Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOM 0853.026 2010-2012 I adamantly oppose the proposed resolution number 308-12 for numerous reasons. I will only address the most egregious within this communication and request that this be submitted as my testimony of record for the October 10, 2012 public hearing in Papaikou, Hawaii. By way of background, I manage the property which this resolution addresses when the owners are away. I believe that I am uniquely qualified to see both sides of this issue without prejudice or political motivation. I offer my opinions here only as my own and not on behalf of the owners of the property. The irony is that this eminent domain action punishes the people who tried for 18 years to be hospital to their community by leaving the property open to foot traffic at least twelve hours daily except for a one day yearly closing to protect their property rights. Neighboring properties allow NO access. Two genuinely unique and conscientious owners have already done the heavy lifting in constructing an access where there was none. I am troubled that Council Member Yagong consulted only with the agenda-driven citizens who drafted this resolution before scheduling meetings with the land owners. In June, when the owners heard about the resolution through gossip,they wrote Council Member Yagong asking to see the resolution. On June 28, I.Was told that Council Member Yagong phoned them to say that he had not yet decided whetherwor not he would bring it forward. Landowners did not receive the resolution until the evening of Sept 17 in an email from the Council Member announcing his intention. They were on the mainland, and, with only four days notice, were unyble to get back to Hawaii for the Sept 21 community meeting. I trust the county will make available on request all records, e- mails, and correspondence regarding this issue, and between the council members and the community. While it's appropriate to consider the county's responsibility for providing shoreline access, this resolution was prepared as if 1) no alternatives existed, and 2) all neighboring property and alternative routes had also been.considered. Missing from the resolution is any plan or funding for the county to manage the easement, to improve and maintain such a fragile trail, to regulate hours, establish parking, make it ADA accessible, provide and regularly clean restroom and trash facilities, and provide privacy, security, and liability protection to the owners' surrounding land. I sense the motivation behind this resolution includes some retribution against the landowners for enforcing their rules and dealing with the occasional bad behavior. The many false and misleading statements of "facts and findings" contained within the resolution and distributed on letterhead bearing the county and state of Hawaii seal/letterhead, were not written by elected representatives or staff. The writing of this resolution has been "credited" to Chris Yuen and an agenda-driven private citizens group. It's mind numbing to me that the county and state would allow this; it implies approval and implicitly legitimizes everything written in the document, including statements that clearly contradict the Na Ala Hele and the county of Hawaii's own previous written documentation. I am at a loss to even begin to identify the all too numerous "Whereas" statements that, in this manner, are being publicly distributed and searchably archived which are false, but here are a couple. 1) a 2011 "survey" is included with the resolution -- when did the county commission a survey on the Waugh / Prickett private property, and if they didn't, why is it included as part of a county document? 2) the resolution asserts 5,000 residents signed a petition, but has the secretary of state approved the wording and validated the residency of the signers of the petition? If not, why is the county presenting this information as a statement of fact? I trust these oversights will be seriously considered, alternatives explored, and the resolution voted down. Jeff Sacco Papaikou, HI O S3.ZI Comm. No. o Ref. To: Pt FL Ref. Date Ki 1 6 2012 *-4).d2