Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOM 0853.001 2010-2012 Piro 3CX3-I 2 ('r)M M g:53 S E A F A R M T R O P I C A L F R U I T & H A R D W O O D' 2012:09:27 Jamae Kawauchi,County Clerk Office of County Clerk 25 Aupuni Street, Suite 1502 Hilo,HI 96720 Dear Ms Kawauchi: We understand that Communication #853-12 from Dominic Yagong,Council Chairperson,sent out on September 176,2012, requesting referral to the Finance Committee,was sent three days past the Calendar deadline of September 146. As Chair of the Council he is obliged to follow the same Calendar as members of Council. The transmittal did not ask permission to breach established procedures, which is, itself, apparently highly irregular. This breach of protocol denies the landowner threatened by the eminent domain resolution a fair opportunity to inform the Council of important details of its case. At the time notice was received from Yagong, it was already three days too late to request to make a presentation to the appropriate Committee Chair. We request that the County Clerk,who is obligated to protect the transparency of the procedures of Council and to ensure fair and equal access as well as to protect the public interest of those served by the Council,make an allowance for sufficient time for the landowner in this important, highly publicized and divisive action, to make his case before Council. This resolution proposes to seize the principal developed assets of a foreign corporation. As far as we know, this has not been attempted on this island since the assets of H. Hackfield & Company, one of the Big Five sugar factors, were seized at the P A P A ` I - K O U ■ L A N D I N G • I N C P.O.BOX 4697 STN."C",CALGARY,AB,T2T 5P1,CANADA TeI.(403)244-6621 Comm. No. 53.1 Ref. To: Ref. Date, nrT 0 2 2012 -2- • beginning of the First World War (1914). Condemnation, the process under which the seizure is being attempted this time,was created to allow raw land to be taken to widen or create roads and bridges and other public utilities. Whisometimes thi�eness be requires that buildings or other improvements and demolished in order for the public project to be accomplished —the procedure is virtually never used to seize'developed assets only to turn around and continue to use them,as is. If this resolution is successful, we could expect to see other private developed assets,such as the"Red Bull"waterfall on the Alderson lands at Qnomea,the trail,tide-pools and waterfall on the Like Estate at Kaieie,or even the lobby and hall of the Palace Theater,seized and turned over to free public use,with the owner continuing to have to bear all the costs of operation. This kind of confiscation or nationalization of private built assets is perhaps expected in communist or socialist countries,but not in America. This is obviously a very important issue. Council should consider its actions very carefully indeed. It is a precedent-setting resolution. This resolution apparently sat on Councilman Yagong's desk since at least June, 2012. He has now let at least three months pass by with no discussion or consideration, and yet his;letter of September 17 th, rushes the Resolution onto the Finance Committee agenda for October 2nd. The Council's own Calendar required,notice before September 14t. Three days earlier. Council has recourse to deal with this failure to follow Council protocol by voting at its next meeting to postpone action on this item and allow for a presentation by the landowner on the next meeting agenda, or not to allow the item to be considered at the October 2nd meeting at all. The landowner has no such recourse, and finds itself in the I - K O U • L A N D I N G • I N C P.O.BOX 4697 STN."C",CALGARY,AB,T2T 5P1,CANADA Tel.(403)244-6621 • -3 - peculiar situation of being notified about the resolution and the agenda item dealing with its land three days after the opportunity to ask to make a presentation to the Finance Committee and/or to Council has expired! What this means, of course, is that the landowner will be limited in what can be said by way of a defense to three minutes. This is an impossible situation, since it would take all that time allotment just to read through the resolution,let alone respond to the merit of its points. The only recourse the landowner has available is to ask the County Clerk to do her duty and insure that the landowner is fairly heard. Very probably,the proceeding should be delayed to allow adequate time for the landowner(and for Council for that matter) to give the Resolution and its implications the consideration they deserve before being forced to vote on it. But at a minimum,the landowner must be afforded the opportunity to respond to the Resolution and state his case. This could fairly be done within an hour,not within three minutes. Sincerely, Waugh President&CEO Papal-kou Landing Inc. • /pc KAWAUCHI.D95.wpd 'P A P A ` I - K O U • L A N D I N G ■ I N C P.O.BOX 4697 STN."C",CALGARY,AB,T2T 5P1,CANADA Tel.(403)244-6621