Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOM 0896.227 2022-2024November 19, 2024 Cindy Freitas makainanqi@gmail.com County of Hawai'i Planning Department Cultural Resources Commission RE: Bill 169, Kona Three LLC TMK: (3) 7-6-021:016 & 017 He Mele komo a he mele aloha no na kupuna o ke au i hala Aloha mai kakou. Aloha, My name is Cindy Freitas and I'm a Native Hawaiian descended of the native inhabitants of Hawai'i prior to 1778 and born and raised in Hawai'i. I am also a practitioner who still practice the cultural traditional customary practices that was instill in me by my grandparents at a young age from mauka (MOUNTAIN TO SEA) to makai in many areas. I Oppose Bill 169, Kona Three LLC. due to the following reasons; Other major developments - over 750 multi -family units, including workforce housing - have already been approved in the immediate area. •Development is in a floodplain, with the applicant intending to place the lowest -income area at the bottom of the runoff, and providing no mitigation for those living makai. (How's that for social justice?)The Council recently conducted a site visit to see for themselves. •Testimony has been given regarding pre- and post -contact archaeological and cultural significance, critical habitat loss, ongoing water shortages, and drought. *These parcels are in HECO's power shut-off wildfire area. *Lack of concurrency required by the KCDP, putting additional strains on infrastructure, including, the "Kona crawl." •Impact on the Kealakehe Wastewater Treatment Plant, which is already violating the Clean Water Act by dumping effluent into nearshore marine waters. *The supportive testimony heard was almost exclusively given by those who already have or who will make money off this application. 1. In view of the Hawaii State Supreme Court' s " PASH" and " Ka Pa' akai 0 Ka'Aina" decisions, the issue relative to native Hawaiian gathering and fishing rights must be addressed. These rights must be addressed in terms of the cultural, historical, and natural resources and the associated traditional and customary practices of the site. comrnqqi , Z� _',c,f. T 0. Ref. Date NOV 2 0 202 2. I am aware that substantial evidence exists that the land encompassed by the subject parcels includes features of the Holualoa Slide, including rock walls that are inadequately described as agricultural walls in the archaeological studies offered in support of the DEA. The Holualoa Slide is an important Hawaiian cultural and archaeological feature from pre -Western contact times that cannot be replaced if damaged or destroyed. 3. Responses provide accurate information concerning the cultural importance of the royal and religious complexes along the coast and within the near -coastal region between Kailua to the north and Keauhou to the south. The remains of many of these complexes were first mapped by Henry Kekahuna. 4. The Constitution of the State of Hawaii clearly states the duty of the State and its agencies is to preserve, protect, and prevent interference with the traditional and customary rights of native Hawaiians. Article XII, Section 7 requires the State to "protect all rights, customarily and traditionally exercised for subsistence, cultural and religious purposes and possessed by ahupua`a tenants who are descendants of native Hawaiians who inhabited the Hawaiian Islands prior to 1778" 5. Act 50, enacted by the Legislature of the State of Hawaii (2000) with House Bill 2895, relating to Environmental Impact Statements, proposes that: ... there is a need to clarify that the preparation of environmental assessments or environmental impact statements should identify and address effects on Hawai`ns culture, and traditional and customary rights... [H.B. NO. 2895]. 6. Nelson et al. 2005. An archaeological inventory survey was conducted by Rechtman Consulting on 28.0 acres located in the near coastal portion of H61ualoa 2nd Ahupua`a. A total of 22 sites containing 150 features were recorded. The sites were primarily preContact era agricultural and habitation sites, though five burial sites, a possible heiau, and a trail were also documented within the project area. 7. Therefore, Kona Three LLC does not want this hearing to occur! After rushing their application to the Council, bypassing the Leeward Planning Commission, receiving negative recommendations from numerous County, State, and civic groups, its not a good project for the betterment of the people in Kailua Kona Hawaii if this is how KONA THREE LLC dose their work. A'OLE. Therefore this amendment should not be supported... Mahalo, /s/ Cindy Freitas