2008-09-04 TCAMPBELL - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

WOODWARD: Yeah, we don’t want to make this a debate. If you have information to present to the Commission, that’s fine; but we don’t have to have a fist fight here. IWASHITA: Point of order, Mr. Chair? WOODWARD: Yes, sir, Mr. Iwashita. IWASHITA: My understanding is the parties under the contested case hearing procedures have the right to cross-examine a witness; and in this case I take it the Director is testifying. So any questions at this point in my mind should be directed at the Director. WOODWARD: I think if there are questions that’s fine. But what we heard just now were not questions. IWASHITA: I understand but basically what we have is a discourse going between the parties. WOODWARD: Right. IWASHITA: Or two of the parties and -. WOODWARD: Exactly. And, again, we are not here to answer questions. We are here to hear testimony. And in any contested case the Planning Director is a participant. So if you have questions, they need to be directed to the Planning Director. IWASHITA: Mr. Chair? WOODWARD: Yes, sir. IWASHITA: I do have questions for the Director. Thank you. Well, first, a procedural matter. I guess just as a matter of record could we have the Paradise Park Master Plan part of the record? Is that a document -? WOODWARD: Right. I was about ready to get to that. We have two things that you th asked to be admitted in testimony. One is the August 26 letter from the Hawaiian Paradise Park Owners Association, the other is the email from Mr. Kaiser. IWASHITA: Yes. WOODWARD: Does anybody, including the intervenor, or the applicant, or any of the Commissioners, have any problem with admitting that? CAMPBELL: I object to the email because it’s excerpts from a meeting. So the entirety of the meeting should be introduced as an evidence instead of excerpts from the meeting. WOODWARD: Anybody have a response to that? Mr. Kaiser? EXHIBIT B 21