HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOM 0393.081 2012-2014 Page 1 of 1
Murashige, Laura COUNTY CLERK
rnIIk� ; R�tfifi
From: J Yoshimoto [joshimoto @co.hawaii.hi.us]
Sent: Monday, October 14, 2013 11:08 AM 2013 OCT ' 14 PH 3: 46
To: counciltestimony @co.hawaii.hi.us
Subject: FW: Bill 113
From: Eric Weinert [mailto:ericdrakeweinert @gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, October 14, 2013 10:18 AM
To: joshimoto@co.hawaii.hi.us
Subject: Bill 113
Aloha Jay,
The way this Council is going about the law making process seems wrong. Firstly, there was no discussion with those farmers
who will be affected by Bill 113 prior to its introduction. And,there is no immediate threat from the big seed companies. Yet
some Council members seem hell bent on passing something, anything, immediately. Countless questions remain
unanswered as to the impact on the County, its farmers, researchers and taxpayers or even who or how this Bill will be
enforced. The Council has yet to ask what the cost will be to implement and enforce Bill 113 or what the costs will be to the
County to defend this legislation if challenged in the courts.
I urge the Council to set Bill 113 aside. I suggest that real farmers, of all methods of farming get together with the help of the
University of Hawaii Hilo discuss how to work together to feed our island and sustain agriculture for future generations. Any
form of an ad hoc committee that continues to play politics with this hot potato will be divisive and prevent this community from
solving our real issues.
Whether you support or oppose GMO, Bill 113 has serious financial impacts.
Council member Kern recently complained that this legislation has already cost the County$20,000. This could be peanuts
compared to the price tag to County taxpayers if this Bill passes. Last week the Mayor of Kauai testified to their Council that
the cost to implement Bill 2491 would be$1.25 million. Has this Council sent a request to the Director of Finance for a budget
analysis on the costs of this Bill?
Although Council member Wille has focused on the right of the Council to make this legislation,there has been no discussion
on the potential costs and liabilities of defending this legislation in the courts. Issues like the taking of property without
compensation, requiring registration of one class of farmers and not of others,the State taking away rights of citizens
guaranteed at the federal level. It would seem only prudent to ask the Corporation Council for an analysis of the legal issues
and the potential costs of litigation prior to passing Bill 113.
Bill 113 puts the cart before the horse, as communications from Ms Wile herself clearly demonstrate. Communication No. 394
dated August 15, 2013 from Council member Margaret Wille asks whether"co-existence"of GMO crops and plants is possible,
and if so, under what conditions. She asks further whether there are particular risks related to pesticides and herbicides.
Communication No. 394.9 dated as recently as September 19, 2013 from Ms Wille to council members proposes fully fifteen
(15) questions for investigation by the proposed ad hoc committee, a committee yet to be formed.
Communication No. 394.1 dated August 29, 2013 from Council Chair J Yoshimoto to council members proposes additional
fact-finding by the proposed ad hoc committee. He asked the Council to investigate"reasonable and pro-active ways to
encourage, allow, and/or promote'co-existence' of traditional/conventional, scientific, bio-technological methods of cultivation
and propagation"with organic methods.
With all these questions still unanswered, does't it make sense to get good information first, then draft appropriate legislation?
Eric Weinert
Comm. No. 353' 8'1
Ref.To: P/(e 61'41/
Ref. Dote DC 115 2013
10/14/2013