2014-05-01HEARINGTRANSCRIPT-CONNECTIONSCBESSSPP12-138

Home

It is not those two streets. It’s too limited. He’s trying to confuse you—that they’re the only experts or appropriate testimony in this area. The major concern that I want to point out before I close today is we’re only asking that you hold us to the same standard that any other person or organization comes through with respect to their particular program—Mr. Fuke’s other clients, anybody else’s other clients that come through to present testimony, hold us to that same standard. Are you requiring any other developer to come in and say we—this is the exact plan down to the stone. This is the exact water usage down to the last quart before you approve this, before you approve an application. Because if you’re not holding us to the same standard, that’s on you. That’s not on us. So, in conclusion, we’re asking that you reject the hearings officer’s decision. There’s a lack of evidence to support her speculative conclusions; she misinterprets the preponderance of evidence; misapplies some of the standards that are applicable. We’re asking you to approve our application. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Members of the Commission. GONZALES: Thank you, Mr. Hong. Okay, for our Commissioners, we have a couple other people that we haven’t had a chance to talk to, if any of you are interested. Would anybody like to talk to Ms. Self regarding her written exceptions to the hearings officer’s findings. Okay, and we actually have Ms. Song here today. None of us were included in the contested case hearing. Would anybody like to speak to Ms. Song? ONO: Mr. Chair, is it proper for me to ask Ms. Song if she has any comments about Mr. Hong’s comments? GONZALES: Good question. Would you like to ask her? ONO: I would appreciate it. HONG: Mr. Chair, may I? I’m going to—just for the record, I’m going to object, you permitted oral argument. There’s no provision in the rule allowed for the hearings officer to either supplement her Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law or amend them. I think this is going beyond the rules so just for the record, my client objects. GONZALES: Noted. Okay, no questions for Ms. Song. Commissioners, if we’re going into executive session, I think now would be the time. Oh wait, I’m sorry, hold that thought. MASUNAGA: I just wanted to make a comment regarding the notice HRS 91-9 that Mr. Hong had mentioned. We—the Planning Department did give notice to the applicant, and it was by letter dated April 7, 2014. He was notified that regarding this tmk, regarding the request to develop a K through 12 charter school campus with dorm facilities and related uses, and this was the applicant, Connections New Century Public Charter School and Community Based Education Support Services. And, the letter, in part, did inform him that it was scheduled for a st public hearing by the Windward Planning Commission beginning 10 a.m. on Thursday, May 1, 2014, at the County of Hawai‘i Aupuni Center Conference Room, 101 Pauahi Street, Hilo, Hawai‘i, and that there would be comment of the application at the hearing, and any written comments prior to the hearing. So, and, it was signed by the Planning Director, Duane Kanuha. 24 EXHIBIT F