My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2004-10-22 TAINALOA
PublicDocuments
>
Planning Department
>
Leeward/Windward Planning Commission
>
Minutes & Exhibits Transcripts
>
2003-2022 Exhibits Transcripts
>
2004
>
2004-10-22 TAINALOA
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/14/2011 11:14:21 AM
Creation date
6/14/2011 11:14:12 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
48
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
Contested Case. But he states, I dont know if its important but he states that Eight Road <br />in Hawaiian Acres meets the, essentially meets the highway, the Volcano Highway; and <br />thats not quite true. It takes a jog, and A Road and then Kuauli or Kuauli Road, and then <br />it meets the highway. And I dont know if, you know, it matters but there is that error of <br />how the road meets the highway there. <br />GALDONES:Okay. So noted. Commissioner Graham? <br />GRAHAM:I wanted to speak to Ms. Songs commentary before, about <br />procedure and whether the Hearing Officer should speak to us now, and all like that. Is it <br />appropriate for me to sort of -? <br />GALDONES:Yes, this would be an appropriate time. Because once the <br />discussion has ended, we will be adopting the procedure and, so, all the parties will be on <br />thesamepage.SoifyouwanttospeakaboutMr.Lovesparticipationinthehearings, <br />you may do so at this time. <br />GRAHAM:So I dont, the basic place Im coming from is I dont understand <br />what her concern is. And as a basis for that, it seems to me that Mr. Love is an impartial <br />hearing officer who conducted the hearing and has seen the submissions from the three <br />parties and has come with his proposal for us; and I havent seen anything, anybody <br />claiming that he was other than impartial in his work to this date. So I would think that <br />our questioning of him, like I would presume to question him about a few of the things <br />that he has written, is based on our understanding of why this impartial person came to <br />these specific Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law. So my sense is that isnt <br />prejudicial to anybody in this proceeding, so thats why Im not understanding the <br />concern. <br />GALDONES:Mr. Love will have the opportunity to be questioned. His report <br />will be questioned by the Commissioners and he will be allowed to respond to your <br />question, if you have any clarity, clarification that needs to be done to his report. <br />GRAHAM:So then the gist of the concern was that he shouldnt be introducing <br />additional testimony here, other than in response to the questions that we come forth with <br />about what he wrote. Is that correct? <br />GALDONES:That is correct. Yes, sir. <br />SONG:Mr. Chairman, for the record, I just want to place an objection on <br />the record to any testimony at this hearing or any statements by Mr. Love. I mean, this is <br />for the record. Because any answer to questions that he might take to advocate his <br />position or advocate against somebodys objection, he becomes like a party and <br />advocating, rather than an impartial hearing officer. In addition, your rules do not <br />provide for Mr. Love to do anything more than submit his written report to you. So Im <br />just placing my objection on the record. <br />7 <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.