Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOM 0710.105 2010-2012 Pa e1of1 PlicumCXL. Murashige, Laura COMM. 7(0 From: jayrbondesen @gmail.com Sent: Friday, July 27, 2012 11:33 AM To: counciltestimony @ co.hawaii.hi.us Cc: cohmayor @co.hawaii.hi.us Subject: Testimony Attachments: County Council testimony 7-27-2012.docx Please pass this testimony on the County Council members for me. It is for two items on the agenda for next weeks council meeting. a., tt Comm. No / ` ` °' /°C Ref.To: / 6,01A•V1CAL Ref. Date AUG 0 1 2012 7/30/2012 7-27-2012 Hawaii County Council, please accept the following testimony on Agenda items scheduled for August 1st 2012 Testimony against a vote to overturn the Mayor's veto of Bill 256 draft 2 Testimony against a vote to overturn the Mayor's veto of Bill 257 draft 2 I am pleased that the Mayor has vetoed bills 256 and 257 which had somehow made it through the County Council. My opinion, that I have previously stated both in written testimony and in person, is that Bill 256 is incomplete at best and bill 257 is unnecessary. Bill 256 draft 2 is not written to protect those of us who actually own property and vote in Puna. It is supported rather by part time residents, outside influences, some trying to take advantage of the system, and a few, rightly or wrongly, who are convinced that the plant has harmed them. It was written using anecdotal comments, hearsay, with no current science to support it, and it contains several ambiguities that will make it difficult or impossible to enforce. Please, do not; End Community Benefits funding Create a poorly defined Buffer Zone Buy and Condemn perfectly good homes in a thriving subdivision. De-value my property. Use County resources unnecessarily. Legislate in a vacuum, without either medical or scientific data supporting these actions. Create redundant and unnecessary evacuation plans for an unlikely, worst-case scenario. Please do not allow this County Council term to wind down with members so divided on this issue. There is simply no current information or expert testimony regarding the geothermal plant in Puna that justifies the heavy handed action in this legislation. And when you agree to that premise it becomes clear that designing and practicing an evacuation specifically for the geothermal plant is simply not called for. As I read the existing laws there are currently methods and funding available for increased monitoring and data accumulation. Why don't we try to find the answers, find the justification for any changes to the law. I understand that Council member's compromise and trade support for each other and that is fine, that's how it works. But now is the time to get this issue off of the front page and turn your attention to the real problems in the community. Jay & Sara Bondesen Leilani Estates