2024-09-06 PL-INT-2024-008544 GP 2045 Draft Comments & Email Response - C. Flaherty

Home

Using such terminology is not required as stated in a court case. Per notes above, the plan does address the counties public trust. 19. Why is there no mention of the term "Precautionary principle" in the 7/24 draft GP, given the state Supreme Court has this principle must be followed all decision-making processes ensure protection of the public trust? Again, notations in a court ruling does not require that we use the exact language. "Traditional and customary practices", Collaborative Biocultural Stewardship, p. 47, p. 234, Action 4.g., "Continue the dialogue between State and County agencies to identify guidance to protect Native Hawaiian customary and traditional practices." 20. Given county agencies have a policy of delegating all responsibility for the protection of Native Hawaiian cultural resources, as well as traditional and customary practices, to the state and there is no "dialogue between State and County agencies, why does the Planning Director believe this to be a valid action"? "Traditional and customary practices", Land Use, p. 80, p. 237, Action 10.c, "Collaborate with the State Office of Planning and Sustainable Development (OPSD) to create criteria to help identify and protect Native Hawaiian customary and traditional practices." see question 20. Above The county and state agencies do have dialogue, and this should be continued and even improved. In striving to improve stewardship, it is critical that the county collaborate with other state agencies like DLNR and OPSD to ensure consistency in how HRS is interpreted and implemented. "Historic trails", Transportation, p. 111, Policy 17.5, "Ensure that existing active living corridors that are publicly owned or available by easement are properly identified and that their access elements are secured and documented. a) Primary examples include but are not limited to historic trails and roads, roads-in-limbo, 'paper roads', former sugar cane roads, train infrastructure remnants (Rails to Trails), and pedestrian and bicycling paths." 21. Given the list of references includes "93., The Daily Bulletin (1892). The Highways Act, 1892.", why is there no policy acknowledging that all trails, paths, and roads in existence when the Highways Act of 1892 was passed are public right-of-ways owned by the state? Because the Highways Act already does that, it is unnecessary for the GP to say it again. 22. Why is there no action stating that the county must protect these public right-of-ways throughout all decision-making processes? Action17.a would address including ROW from the Highways Act. "Develop and adopt a program to establish public access to historic and modern active living corridors and facilities that provide an island- wide route and connect to major destinations." Further, the Highways Act gave ROW to the state which differs from county ROW. In this action, we seek to create a network of trails that can include these historic trails. 5