Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOM 0183.036 2020-2022 1 OF 041?. ,h,Q�9 n\ i4„1,ii 1. ` Lee E.Lord j, J� > .Vflr �* Managing Director Mitchell D.Roth - -- Mayor �47-;,...1...:7,1, • Robert H.Command '•e. OF lit t'> Deputy Managing Director Ph' &runt of�. .i� ti'i ®fftxi of fit Aavor 25 Aupuni Street,Suite 2603 • Hilo,Hawaii 96720 • (808)961-8211 • Fax(808)961-6553 KONA: 74-5044 Ane Keohokalole Hwy.,Bldg C • Kailua-Kona,Hawaii 96740 (808)323-4444 • Fax(808)323-4440 April 29, 2021 = c- Council Chair Maile David r73 And Members of the County Council ,c) r-, County of Hawai`i --, -,-;---- Hilo, Hi 96720 'sv, Aloha Council Chair David and Council Members: • On March 29, 2021 I recommended to the County Council that Mark Van Pernis be removed from the Leeward Planning Commission because of his disruptive and discourteous behavior during Commission meetings. At its April 6, 2021 meeting, the Planning Committee voted to postpone action on Communication 183 to their May 4th meeting to provide Mr. Van Pernis an opportunity to improve his behavior. I am told that LPC Chair Mike Vitousek sent a written warning to Mr. Van Pernis setting ground rules for his participation in future meetings and requested a verbal or written apology be issued to Planning Department staff and his fellow Commissioners. Chair Vitousek arranged for Corporation Counsel to provide re-training in procedures of the Commission including duties and responsibilities, parliamentary procedure, Sunshine Law, and County Ethics Code. Based on Council Member comments, Chair Vitousek coordinated with Planning Department to order a headset so that it is easier for Mr. Van Pernis to hear and be heard clearly at future meetings; it should be noted that Mr. Van Pernis has never expressed issues with being heard or understood or asked for any sort of accommodations. Chair Vitousek also changed the meeting format so that Mr. Van Pernis can provide written questions for staff and applicants to be read at the meeting, as well as to allow verbal follow-up questions at the meeting until Mr. Van Pernis is trained in how to use Zoom chat. The written warning and Corporation Counsel training are enclosed. Mr. Van Pernis was re-trained on April 13th so that he could participate in the Commission's April 15th meeting. He did not provide a written or verbal apology as requested by Chair Vitousek. Despite the efforts made, Commissioner Van Pernis continued to disregard the Chair's instruction and was rude to an applicant at the April 15th hearing. He was instructed by Chair Vitousek to provide his written questions (enclosed) in advance of the meeting, yet he provided them to Planning Department staff about 20 minutes before the meeting started. You will notice many of the questions are repetitive, irrelevant to the application, and worded in a way to be interrogating. Questions are enclosed. Comm. No. 1'61- County of Hawaii is an Equal Opportunity Provider and Employer. Ref. TOC PI1 Y — q 2021 Ref. Date 1 `J 1 Lastly, Item#3 on the April 15th hearing was a difficult and sensitive matter because the Commission voted to deny a Special Permit for a wedding venue in Holualoa due, in part, to the condition of the private roadway. The applicants, Kate and Doug Hickey were upset and emotional because they could tell the Commission had major concerns with the proposal. Instead of showing Aloha towards the Hickeys, Commissioner Van Pernis behaved in an unprofessional manner showing No Aloha. I encourage you to view the lack of aloha he displayed at the following video link: bit.ly/3nAAzFv (between 5:30:24 and 5:38:24) The Leeward Planning Commission is made up of volunteers,many of which have full-time jobs, and are asked to read voluminous applications and reportson their weekends and after hours to make the best land use planning decisions for our community. They value having robust and relevant discussions on the effects of their decisions and do not take the task lightly. It is unnecessarily demanding on the Commissioners when they must listen to repetitious, irrelevant, and often interrogating questions from Commissioner Van Pernis and especially demanding on the Chair to monitor and discipline his behavior. I am again requesting for the removal of Mark Van Pernis from the Leeward Planning Commission. Should he be removed, I look forward to nominating and having the County Council confirm a new commissioner that can represent the North Kona community in a manner that treats people with dignity and respect. Should you have any questions, please contact me. Mahalo, 4 .64"*. Mitchell D. Roth MAYOR County of Hawai'i is an Equal Opportunity Provider and Employer. Mitchell D.Roth °'c� '� Michael Vitousek,Chair 1,147; Mayor ;�.,t��` Max Newberg,Vice-Chair ys Nancy Carr Smith Lee E.Lord •6 - Barbara DeFranco illanaging Director �ti'oF'H.4..--- Perry Kealoha Mark Van Pernis County of Hawaii Faith"Faye"Yates LEEWARD PLANNING COMMISSION Aupuni Center • 101 Pauahi Street,Suite 3 • Hilo,Hawai`i 96720 Phone(808)961-8288 • Fax(808)961-8742 April 12, 2021 Mark Van Pernis P. O. Box 2156 Kailua-Kona, HI 96745 Aloha Commissioner Van Pernis, I am writing this letter in my capacity as Chair of the County of Hawai`i Leeward Planning Commission. The purpose of this correspondence is to document, and to provide a written warning with respect to behavior that you displayed at the March 18, 2021 Commission meeting and as well as other behavior that you have displayed at times throughout your tenure on the Leeward Planning Commission. Specifically, you have displayed behavior, which is unnecessarily argumentative, adversarial, and disrespectful to members of the public who have appeared before the commission,Commission and Planning Department staff, and your fellow commissioners. This includes but is not limited to speaking in a discourteous, accusatory and condescending manner, questioning applicants or others about matters not relevant to the pending application not listed on the Commission agenda, conducting your own personal investigation into matters before the Commission, refusing the chairs requests to limit your questioning to relevant matters and/or to conduct your questioning or speaking in a civil and respectful manner, and refusing to disclose information about your personal interest in applications that you are reviewing. These behaviors, with reference to specific examples are further described in the subsequent attachment. By this letter, I make clear that these behaviors will not be tolerated. Your behavior reflects poorly on all of us as a Commission and detracts from the public perception that this body can represent our community in a fair, orderly, and respectful manner. On April 6th, 2021, the Hawaii County Council Planning Committee met to discuss Communication 183,Mayor Roth's recommendation that you be removed from the Leeward Planning Commission. At this meeting, the majority of Council members, including those opposed to your removal from the commission, recognized that your behavior on the Hawaii County is an Equal Opportunity Provider and Employer Mark Van Pernis April 12, 2021 Page 2 Commission isp roblematic. One of the concerns raised by the County Council was whether you had been received adequate training for your role as a Planning Commissioner. You denied having received training. As Chair of the Leeward Planning Commission, I request that you refrain from attending any future Leeward Planning Commission Meetings until you have completed training or re-training on Planning Commission Rules of Practice and Procedure, Roberts Rules of Order, Code of Ethics, and State of Hawai`i Office of Information Practices "Sunshine Law". This training will be conducted by the County of Hawaii Corporation Counsel at a mutually agreed upon time and place. If there is anything I can do to help facilitate your getting this training as soon as possible and before our next Commission meeting,please let me know. Also, at the April 6, 2021 Planning Committee meeting members of the Hawai`i County Council recommended that you provide a written apology to your fellow Commission members and planning department staff for the discourteous behavior that you have displayed in the past. As Commission Chair I ask that you provide the requested written apology and that you confirm the commitment you made at the April 6, 2021 Hawaii County Council Planning Committee Meeting to moderate your behavior and to operate within the parameters of the Planning Commission rules prior to rejoining the Leeward Planning Commission. Once you rejoin the Leeward Planning Commission following the completion of your re- training, and the receipt by the Commission of your written apology, I sincerely hope that you will work with the me as the Chair and with Planning Department staff to implement any needed procedures and protocols that would improve your ability to effectively and respectfully convey your opinions and perspective. Again, we will gladly assist in anyway we can help. After the completion of your re-training, in the event there are recurrences of behaviors disruptive to the order of the Leeward Planning Commission meetings or which fail to extend appropriate courtesy and respect to any applicant, County of Hawai`i staff person, member of the public or your fellow commissioners,please understand that I will not hesitate to exercise authority as chair pursuant to County of Hawai`i Rules of Practice and Procedure Rule 1-5(j)to address these behaviors and, if necessary, to remove you from the meeting. I will provide you with one verbal warning, if you do not heed this warning, I will call a recess and give you a second verbal warning. If there is any further disruptive, disrespectful, or discourteous behavior following the recess, you will be removed from the meeting. It is important that we mutually understand the procedures that will be put in place to maintain decorum. I will apply the same standards and protocols to all members of the Commission. If you are to continue to serve on the Leeward Planning Commission under my Chairpersonship, we will not allow your behavior to diminish the importance of our collective responsibility to represent the people of Hawai`i County with respect, with fairness, and with aloha. It is my Mark Van Pernis April 12, 2021 Page 3 sincere hope that you will take this under consideration and reflect on the personal responsibility that you have to the community that you represent. I believe that if you can conduct yourself in a manner befitting the Leeward Planning Commission, and avoid conflict of interest,you will be able to effectively contribute your knowledge to the goals of the Commission in maintaining the qualities that make our home island unique. Mahalo, Michael Digitally signed by Michael Vitousek Vitousek Date:2021.04.13 08:14:36-10'00' Michael Vitousek, Chair • County of Hawai`i Leeward Planning Commission Enclosure ATTACHMENT: 1. March 18,2021: You requested to discuss an item that was not on the posted agenda for that meeting. As the Chair,I informed you that we could not discuss that item at that time due to Sunshine Law requirements,but that we could work with Planning Department staff to include it on a future agenda. You repeatedly attempted to discuss the issue despite my consistent and polite requests to cease. In order to maintain order and decorum I had to request that your microphone be muted multiple times. 2. March 18,2021: You mischaracterized statements from other Commissioners by stating that"we shouldn't do nothing"as Commissioner's Carr-Smith and Kealoha are proposing. The minutes reflect this is not an accurate representation of what the Commissioners stated. You are entitled to state your opinion,but it is discourteous to falsely characterize the opinions of your fellow Commissioners. 3. March 18,2021: When Deputy Corporation Counsel interceded on your line of questioning to inform you that you were not in compliance with Sunshine Law you said,"don't interrupt."The Corporation Counsel was visually disturbed by your response and replied, "excuse me". The Chair informed you that it is the duty of Corporation Counsel to maintain compliance with Sunshine Law and to intercede when Commissioners run astray of the requirements. 4. October 15,2020: The Applicant Palamanui Global Holdings LLC requested that you recuse yourself from the proceedings and you declined. You failed to disclose that you reside in the Makalei Estates Subdivision,which abuts with the Palamanui Project area on the east boundary. You requested multiple changes to the language of the application, such as removing a requirement to construct a University Drive to Makalei Drive and replacing Makalei Drive with the eastern boundary of the property(Condition S),which ensured that University Drive could not be constructed to connect to your neighborhood. As well as requesting amendments to language on access to Makalei Estates for work on the water system(Condition Y). You then abstained from voting on the matter. Your failure to disclose the fact that you live in a subdivision affected by the ordinance that you were reviewing, as well as your use of your position on the Leeward Planning Commission to remove language from the ordinance directly relating to the subdivision in which you reside gives a strong appearance of conflict of interest and is a possible ethics violation. This potential conflict of interest was revealed at the April 6, 2021 Planning Committee meeting of the Hawai`i County Council during questioning by Chair Kierkiewicz. This matter will be forwarded to the Board of Ethics for review. 5. Prior to the August 20, 2020 meeting you provided a Memorandum to the Leeward Planning Commissioners dated July 31,2020. In this Memorandum you state that the reason you questioned the applicant about his personal bankruptcy at the February 2020 meeting was because you had previously served as an attorney for an individual that had been awarded a foreclosure judgment from the applicant and that the applicant had quote: "escaped paying the judgement". This raises a question as whether or not you utilized your position as a Commissioner to gain information on a legal matter in which you had been involved in, and whether you should have recused yourself to avoid the appearance of conflict of interest. 6. Also included in the Memorandum dated July 312020 you state in writing that you personally contacted individuals associated with the ongoing Pua'a/Suffolk application, and questioned them on details of ownership and conditions of the ordinance outside of a duly agenized commission meeting. You then and presented the findings of your independent investigation in writing to the commission. Sunshine law requires the Leeward Planning Commission receive information as group,you may not conduct your own investigations into applications outside of scope of duly agendized meetings. 7. August 20, 2020: Applicant's representative Mr. Sidney Fuke relayed the Applicant's believe that you have a personal bias against the applicant and requested that your comments be limited to topics that are germane to the application. Later in the meeting you conducted what appeared to be a personal attack on Sidney Fuke who was acting as a Planning Consultant for an applicant stating that representing Pua'a/Suffolk was a"blight on his record"and"he should be embarrassed." 8. August 20,2020: Your questioning of traffic engineer Randall Okaneku was deemed to be unduly repetitious by Chair Carr Smith. You became combative with the Chair when she tried to hear from other Commissioners. 9. September 21,2020: Cross examination style questioning of members of the public testifying in support of the Hickey special permit application. For example,"are you aware that this application violates state land use regulations?" The applicant stated they believe that you were asking leading questions that prevented a fair and impartial discussion. 10. February 2020: Personal attack on Applicant Brian Cook asking if he had ever personally declared bankruptcy. Applicant asked, "why so personal?" 11. February 2020: Repeated interruptions and hostile questioning of applicant led Corporation Counsel to state that" If you are not going to act in a civil manner,we are going to ask you to leave."You responded by telling Corporation Counsel"I think you are out of order." Bartolome, Pomaika'i From: Yoshimoto, J Sent: Tuesday, April 13, 2021 4:43 PM To: Mike Vitousek Cc: mvpvv@hawaii.rr.com; Sauer, Noriko;Jackson, Maija; Carvalho, Emarie Subject: Planning Commission Training completed on April 13, 2021 Attachments: Planning Commission Training 04 13 21.pdf PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL COMMUNICATION - DO NOT SHARE THIS INFORMATION -ATTORNEY CLIENT-PRIVILEGE Aloha Mike, This email confirms that I provided training using the attached power point to Commissioner Mark Van Pernis today, April 13, 2021 via telephone. The training session was approximately one hour and 35 minutes. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me. Mahalo, J Yoshimoto Deputy Corporation Counsel Office of the Corporation Counsel County of Hawaii 101 Aupuni Street, Suite 325 Hilo, HI 96720 Email: iyoshimoto@hawaiicounty.gov Phone: 808-961-8251 County of Hawai'i is an Equal Opportunity Employer NOTICE: The information contained in this email may be confidential and privileged. This information is intended only for use by the individual to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any use, dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please immediately notify the sender by return email, and delete this email, any attachments and all copies. 1 . * -* From: test mvpvv@hawau rr corn Subject: Applicant Koizumi,for B&B on RS 20 adjacent to Kona Coastview Sub.,on Mamalahoa Highway Date: April 11,2021 at 6:53 AM To: test mvpvv@hawaii rr com ACI Vi Planning. j (f DID PLANNING LOOK INTO HOW MANY LICENSED B &Bs ARE LOCATED NEARBY, (SAY,A 10 MILE RADIUS IF THERE'S NO OTHER FRAME OF REFERENCE).? IF KNOWN, HOW MANY? DID PLANNING LOOK INTO HOW MANY COUNTY STVR PERMITS HAVE BEEN ISSUED NEARBY, (SAY A 10 MILE RADIUS IF THERE'S NO OTHER FRAME OF REFERENCE)? IF KNOWN,HOW MANY? DID PLANNING LOOK INTO HOW MANY STVR APPLICATIONS FOR PROPERTIES IN THE AREA WERE TURNED DOWN? IF KNOWN,HOW MANY? ._DID-P • • • : •• •, •- : . k _ _ , r= S - • 'I r• - I W. IN •- r • . • :c - 1 HAV ? From: test mvpvv@hawati rr corn Subject: Koizumi B&B application. uestions for Applicant Date: April 14,2021 at 8:07 AM To: test mvpvv@hawaii rr corn 1. Have you ever applied for or received a STVR (Short Term Vacation Rental)for this property? If so what was the result? 2 Was there a B&B operation on this property before the Application? If so,for what periods of time did it operate? And if so,was there any penalty assessed? If so,what was the penalty? 3.Do you know how many B& Bs and STVRs,both licensed or permitted and unlicensed or unpermitted,are within a few miles of this property?(Don't give names or locations,just the number). If you know,what's the number? 4.Won't people coming to your proposed B&B from the airport use two lane Kai'iminani Drive and then two lane Mamalahoa Highway? 5.Don't Kona Coastview,Kona Highlands, University Heights,Makalei Estates,Koloko Mauka subdivisions, other subdivisions,and many,many properties,as well as traffic to and from Waikaloa and the Waimea area, use the two lane Mamalahoa Highway near this property? 6. Hasn't the traffic on Mamalahoa greatly increased in the last few years,such that sometimes it backs up and sometimes its very slow or stops? ?,Has there been any traffic study or other work that you're aware of that measures what the traffic is in both lanes of Mamalahoa and measures or predicts what effect the traffip opMamalahoa the proposed B&B would have? „1a q- \ \4. •. t,,:- ,�+1v Wit °If✓ PI"" 8.How do you propose to keep access traffic to the B&B on Leimomi Street,which the Application says needs work,? 9. Is the Applicant willing to agree to a ondition.that all ace to and from thg Prope and the B&B s clusiyely be on and from Leimomi Street? ®, -I(2 t I q lvr'�- to NI I04 ,cL p f ifl-Ha - ,r '. -. ,..I '.. • :-••:' - - . . . • _ ' - re yT19c-pre a e - • ' -• ,ith your ne'. •.-;._.<- •- - , ••' -• •- • out the B&S? • From: test mvpvvk hawat rr.cAm Subject: Planning,questions i v..�CA- IQZ'V Date: April 14,2021 at 7:37 To: test mvpvv@hawafi.rr coin Just th ee short ones:a - C p l itAl 1.Did anyone from Planninggo and inspect theproperty and the proposed access off of Hualalai Road before a P P Y p P recommendation was made? 2.Did planning know that Kakalina Street starts off of Nani Kailua in Kailua View Estates north of this and the'Innovations properties? 3.Did PLanning consider The traffic at rush hours on Queen Kaahumani Highway and particularlythe intersection of Queen K and Hualalai Road mauka before making a recommendation as to this appiiication? ,Prom; v rr corn Subject. Penal a plication. Date: April 14,2021 at 11:41 AM To: test mvpw@hay.aii rr.com • Questions to Applicant. 1. Your application r fe to 'future Kalalina Street". Isn't Kakalina Street in Kailua View Estates wth access from the Queen Kaahumanu �y;' utting up to property to the north off Innovations property next to your propery? Is Kakaaina going to be extehded from Kailua View estates to Innovations and to this property to Hualalai Road? If not.why not? ti 2.Would the Applicants agree to a condition that Kakalina Street be extended from Hualalai to Kailua View Estates so that this school and Innovations of would have two ways of access? Would the Applicant agree to a condition that the school not open until Kakalina Street is improved and dedicated to the Count}7 3.(These may be questions for the traffic study consultant). There's more than 350 properties along Hualatai Road and in subdivisions that have access to and from it. There's also traffic on Hualalai Road from around Holualoa and points south_ And also a rush hour traffic from Queen Kaahumanu Highway that uses Hualalai Road to try to get around the traffic jam near Lako Street on the the Queen K, past its intersection with Hualalai down to HenryStreet. "Mares also traffic on Kakalina in Kailua View Estates. During rush hours morning and afternoon the biggest traffic jam is in Kona in this area on the Queen K,wth stopped traffic that emergency vehicles can't even get through, including the Queen K and Hualalai intersection. Were all these intersections,streets,highways and traffic jams studied and considered in the traffic study? 3.Was any of the traffic study done during the Covid 19 lockdown when most people were staying at home home and sheltering in place? 4.Would you be willing to c •ition that a turn lane on Hualatai be put in if Kakali®®i�a does; Estates' ctf� go through to Kailua an _ 5.Only 400 gallons of public water are presently available,just enough to service the residence the Application says will go on the remainder of the prope. y Your engineer Mr.Morrison states that an'average of 2270 gallons of water will be needed. It is stated or implied that the applicant is to and and arrange for the additional needed water. Are you willing to agree to a condition that the school operation not be opened until that needed water is sourced and deliverable to the property? 6. .The application says that you.r will involve up to 87 people,which to me means 87 cars, during the morning and afternoon rush hours turning from substandard. Hualalai Road,turning onto what your application refers to as"future Kaka'iaina Road", And then 50 pluscars for other events that are described in the Application_ Would you be willing to agree to a condition limiting such other events to school related and educational events? 7. .The Planning Department,in its proposed condition 7 requires construction of the propose development within FIVE years of the issuance of a special use permit. And in proposed condition 15 refers to the possibility of.An unspecified extension of time with conditions at the sole discretion of the Planning Director,whomever that will be in the future,if you apply for it. INSTEAD of those two proposed conditions,would you agree to one condition for completion of construction of the school operation within TEN YEARS from the issuance of the permit,with the permit expiring if there's no construction finished in those ten years. In other words,a ten year"sunset"provision_ This would bring more certainty to the project instead of an application and the future discretion of the Director whomever that might then be. • From; test mvpvv0hawaii rr corn `~ Subject: Penaroza,more questions,continued Date: April 14,2021 at 7:15 PM To: test mvpvv^ha.vali.rrcom 18.Who owns and maintains the paved portion of Kakalina Street from Innovations past this property to Hualalai road now?. 9. Isn't Hualalai bumper to bumper traffic in rush hours during non-Covid times? 10.,Doesn't Innovatons have two access points,on Mamalahoa between Hualalai Road and Nani Kailua to which Kaklalina is attached,and another one off of kKskalina from Hualalai? While only one aceesss for your school Is propose off of Kakaalina where it goes into Hualaai?I So if Kakalina goes ail the way through Innovations would and three access points and this property would have two both ways off go Kakaina? G. s�{clur{ 11.Hualalai Rodd doesn't have ans. is where Kakalina intersects, right? Would yo be willing to build showers on Hualalai Road 50 feet both ways at its intersection with Kakalina/ 12. There's curves on Hualalai Road both above and below its intersection with Kakalina,correct? 13.The Kakalina- Hualalai intersection is not very visible from Hualalai Road both above and below that intersection, correct? Would you be willing to install turn lanes oh Hualalai Road at its intersection with Kakalina? 14.Would you be opposed to a site visit by this Leeward Planning Commission Planning Commission during a rush hour, say 4-30 or so is the afternooinvolving Queen K,Hualalai Road, both ends of Kakalina Street,and this this property? • From: test mvpvv@hawaii.rr.com # 3 Subject: Hickey SPP 21-000222 Date: April 14,2021 al 8:46 AM To: test mvpvv@hawaii.rr.com EST1ONS FOR APPLICANT_.- 1.THERE WAS A PREVIOUS DEFERRAL CONCERNISNG THIS MATTER, AND I THINK IT WAS SO THERE COULD BE CONFERRING WITH OTHER USERS AND OWNERS OF THE ROAD YOU WANTED TO USE FOR GUESTS, CUSTOMERS AND VENDORS OF YOUR COMMERCIAL OPERATION ON YOUR AGRICULTURAL PROPERTY. DID SUCH CONFERRING TAKE PLACE? AND WHAT WAS THE RESULT? 2.WILL YOU AGREE TO IMPROVE AND MAINTAIN THAT PORTION CPF THE ROAD THAT GOES TO YOUR PROPERTY TO TW/i0 LANES T YOUR SOLE EXPENSE, AND TO INDEMNIFY THE OTHER ROAD OWNERS AND THE COUNTY OF HAWAII A41,TO ANY ACCIDENTS OR CLAIMS BY YOUR VISITORS,GUESTS AND VENDORS CONCERNING THE ROAD? 3.HAS THERE BEEN ANY PENALTY OR FINE FOR ANY TIME OF OPERATION OF THE COMMERCIAL OPERATION ON THIS AGRICULTURAL PROPERTY BEFORE THE APPLICATION FOR A PERMIT? IF SO,WHAT WAS IT?