and the Intervenors. If the public cannot hear the testimony because it has been secreted away from the public forum, how then should they know w testify to? Indeed, the County, in this case, has decided that the public testimony does not have the same weight as the Applicant's case because it may not be relevant and is not subject to cross-examination. This is a further question I have for the powers today, whether my understanding is correct when I understand, being that I've had no guidelines in this process other than a publicly transferred document on, in general, contested case hearings and how they go. And I do not know the weight given the Applicant's testimony versus the public's versus ours. I'd like to clarify that point. But I'd also like to respond to the County's representative today. I am not saying that I have not, I am not questioning my interrogation or my cross-examination of however, Ms. O'Toole, new information has come to light in my mi and to understand the rights of the public. There were some 70 people at the original public hearing that we all met here. Now the process is many people come. If they cannot cross- 9