Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOM 0853.041 2012-2014 November 6, 2012 Dear Council Member, ;• i " I live in Papaikou, and ask that you consider these comments regarding Resolution 308-12. Look at the Big Picture for Papaikou! The community thrives when solid thinkers and vested community members thoughtfully and strategically develop and implement plans in collaboration with all levels of input and resources within the community through the CDP. The county has spent well over$100,000 in the development of the Hamakua Coast CDP, which includes extensive work on access opportunities,and will be completed in the near future. This resolution is premature and ill-advised, it sets in motion the county "taking"an access path, without consultation and coordination with all of those who have invested their time and efforts in the CPD process. Better regional solutions are available,which include parking and connectivity to other shoreline access trails. Eminent domain should only,EVER,be considered as a last option! This condemnation resolution is the FIRST official communication from the county about ANY interest in county access across the Waugh/Prickett property! The owners FIRST notification from Councilman Yagong came by e-mail on September 17, 2012, less than 6 weeks ago. Why has Councilman Yagong chosen to hit the fast forward button, bypassing the normal process of negotiations,and other steps and mediations normally taken with the planning department to ensure a fair and equitable resolution, and jumped right into to the eminent domain process? More shocking, the landowners'willingness to work with the county, to build and voluntarily sell an alternate path which will be better for the community and for them is dismissed by those whom I characterize as the angry mob as"too little too late!"This is incomprehensible–it seems to be forgotten the landowners never had any legal obligation to let a single member of the community cross their property. They built the path and have allowed 12 hours daily access for 18 years out of respect for the community and its traditions, and tried to balance it with their needs for security and some privacy. This trail is neither historic nor particularly special–Na Ala Hele has twice looked at Chris Yuen's and Niels Christensen's documents, and twice determined it is not a historic trail.As you heard in testimony, over many generations of private property ownership,the community has taken many routes to get to the beach, sometimes authorized by the then owner, sometimes not. If the county has now decided public access to the beach is a priority, so be it, the landowners are willing to work with the county on a fair and equitable solution. So the question is,why is the council even considering an eminent domain resolution as its FIRST approach with a landowner,when the"values"I've heard stated over and over are 'eminent domain should only be used as a last resort?' Solid community participation and support going forward! With a public access trail as the future outcome,the landowners are starting a transition to community trail management now. Bradda Skibbs,head of the non-profit organization, Basic Image,has agreed to spearhead the organization of community groups in Silverton Camp and Papaikou to work with the owners on trail management and extended hours of access on the current path while a new trail is built. Surfers and fishermen are also stepping up to alleviate other management burdens carried by the owners in the past. I want to emphasize, I don't believe the"community" is represented by the 5,500 signatures on a misleading petition about a beach being closed. Papaikou itself only has approximately 363 families and these are the people Comm. No • Ref.M- EM. te 117— Ref. • that need to be consulted with, to address traffic and safety issues related to opening a public beach access through the community,using the framework of the CDP. Safety Concerns As the current property manager/caretaker,I can assure the council that far too many dangers for theft,harm, and misdeeds occur and will continue to occur against the owners and in the Silverton Camp neighborhood without a well coordinated plan in place and proper funding. The county has not addressed the specifics on how they will protect the owners,the owners'property,the neighborhood, and the neighborhood assets, and the county has not offered any responsible estimate of what the county budget would need to be in order to insure the public safety. Credibility issues in the wording of the resolution for the county/state of Hawaii As I have mentioned in much greater detail in my past testimony, not only does this resolution represent a break from stated"values"about eminent domain as a last resort, but allowing unvetted and untrue statements to be publicly circulated as"facts and determinations"on state and county seal/letterhead/logo is deeply troubling(I'm referring to the"Whereas"statements included in the resolution). Mr. Waugh has enumerated and rebutted many of them, but they continue in the public domain,and continue to confuse people about the truth. I am also troubled that no other adjacent property owners have been approached by the county for public access, even though testimony indicated the traditional fishing spot was off of Fujiyama's landing, and Shropshire's road (Kopilimai)was the path many took to the mill to reach the beach. Singling out Mr. Waugh and Ms. Prickett seems more like retribution than an equitable solution. Finally The beach is a Papaikou asset and treasure and should be managed by the local community of Papaikou. I feel it is being hijacked by some with a global agenda, who are fanning the flames of some neighbor to neighbor issues to legitimize their demands for unfettered,unrestricted access to mountains and shorelines, using eminent domain powers as a primary tool, not last resort. All of these above mentioned points without any due diligence concerning the fiscal costs associated with 308- 12 will certainly be bad policy and a bad precedent for constituents, legislators, and the County and State of Hawaii. In closing, I sincerely hope you will vote against resolution 308-12, a resolution envisioned and written on behalf of those promoting an ideology and not one written by the county on behalf of the community or in support of the community or its future plans as envisioned by the CDP. It is a bad solution for the community of Silverton Camp and Papaikou, and a bad precedent for Hawaii County, and the state of Hawaii. Again, I urge you to vote"AGAINST"this resolution! Kip lest r yes, 7 e' .acco aikou,HI