2016-05-05 Hearing Transcript - PD Initiated Puna Pono Alliance et al Presentation by Claims Adjuster

Home

Thank you. HEAUKULANL Thank you. Mr. Albertini? Good morning. ALBERTINL Good morning. Good morning, Commissioners. Aloha. I didn't submit written testimony today because I submitted written testimony to this Commission twice before—in January 2015 and in the more recent hearing. I want to affirm what Pali and Ron said, and our organization Malu `Rina. We've been working in solidarity with Pele Defense Fund for 30 years on this issue. We helped to organize some of the big protest in Wao Kele o Puna Rainforest. But, to me, the real issue here is the tail's wagging the dog. The claims adjuster here is kind of dictating what's going on, and there's something wrong with that picture. And I don't know what it is, whether it's just bureaucratic bumbling that we're dragging our `okoles down the road here or if there's something more serious. You know, this is the kind of study that should be done on everything. There should have been a study like this done on Mauna Kea. There should be a study done when we're taking control of the beaches and privatizing mauka-makai trails and all these things, how it impacts people. But it's not done! And maybe those in real power don't want this study done because if the impacts are put on paper and made clear, then what? What's it gonna have the effects on all these future kind of developments. So, I think we need to move it forward. I'm tired of coming to the Commission here. It's a bureaucratic problem, I think, unless it's more principle like I'm talking about power. So find a way to move it forward. That's not our job. That's your job, and it's the Planning Department's job, and the Finance Department procurement. All those kind of things that our taxes are paying for. Let's move it forward, and work with Pele Defense Fund. Work with any other of the groups if we can be of support. Thank you. HEAUKULANL Thank you, Mr. Albertini. You know, I'm comfortable enough with you to engage in a conversation here, so I'm not sure that I agree—well, two things I don't agree with. First, I don't agree that, that tail is wagging this dog. ALBERTINL Good! HEAUKULANL You know, as—as a procedural history of this case has made clear, there was an initial recommendation to deny the claim, and this Commission overruled that. So, we're not really talking about dogs or tails. What we're talking about is funding this study or a study that fits into the bureaucratic bumblings, and that's not really our job, but, you know, I sincerely want today to be a roadmap so that interested parties can put together one that can, can find its way through that. 15 EXHIBIT D