MIN CHC 2009-10-09.tif - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

would like to see language in there that sets a time frame for the appointments to be made. If we have a ten -year process, to delay the Action Committee, which is the oversight committee for the public, where the public input comes in. If we delay that indefinitely, we are taking away that ten year period, when we were expecting out plan to be implemented. So, that's why it is so important to us. I know time frames are difficult to put into a Charter which stays pretty general, but I know that in different places, looking through the Charter, you do have some time frames; and that is why it is so important to us. Also, as far as the CDP having teeth, we think it is really important that any large subdivision, any plans for rezoning that would affect what is in the CDP, be reviewed by the Action Committee. We think it is important to put language in there and we provided that in our written testimony. I believe that is my time frame. Thank you. CHR. HAITSUKA: Are you going to speak on any other issues? MS. BIDLEMAN: I could do that as well. In our proposals in Communication 48 we had two other proposals. One of them was to support Margaret Wille's testimony, which was about including live broadcasting on the internet of decision - making government bodies. Also, on- demand, as I just explained to you that is how I got interested in testifying. That is why I got interested in the Charter, was seeing her testimony. It had more impact on me than simply reading the public notices; it was dramatic. Many of us, we do get our news by the internet. I also see that we have a ten year period. Here it is. People have been using the internet for ten years, and we are just now talking in this County about making it a requirement that it be on the internet; that meetings be posted on the internet. For those of us - - -I read my local newspapers online, so I don't get those public notices unless I have access to them on the internet, I don't know about them unless someone gives me a call and tells me about it. So, to wait another ten years is a long time. We are also trying to go through other routes to get this to people's attention, but by putting it in the Charter - -I don't know the language that you would use, because we know that it would take some time to establish this. If a private individual could tape the testimony of Margaret Wille, I believe that our County government could do it in a more comprehensive way. The final one was in support of Debbie Hecht's amendment proposal about the 2% Land Fund. It was a demoralizing experience for people who went out and collected signatures and found out that it passed, and then turn around and lose the funding for two years. And we don't know for how long that will go on. One thing that impressed me personally, is I have lived in Hawaii for five years, and my experience on coming here was that the public so often gets involved in negative campaigns. It is always, we don't want this, and we don't want that. This was the first campaign I saw where it was positive, it is saying we do want to protect open access. We do want to protect lands for our future generations. I thought this was really a new event, and I hope it means that things are going to change; a turn around here, where people are going to start being more positive about what they want for their future. So, it was demoralizing to see us lose it so quickly. From reading Debbie Hecht's testimony and information she has gotten out to us on her blog, I understand that other counties in Hawaii do have some sort of land fund that the public has put it in their Charter. So we do have a precedent here for this Commission to do the same. Thank you. 7