HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOM 0349.080 2006-2008 Page 1 of 1
~G
Murashige, Laura -
From: Alva A. Strange [alstrange@comcast.net]
Sent: Friday, June 01, 2007 1:02 PM ~ nee ~ p~ ~ ~ 7
c~Jl J~.~
To: counciltestimony@co.hawaii.hi.us
Subject: Attention: Council Chair and Members Re: Resolution 169-07, Punaluu„Kau, Hawaii
Attachments: Resolution 169-07. Testimony to Council. 6.31.07 hoc; Punaluu. Public Record Request. May
17. 2007.doc
June 1, 2007 1:00 pm HST
Dear Council Staff,
Attached is our ohana testimony to be included at the Hearing on June 4, 2007 at the Naalehu School
regarding Resolution 169-07, affecting Punaluu in Kau.
Please let me know, today, who will be the person reading this at the public Hearing.
Thank you.
Kalei Taylor
comm. No. ~ • ~0
Ref. To,
Ref. Date
6/1/2007
From: VIA EMAIL
Kalei Taylor
Alva Strange
Sidney Strange
P.O. Box 68928
Portland, OR 97268
May 31, 2007
Council Chair and Members
County of Hawaii Council Office
25 Aupuni Street, Suite 209
Hilo, HI 96720
counciltestimony@co.hawaii.hi.us
Re: Testimony: Resolution 169-07 Punaluu, Kau, Hawaii
At the public Hearing/Council meeting on June 4, 2007 at Naalehu School,
Naalehu, Kau, Hawaii please address the following questions:
L Is TMK (3) 9-6-001-007 listed in the Resolution?
Is TMK (3) 9-6-001-008 listed in the Resolution?
Is TMK (3) 9-6-001-0091isted in the Resolution?
These are all privately held kuleana lands. In the Resolution TMK (3) 9-6-
001-007 was NOT included. It was excluded. One of the owners of that
land is Winifred Pele Bangay Hanoa, President of Kau Preservation. Why
were all kuleana lands but hers included for purchase? It would appear that
there is a special exemption being granted to her family's land.
Per Hawaii County Code Section 2-83: "No officer or employee shall use or
attempt to use the officer's or employee's official position to secure or grant
unwarranted privileges, exemptions, advantages, contracts, or treatment,
for oneself or others;
2. Why were the owners of the included kuleana TMKs not notified by the
County, Council members and/or Council staff? We request that TMK
(3) 9-6-001-008 be removed from this Resolution!
1
3. Is the Resolution going to affect only TMKs owned by the Sea Mountain
Investment Partners and future owners, Sea Mountain Five Developers?
4. Has anyone approached the present owners and future developers to see if
they want to sell their land for the proposed park?
5. If the property owners do not want to sell will the County's next step be
eminent domain?
6. Has the County looked into Public/Private partnerships with other
companies or organizations? (Jean-Michel Cousteau and others?)
7. Hawaii County Code, Section 2-85 states that contracts are subject to
competitive bidding, fair and open competition.
If the County is successful in obtaining the land will the County have
open bidding for the management contract of the land? Will they post
notice broadly to gain as much competition as possible? Will the Request
for Proposals be written to allow many types of partnering for land
management?
A. What will be the County's criteria for selection?
B. How will the County insure an unbiased committee to select the
management contractor?
C. In the Resolution why was a "hand-picked" group, Kau
Preservation, listed as having submitted a management plan to
manage the proposed park?
i. Why are they the only ones to submit?
ii. What are their qualifications?
iii. What prior land management contracts have they worked
on? Were they successful?
iv. Are they educated in wild life management, marine
biology, parks management?
2
8. Why would the County want to spend millions of tax payers' dollars
on acquisition of land when the developers are willing to donate 56
acres to the County for a park as well as provide a cultural center, a
nature preserve, construct additional facilities and restore the pond?
This could save funding for other projects. This would also create
much needed jobs for this economically depressed area.
2
9. Attached, for your convenience, is the Public Records Request which
was sent to Donna Leonard at the Council Office, on May 17, 2007.
To date we have received documents non-responsive to the request.
We have not received copies of any emails between Councilman
Jacobson and Pele Hanoa and/or Kau Preservation. Jacobson is
quoted as stating that Pele has no email. So, whose email address is
pele@kaupreservation.org?
10. We request that we receive, by US Mail, all the minutes of the
hearing, in writing and on DVD.
11. If this proposed park comes to fruition, may we suggest that it be
named Kalei Waiau Whittington Park after my great grandmother
from whom our kuleana has been passed down to our ohana. It
would be a perfect partner to Richard Whittington Park at Honuapo.
He was my great grandfather who was the road supervisor in Kau. I
understand that it was under his care that the first paved road to
Punaluu was built.
12. Finally, we believe that this is not an either/or issue. We believe that
There must be support for wildlife and the economy for this area to be
successful and thrive. We cannot sacrifice honu merely for
development, nor can we sacrifice peoples' jobs and livelihood in the
name of "preservation". An intelligent, well balanced proposal must
come forth to take into account all of these important issues. We
hope that the County, along with the community, can work towards
a balanced management plan for this beautiful area.
Thank you for your time and consideration of these issues.
Sincerely,
Kalei Taylor
3
Kalei Taylor
P.O. Box 68928
Portland, OR 97268
May 17, 2007
County of Hawaii Council Office VIA E-MAIL
25 Aupuni Street, Suite 209
Hilo, HI 96720
Re: Public Record Request on Proposed Resolution 169-07
Deaz Donna Leonazd,
Thank you for the time on the phone on Tuesday, May 15~'. As we discussed, it does not
appeaz that the County has a public records request form on-line at this time, and you
were not aware of a form in hard copy as well. Per your instruction, I am sending the
following public record request to your office.
My family owns property on the Big Island at Punaluu. (TMK 9-6-001-008). It has been
in our family from the time of my great-great-grandpazents, David and Kahoopai Kahana
(Kaapana) Waiau. My great grandparents are
Kaleiluluuikalehuaakamaileamekahalaleiokeakualoawahineu'iopanaewa Waiau
Whittington and Richazd "Dick" Whittington. The County park at Honuapo is lovingly
named after him.
We did not receive notice from the County or the Council member who is introducing
this Resolution 169-07.
My concerns are as follows:
1) Inadequate notice. Property owners, such as ourselves, were not notified.
2) Apparent conflict of interest. Per Hawaii County Code Section 2-83: "No
officer or employee shall use or attempt to use the officer's or employee's
official position to secure or grant unwarranted privileges, exemptions,
advantages, contracts, or treatment, for oneself or others;..." (emphasis added).
A) The proposed Resolution applies to almost all land owners in the Punaluu
area except one: TMK 9-6-001-007
B) The map showing TMK 9-6-001-007 has Elizabeth K.K. Bangay's name
listed. On the tax records the present owners aze:
Bangay Christopher K
Bangay Dennis
Bangay Joseph K
Bangay Peter P
Bangay Randall
Bell Elizabeth K
Dedman Elsa K
Galban Helen H
Hanoa Winifred P
Whitten Corinne
C) Winifred Pele Hanoa is the President of Ka'u Preservation, Inc.
D) Ka'u Preservation, Inc. is listed on the proposed Resolution as "...working
on a management agreement and plan for the azea..."
Obviously, this raises a conflict of interest question when one person's land is exempt,
and that person is also being hand picked for a contract to potentially manage and run the
land surrounding her and her family's own property. This exempt land would also rise in
value substantially if it is the only parcel left available for development.
3) Lack of Competitive Bidding. It would appear via Hawaii County Code, Section
2-85, that contracts are subject to competitive bidding, fair and open competition. It
does not appear through this proposed Resolution that any consideration is being
given to solicit and evaluate competitive bids/proposals for management of this area at
Punaluu. The qualifications of other potential management arrangements have not
been set forth. Public-private partnerships aze also available. Sea Mountain Five has
offered to donate 56 acres to the County, provide a cultural center, a nature preserve,
construct additional facilities and restore the pond. Sea Mountain Five has a
substantial incentive to maintain this area as their income is dependent upon the
attractiveness and wildlife that surrounds it. Arguably, they aze in a good position to
provide much needed funding and accomplish the same goal with private tourist dollars
and higher property taxes instead of relying solely on local taxpayers. This could save
funding for other projects.
4) Pre-determined fate. The proposed Resolution, by selecting a firm for management
of this area, assumes
A) all land owners wish to sell and/or
B) that they approve of the Council's choice to use Ka'u Preservation, Inc. and
their proposed plan.
The cart is well before the horse here, in that many families would not consider any
negotiations with the Director of Finance under any circumstances. Other land
owners would not consider negotiations without knowing the plan for the area or the
qualifications and capabilities of a proposed management group. By having a
management group foreordained, does this cast eminent domain if and when
negotiations fail?
5) Lack of Community. I understand that in the Council Meeting on May 1, 2007,
Councilman Jacobson requested the Resolution be passed on the first reading and
without comment from the community. It is unacceptable for an elected represen-
tative of the people to actively encourage lack of participation from those who
would be affected.
Therefore, this public record request is submitted pursuant to Hawaii Open Records Law
(HRS 92) for the following Government Records:
1) Copies of all information exchanged by and between Councilman Robert (Bob)
Jacobson and Pele Bangay Hanoa d.b.a. Ka'u Preservation, Inc. (information to be
defined to include, but not limited to, formal letters, maps, drawings, drafts, e-mails,
text messages, and voice mail recordings on County owned equipment such as
desktops, laptops, PDAs, CD ROMS, flash drives, land or cell phones, or any like
personal equipment used to conduct County business).
2) Copies of all information generated or received by Councilman Jacobson related to
Proposed Resolution 169-07.
3) Copies of any proposed management plan by Ka'u Preservation, Inc., whether in
draft form or otherwise.
4) Copies of Councilman Jacobson's County Calendar for the previous 12 months.
5) Per Hawaii County Code Section 2-91.5, a copy of Councilman Jacobson's gift
Reports for June 30, 2006 through June 30, 2000.
6) Copies of information contained on County back-up tapes for email and file servers
on which deleted information related to proposed Resolution 169-07 may be
contained.
7) Copies of any Environmental Impact Statements regarding Green Sea turtles, (honu),
or Hawksbill turtles, (honu'ea) at Punaluu.
The public interest in disclosure is significant. It may affect not only the 23 identified tax
lots and the people/families that own them, but may also affect members of the local
community who have an interest invoicing their vision for the area. We intend that this
information be available to those property owners who wish to receive copies of the
information above, and as such request that the fees for such be waived. HRS Section 2-
107 (b) (2).
I would greatly appreciate it if you would provide me with notice of when and where the
second reading of this proposed Resolution 169-07 will take place. If you have any
questions regarding the above request, please send them to my email address:
kaleitavlornn.aol.com.
I appreciate your attention and professional courtesies in this matter.
Kalei Taylor