Laserfiche WebLink
applicant has a burden of proof or a burden of persuasion in these proceedings. Would you agree <br />with that? <br /> <br />FUKE: I agree. <br /> <br />HEAUKULANI: Good, fair enough. Thank you. <br /> <br />GONZALES: Thank you, Mr. Fuke. Mr. Hong? <br /> <br />HONG: Good afternoon. I’ll be very brief. I think one of our country’s greatest presidents, <br />Harry S. Truman, once said if you can’t convince them, confuse them. And I submit that Mr. <br />Fuke and his client are trying to confuse you. He’s trying to confuse you by telling you that in <br />terms of the burden of proof, as Mr. Heaukulani pointed out, only and solely rests on us when <br />that’s not what happens. What the burden of proof basically says is, you look at the scale, and if <br />it tips a little in your favor, then, you’ve met the burden of proof. There are different burdens of <br />proof in law, clear and convincing evidence beyond a reasonable doubt, criminal court, but all it <br />says is that the scale tips a little bit in your favor, then, you’ve met your burden of proof. What <br />that also means is that if you provide testimony on a particular issue, you’ve met that burden of <br />proof unless they can show a countervailing testimony. Testimony that comes in opposition to <br />that. Then, you’ve kind of gotta weight it. Look at their credentials, who’s more credible, who’s <br />not more credible. In this case, with respect to water, unchallenged. No witnesses to support <br />that we lack water. There are no witnesses to support in terms of the Water Department’s <br />recommendation that it was inappropriate. We’ve met our burden of proof on the water issue. <br /> <br />In terms of traffic, they’re trying to confuse you. They feature certain highly selected excerpts of <br />Mr. Rowell’s testimony. What Mr. Thiel actually testified was with respect to UH and DOE <br />being out of school at the time, was that when he looked at Mr. Rowell’s numbers, and the <br />calculations he went through, that he estimated that Mr. Rowell was—erred to cautiously on the <br />conservative side, meaning he was factoring in a higher load then he needed to, to show. That <br />curiously was left out of the presentation. <br /> <br />In terms of the—Mr. Kanemoto’s testimony, and he testified this at the hearing too, these are <br />DOE standards. This applies to, you know, brick and mortar schools. It doesn’t apply to charter <br />schools. You know, it’s comparing again apples to orangutans. They don’t match. They don’t, <br />one—the DOE, and I know this is hard to understand, that the DOE regulations regarding <br />schools and sizes and the height of a toilet from the ground depending upon the school, do not <br />apply to a charter school, and that was very clear in terms of the testimony. So, saying to you, <br />that those DOE standards apply—please—put that on the record if you’re going to deny our <br />application. I would love that to be on the record. <br /> <br />In terms of the definition of community, I think Mr. Heaukulani is absolutely correct. The <br />General Plan does not limit the definition of community to a couple of streets within rock <br />throwing distance. It’s much broader than that. I live in Kaūmana. I’m part of the Kaūmana <br />community. I live up on Puhili in the old Wilder Subdivision. That’s part of the community. So <br />the question is, under the General Plan, what are you going to look at with respect to community. <br />23 <br />EXHIBIT F <br /> <br /> <br />