2007-09-21 TD-BAR - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

minutes or something. Would you like to take a break now or you want to go forward a little bit? FUKE: No, I think we can just finish up this next one, yeah. You know, we also understand that there was the issue like relating to the cultural impact analysis report. We did have a cultural resources management plan, but that was ultimately for its own reason deemed to be not in compliant with Chapter 343, you know, cultural impact assessment type. So as Mr. Tyler had indicated, the applicant contracted with Dr. Usha Prasad, who is here, who had prepared the cultural resources, excuse me, a cultural impact assessment. She was given instruction to prepare a cultural impact assessment that expressly complied with the requirement of Chapter 343 relating to cultural impact assessment and also to address the kinds of cultural issues that were raised by the Planning Commission in its initial position on this matter. So at this time I’d like to call on Dr. Usha Prasad to provide her direct testimony. GRAHAM: Thank you. Dr. Prasad, do you swear or affirm to tell the truth on this matter before the Planning Commission today? PRASAD: I do. GRAHAM: Thank you. And you can go ahead with your presentation; and start with your name and address, please. PRASAD: My name is Usha Prasad. I’m an anthropologist. I was asked to do the cultural impact assessment for this project. My address is 667 Old Mokapu Road in Kailua on Oahu. I’m just going to briefly say I completed this study in accordance to the guidelines that are provided by the Office of Environmental Quality Control. That’s for doing CIA impact studies in Hawaii. The other thing is that in your previous conclusions there was a request to look at Rule 9-11; and both of these things were addressed by the study. The manner in which it was done, and maybe some of this will really be answered later on, but it’s normal process for me to begin by trying to contact descendants of a land of a project area, and I had attempted to do that. And I have, there were interviews specifically completed for this study. The list of individuals are in Appendix C. Not all of them completed, not all of them provided complete interviews. Mr. Tyler was interviewed for this project and Ruby McDonald was present there, and it was at the Office of Hawaiian Affairs. And I think that in my conclusions I would just like to say to, in order to address what he brought up here, is that there isn’t a neglect for the fact that there aren’t customary rights and practices taking place on the land. There isn’t neglect of that issue. On contrary, what I think I concluded with is that those were things that need to be taken into consideration. The, well, I guess I’m getting a little ahead of myself here. Anyway, is it okay if I just ask if there are questions for me? I think most of my study here does address the issues or the concerns that the law has for doing CIA studies in the State of Hawaii. Thank you. GRAHAM: Thank you for your testimony. Do we have any questions from any of the Commissioners? Commissioner Iwashita? EXHIBIT B 24