My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2013-10-03 Windward Transcript - Hu Honua
PublicDocuments
>
Planning Department
>
Leeward/Windward Planning Commission
>
Minutes & Exhibits Transcripts
>
2003-2022 Exhibits Transcripts
>
2013
>
2013-10-03 Windward Transcript - Hu Honua
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/13/2014 9:52:29 AM
Creation date
1/13/2014 9:52:13 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
11
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
<br />STRAUSS: Mr. Chair, may I just add one point -? <br /> <br />GONZALES: Okay. <br /> <br />STRAUSS: Please. Thank you. Well, because my -. <br /> <br />NOMURA: Microphone. <br /> <br />STRAUSS: Sure. Because my brief was cited, if you, if you actually read it and if you go to <br />page 7, it’s pretty, pretty easy to read, pages 7, 8 and 9. Part of what the Judge says he’s going <br />to consider is only what’s in this part of the brief. The brief raises the Public Trust Doctrine <br />which directly affects the ocean waters of the Hamakua coastline, the air quality of air that Big <br />Island residents are breathing, and the energy policy of the State of Hawai‘i. It’s not as narrow as <br />Mr. Grimmer would have you believe. It’s very, very broad. The Public Trust Doctrine is very <br />hey’re of <br />broad, and there are specific examples cited. Trecord in the remainder of page 8 under <br />item numbers 14, 15, 28, 29, 30, 31 and 32. And I’d like, again, I’m not suggesting that you <br />ignore the Court’s Order. I’m suggesting that you have the power and the jurisdiction through <br />another mechanism to directing the Director to revoke this permit or to reconsider this permit <br />based on more background report, more evidence that was not presented to this Planning <br />Commission at the time. All you got were some recommendations and they proved, at least this <br />respect, to be wrong. And that should give you some pause. <br /> <br />GONZALES: At this time I’d like to entertain a motion. <br /> <br />HEAUKULANI: Mr. Chair. <br /> <br />GONZALES: Yes, sir. <br /> <br />HEAUKULANI: I am troubled by some of the issues that Mr. Strauss has raised. I have some <br />concerns that I shared, but at the same time I feel that procedurally we are limited in what we can <br />do here today by Judge Nakamura’s remand order. I feel like many of the issues -. Well, these <br />issues are going to be resolved. They’re just not going to be resolved here. And given what has <br />come back to us from Judge Nakamura, I feel that we are very limited to the two issues that he <br />sent back to us. And for that purpose, and I have been provide with a draft Supplemental <br />Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, and Decision and Order. And my motion would be to <br />adopt the recommended Supplemental Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, and Decision and <br />Order for purposes of resolving the issues before us today. <br /> <br />GONZALES: Would anybody like to second that? <br /> <br />MIYASATO: Second. <br /> <br />GONZALES: Discussion? Mr. Darrow? <br /> <br /> 10 EXHIBIT B <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.