2007-09-21 TD-BAR - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

what, whether or not the end result is sufficient I think is beyond the capability of the three of us sitting here at the table today. What I do recall, in follow-up to your initial question, is that there was a statement in the cultural impact assessment which basically said, well, some of the kupuna that we talked to said, well, to their knowledge there was no cultural activities going on on this property right now. And my recollection of the Ka Pa‘akai case, as well as the Supreme Court decision and the Supreme Court decision pertaining thereto, is that it is insufficient to say that there’s no practice now. What, one of the main purposes of this is to insure that those practices which were constitutionally guaranteed will not be compromised or further exacerbated or prevented from happening as a result of activities on the land. And that was my impression, Mr. Iwashita, that this had not been done. Just to have a statement saying that these practices do not go on is, may be a statement of fact but it is not to in any way preclude the ability for interested persons to practice traditional and customary rights on the property. And those opportunities are, if those opportunities are to be foreclosed as a result of development, then there has to be some kind of mitigation or something to that effect. And my impression is that that was not done. That’s my personal impression. GRAHAM: Thank you, Mr. Tyler. TYLER: You’re welcome. GRAHAM: Commissioner Rho. RHO: Mr. Tyler, we’re having some trouble with the microphones today, and I wanted to make sure that I heard correctly, that you and others were not consulted when this report was written? TYLER: I can’t speak for others. I saw what I read. And, I mean, I know what I read and I saw who was interviewed. And my impression was that some individuals who might have had more knowledge about that particular area, rather than Kona in general, or North Kona, or Kailua or the Kuakini Highway of which there was lots of information contained in the report, would have made for a more comprehensive and complete, more comprehensive and relevant report. That’s what I meant to say, Mr. Rho. RHO: Well, maybe you can just answer for yourself whether or not you were involved -. Were you consulted prior to this report being written? TYLER: Not to the extent that I believe I should have been; and I have told the applicant and his representative that. RHO: Do you have a copy of their report? TYLER: I have a copy of the report, an electronic copy, that Mr. Dickler sent to me; and I do appreciate that he did that. EXHIBIT B 17