2003-11-07 TSOTO - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

rules, that the application for standing is defective and should not be granted on that basis. KIM:May I respond? SPRINGER:Thank you. Mr. Kim? KIM:It is clear that the government function of the Commission is to assist its citizens. The document requesting standing was timely filed with the requisite $100. This is not a poll tax where a technical violation keeps people from voting. We do not build barriers to keep people from addressing and redressing issues such as contested case hearings from our public citizens. It is clear that such a technical violation such as this will not stand on appeal. The practical ramifications are if the Commission denies based upon this purely technical defect, then there will be an appeal. And you can go forward, but I can tell you right now the case law in Hawaii will show that this kind of technical violation for standing will not keep people from the access to the government. The letter and the spirit of the rule were complied with. We have indicated our basis, the technical compliance clearly. And I want to focus on this Commission members, what prejudice has been levied on the Applicant by this technical violation? Nothing. Because the Association, as admitted by the ApplicantÓs representative, has standing. They are right next door to this proposed development. Hawaii law on standing is liberal. The courts in this jurisdiction will not support the denial of standing to satisfy a technical requirement. And, more important, the counsel for the County has already advised you that you have the discretion to waive these technical defaults or requirements. And, so, in the interest of substantial and fairness, as far as addressing matters on the merits, especially, and I would point out to you, especially when my client is only Intervenor of the public in this case, by denying the application and the petition for contested case hearing, you are, in effect, denying the public access to your forum. And, so, on that basis, I would strongly urge that you grant the Petition for Contested Case hearing. Thank you. SPRINGER:Thank you, Mr. Kim. Mr. Mooers, any follow-up? MOOERS:Yeah, I think there is a damage. My client has already waited four months to proceed with this hearing under the assumption that they could reach an agreement with the AOAO, which weÓve attempted to do on numerous contested case, denying a contested case does not mean that they cannot address issues related to this application. TheyÓve had every opportunity to provide testimony which they have, and they continue to have the opportunity to provide testimony. We did not deny them access to the contested case proceedings. They did th defective filing. As far as the Corporation Counsel advising that the Commission can overlook technical deficiencies, my question would simply be then, please provide us with the list of rules that we have to abide by and those that we donÓt. I mean, if theyÓre arbitrary and we 4