2000-03-08 Charter Commission Minutes

Home

minutes 03-08-00Page 4 of 35 the rights to do something in 1905, however, our response to him that we hoped to have had, and come before you to address it, because I see now that we’re here now just talking about the proposed Amendments that already this Commission has passed, or approved, in February, or some in December, but most - RAY: Wait. These are proposed Amendments for discussion. We’re taking these out for public hearing. All we’ve done is taken a vote on that basis, so everything, including anything else, is a possibility at this time. KAHAWAIOLA’A: Okay, that’s good for us to hear, the reason being we came forward, and I came forward, to object that our concerns, basically dealing with Article I, Section 1-1, which has great ramifications for the Native Hawaiian communities, they are not being included in this, or they’re being excluded because their lands are being included. We don’t know whether it’s in or out. That message is still being sent today, as you make proposals to the County Charter. We move to the County Building Permit Department, whatever. It’s we don’t have the jurisdiction on Hawaiian Home lands. It’s a conflict and the message is being sent to the Native Hawaiians out there that the County, through their Charter - we don’t know whether we’re supposed to, or not supposed to. And with that conflict being put out, we express to this body, because you guys are in this, have been appointed to do your appointed round, as Ms. Herkes says, she’s just here to do that, and I appreciate the fact that she wants to do that. As a Native Hawaiian, I feel that this body has not taken the opportunity to address our concerns in a fashion that we’d like to have it thrown out there and let the Native Hawaiians also come forward and tell you whether those lands that have been identified in your County Charter - remember I say, Your County Charter because, as far as I’m concerned, your County Charter, by the actions of the bodies that are now implementing it, and your Building Department is in here. Your Planning Department is in here. They sent a message to the Native Hawaiian that, no, we don’t have the jurisdiction. You guys got to go somewhere else to have your plans looked at, to have your building permits issued. So, I implore all of you, if you don’t believe me, tomorrow you guys should go to the Building Department and ask them. Because if that is the case, then obviously, in your Article I, Section 1-1, where it gives you the geographical limitations of the lands that you have jurisdiction over, is in conflict when you say that the Charter says all the lands on this island and its appendages, we have jurisdiction over. Obviously, there should be some holes in the map, that you don’t have jurisdiction over Hawaiian homes here in Ka’u, in Puna, or wherever it exists. There’s a lot of things that are happening out there that needs to be addressed, so that’s my reason for coming by and imploring this Commission, because that’s where we got to start, just like how you were empowered to make Amendments to the Commission. I can’t do it on the eighth year. We got to come on the tenth year when you guys have been empowered to come forward to make these things, or 10 or 20 years, whenever you do that. By the same token, it gives us an opportunity. That’s why we’re here, to come to this body because, yes, we do realize that there’s other alternatives that we can go through, however, the alternatives start at A. We need to learn to start at A, then go to B. When A doesn’t do it, we go to B, we go to C, until we reach ramification, settle, resolution, or whatever it is, whether it’s the court system; whatever it has to take us. But we have an opportunity for economics, that if this body would take a look at it. We beg to differ with Mr. Yuen’s opinion. That’s the reason we wrote our differences, and hoped that this body would have addressed it. And in that fashion, we were prepared because there is a perception out here from Native Hawaiians, this Rice v. Cayetano case, however narrow the Supreme Court ruled, it did rule that there are some separate people out here that needs that have to be taken care of, so I just need for you guys to look at this and address it because I think that the Commission has a responsibility to review the Charter in such a fashion that we can reach resolution, so that make it clear so that even Native Hawaiians, as simple people as we are, can understand when we read it and see you guys run the land and you guys should run the land. Not say you run the land, and when we come inside to get something from the County, say we don’t have the jurisdiction on the land. That’s one of my biggest questions and I need that to address it. HERKES: Can I ask a question? RAY: Sure. HERKES: Thank you. Can I ask you, just for clarification, a question. So, you’re suggesting that we should write the Charter for all of the lands except for the lands that Hawaiian Homes and are ceded lands? Those would be exempt from the Charter. JIM: No. HERKES: And therefore, they wouldn’t get the services and they wouldn’t be covered by the County Charter. JIM: Well, I think the - HERKES: He was the one that was explaining. file://\\coh01\cohweb\council\charter_commission\minutes\minutes 03-08-00.html7/1/2011