Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2008-06-20 TKONACDP PLANNING COMMISSION COUNTY OF HAWAII HEARING TRANSCRIPT JUNE 20, 2008 A regularly advertised hearing on the KONA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLANwas called to order at 6:10 p.m. at the King Kamehameha's Kona Beach Hotel, 75-5660 Palani Road, nd Kailua-Kona, Hawaii, with 2 Vice Chairman Alvin Rho presiding. PRESENT: Lani Bowman ABSENT & EXCUSED: C. Kimo Alameda Takashi Domingo Andrew Iwashita Shelly Ogata Rene’ Siracusa Alvin Rho Rodney Watanabe Rell Woodward Ivan Torigoe, Deputy Corporation Counsel Christopher Yuen, Planning Director Norman Hayashi, Planning Program Manager Phyllis Fujimoto, Staff Planner Jeff Darrow, Staff Planner Maija Cottle, Staff Planner And approximately 70 people from the public in attendance. KONA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN Review of the draft Kona Community Development Plan (CDP) submitted by the Kona CDP Steering Committee and its Consultant, Wilson Okamoto Corporation. HAYASHI: I’ll turn the mike over to Nancy Pisicchio who is the consultant for the Planning Department and is responsible for the Kona CDP preparation. And with her are: the consultant team – Earl Matsukawa from Wilson Okamoto, and Ken Melrose who is the Chair of the Kona CDP Steering Committee. So they will be making the presentation to you. I’m sorry – they also have Mike Matsukawa there. PISICCHIO: Thank you very much. Good evening. My name is Nancy Pisicchio from the Kona Planning Department. I’ve been working as a consultant for the Planning Department since I guess 2005, helping to put together the Kona CDP. And we finally have a finished draft, I’m happy to say. It’s been a longtime coming and a lot of participation from a lot of people in the community. So we are going to give you a brief overview of the Plan, of the outline. Back in September of 2005, we began with public outreach meetings. And these were an invitation to the public to have facilitators come to their homes or their churches or schools or garages or parks, and asked people what the vision for Kona was, and we got about 3,500 ideas from that that people had expressed. And from those initial community meetings they were EXHIBIT B 1 sorted and categorized by topic; so we got the sense of what the priorities of the community were. And the point that I’ve made over and over, because it was so conspicuous, is how unified people seem to be, you know, with their priorities, depending on whatever the topic was – under traffic or transportation or land use or environmental resources or cultural resources. The priorities amongst the community were very, very similar, and it was empowering to move forward to try to do a plan when you can see there is so much unity in the community. And after that stage we invited people that had special interests and issues, if they had special interest in recreation or transportation, to form Working Groups and try to give their more specialized knowledge or interest on a particular topic.And those meetings went for a number of months and resulted in a proposed policies and actions from the Working Groups that they submitted as well. We also had a number of large charrettes; and the primary purpose of the charrettes was to invite large numbers of the public – I think we had a couple hundred of people or 300 people at one of the charrettes – to find out where people would prefer to see growth and where people would not prefer to see growth. And we had big mapping exercises like – you can maybe – these are some photographs from the mapping exercises where people were asked, you know, if you are looking at the whole Kona District and there is going to be growth, where would you rather see it; and so people were able to designate on the mapping exercises what would be preferable for areas of development and where they would prefer not to see it then. And again, that is quite unified in terms of the conclusions that groups came to over several meetings. There was also exercise in protected places – where are the areas of the Island that people felt need to be protected; and one of the charrettes, that was also an exercise where people were asked to give input. From there after all the information that we harvested from small group meetings, public input, Working Groups, large charrettes, the Steering Committee was established. And here you can see the members of the Steering Committee and also the staff and consultants that were primarily involved in working on the Plan and all the information that we harvested from the community: Wilson Okamoto – Earl Matsukawa and Tracy Fukuda who couldn’t be with us tonight; the Planning Department – I was the most active person representing the Planning Department; and also Roy Takemoto from the Mayor’s Office who is very essential part of helping to put this Plan together. And initially Research and Development was very active in facilitating the small group meetings; Research and Development under Jane Testa’s department has been really, really active in training people to facilitate to go out to a community and to run small group meetings, so that we can get public input in a positive fashion, and they need a lot of credit for providing that support, and training facilitators, asking people in a community, “Do you want to help facilitate meetings?” So they played a major role as well. This is the Vision that the Working Group developed, and the Steering Committee kind of finished, honing down into a few words to try to give a feeling of the input we were getting in a Vision statement, part coming up with the Vision statement, but that was the Vision statement that was arrived at with the Steering Committee to try to capture as much as possible the feeling of how we wanted to prioritize the Plan. And also we arrived at eight guiding principles that were intended to be the framework for all the policies and goals and objectives and actions that are contained in the Plan. If the EXHIBIT B 2 Commissioners look in the front cover of your Plan, these guiding principles are listed in the front cover, so that we won’t forget because the whole Plan should be able to measure up to these guiding principles; so we wanted them to be there to remind us as we implement the Plan over time – are we following these guiding principles or keeping that standard. And I think with that, Ken Melrose who is the Chairman of the Steering Committee, he is going to provide you with an overview of the policies and actions that were honed down after several years of work. Thank you. MELROSE: Aloha and mahalo for extending your already long day of public service. Thank you for staying with us to be introduced to the Kona Community Development Plan. The Plan is organized in two volumes. The one which you have is Volume I, which contains all the policies and actions, and would be the basis for the adoption as ordinance. Volume II includes the documents that were prepared for the Plan – the housing study, the open space study, the variety of Working Group reports, etc. – all the ideas, the reports out of the charrettes are there. The Plan itself, Volume I, is organized by Chapters: the first being what is Kona, the second defining the vision statement, and the guiding principles that Nancy just discovered, and the fourth Chapter being the one that organizes the goals and objectives of the Plan, and then closes with an implementation Chapter, which Earl will cover as well as Mike, that we felt very strongly that this Plan needed to have a strong action component to it, so it didn’t become just a resource document. Within the Plan there are official maps, there are appendices that are design guidelines for both the new urban areas and the clustered subdivisions in the rural. The Vision statement has guided us all along, as have the guiding principles. So then within the actions and policies, we took the elements of the General Plan, and organized them into eight individual sections as you see here; and they’re all in Chapter 4. From the public comment and the working process that Nancy described, the top three concerns or issues raised related to traffic, local governance and planning. So the Steering Committee and the staff took that input, and started to begin to work on solution statements to the numerous obvious problem statements we have throughout Kona, and created a framework within the Plan that has structured incentives to guidelines, use, transportation and policy decisions toward the desired vision and in the same time respecting existing entitlements. Transportation goal focused around multi-modal transportation, focused also on bus transit routes. The picture chosen here is Kailua Village – the obvious jewel in Kona along our oceanfront where the history is so permanently displayed for a visitor and resident alike. The land use goal was to create a foundation and a framework for concentrating growth within urban areas in North Kona, which would allow us to preserve rural character and significant cultural resources in the process providing housing opportunities and a process for constructively and fairly achieving the best practices in guidelines. This is a shift in land use planning towards smart growth principles and smart growth codes including focus on a sense of community, interaction with nature and focus on the building standards. The 2050 Sustainable Plan the Legislature dealt with this year included sustainability definition in Hawaii as meaning respect EXHIBIT B 3 for our culture and our beauty, strikes a balance, economic, social and environment, and meets the needs of the present community without compromising future generation’s needs. The policy highlights of transportation and land use are very strongly interwoven here. The focus is on new growth going in the urban areas – urban areas defined as the urban expansion area of the existing General Plan. There were no recommendations to expand the urban area with this Community Development Plan – and to focus that growth within mixed-use, walkable urban villages, and to establish the Transit Oriented Development and the Traditional Neighborhood Development. These are new terms in Hawaii; they did not actually exist or are accommodated within our existing Zoning Code. So very strongly we wish to define them within the Community Development Plan. Attachment B is the Village Design Guidelines and Attachment C is the Rural Clustered Subdivision Guidelines that are focused around the national smart growth policies that are functioning well in other districts. And the primary focus was to increase our multi-modal transportation, pedestrian-, bike-friendly roadway standards included in those codes, and to focus on the issue of connectivity.Kona doesn’t have as many ways around congestion as other communities might. And so that was a big focus. This particular road, Puapuanui, was just this week opened to the public as another connector road; and that’s one of the reasons it is shown here. In the rural areas the decision really is, in the Plan, to focus growth within the existing rural towns and villages – this would be Holualoa and the string of communities that have always existed from Honalo, south to Captain Cook – and to increase rural public transit using a transit hub in Captain Cook, link to a transit hub in Kailua and onto the major employment north. And in the process of focusing around existing towns and villages to protect the important agricultural lands of mauka Kona, future growth in the rural areas would be focused around clusters. The Plan adopts an official transportation map. This is defined as an official layer or a series of layers within the County GIS system, and the metadata definition of those policy layers is Attachment A of the Community Development Plan. It focuses on a bus transit system linking Captain Cook with Kailua and stringing along the major roadways. There are three major roadway components here that are intergrowth to the success of the Plan, and include the Mamalahoa Bypass from South Kona Napoopoo junction to Kamehameha III Road, the Parkway linking Kamehameha III and Kuakini, the extension of Kuakini from the Old Airport to the harbor, and the creation of the new Mid-Level Road that links the top of Henry Street with the new recently-approved Palamanui project for the University of Hawaii to the north of the urban district. The Plan also includes layers for bicycle and pedestrian paths and standards for their improvements within the right-of-ways. It includes an official land use map. Then this map includes in it general location of proposed Transit Oriented Development communities beginning in the south of Kahaluu moving northward through the mid sections along the future Parkway, the Kailua area and the Makaeo Old Airport Park, and then strung along the new Mid-Level Road, Keahoolu, Honokohau, EXHIBIT B 4 Kalawa, the lower Kona Palisades and then University Village. One of the focuses is that there will be more employment within these urban areas. The pink ones are more commercial in orientation. The blue are focused around more residential, although residential is a component in all. Part of the process of making this happen is we shift this paradigm land uses to create a proactive design review process. This is an expansion of the plan approval process within the Planning Department to create a Kona Design Center. Staff would be carrying forward working with projects to conform with the Community Development Plan and to assist them in a realization when they become consistent with the Plan. In this way the Plan provides for incentives for participation in that Design Center review process, which helps us to realize our desired outcome. Integral in the most of what we’ve talked about just now within the built environment, the open space environment, intergrowth link between culture and the environment, policies here recognize the fundamental relationship of both of these cultural resources and the natural environment. The goal of the cultural resources relates to the multi-ethnic cultures of Kona being preserved. And environmental focus around the natural resources that enhance Kona’s character, and development would be in harmony with that relationship and a networked system of open space. Policy here for cultural and environmental resources includes the development of watershed management plan, which builds on the efforts of the Five (sic) Mountain Alliance creating incentives for watershed preservation; develops a shoreline monitoring program that enhances that of the Department of Health; anchialine pond management plan that enhances the relationship of the Corps of Engineers and the University of Hawaii; plan to help manage storm water in the floodways – we have no perennial stream, so all of our floodways are dry riverbeds; and then to map those flood corridors that would be usable for multi-purposes like recreation. The Plan establishes a Kona Cultural Resources Committee; this is a local group of kupuna that would be involved in helping to further identify the valuable historic sites in Kona. One of the challenges we had, quite honestly – much of the Steering Committee and the public wish that the documentation of known existing environmental and cultural resources would be more clearly and precisely articulated in the Plan – we did find that there is a wide variety of technical consistency for that location; so that there needs to be some follow-on study to create that consistency before they can be accurately located. So there would be a mapping of those resources. Creation of a Kona Treasures Fund – which is really a non-profit organization that could provide a vehicle for tax deductible contributions in this area. Establishing a “Hubs and Links” Open Space Plan as a follow-on study that would create the important -, using this mapping and these committees to deal with an open space plan. The first two actions the Steering Committee took involved one which created a protected shoreline from the Old Airport Park to Kukio, and created a priority to a 1,000-foot shoreline setback in the Districts of North and South Kona for properties that exceeded 1,000 feet in depth, and provided some incentives EXHIBIT B 5 and some mechanisms, so that the landowners are not penalized with the setback but are provided with the opportunity to cooperate with this vision as well. Housing is a critical concern in Kona, and the goal is to diversify the choices. Our policy highlights are really supply and demand driven; we believe that more units are necessary to increase affordability, that affordability is a core component in the approval of a Transit Oriented Development community master plan, and that the affordable inventory would be maintained – create capacity for buying and renting. Recent efforts for affordable housing projects in Kona have come up against really an ownership qualification difficulty, and there needs to be an educational process to do that. And also to address special needs, we would establish a Kona Housing Non-Profit and Trust Fund; this non-profit, one of its major roles would be related to the educational component, but also using as the focus for in-lieu fees, transfer fees, etc. for it to activate additional housing projects. Public Facilities – very strong, important component of the Plan; and there would be a desire to have them sustainably built and maintained. They create a sense of community, and certainly recreational ones add to our quality of life. The issue here really for Kona is that these be developed in concurrent with new development. Public facilities, plans, policy highlights include law enforcement level of service, including the creation of the new South Kona Police Station at the recently acquired site in Captain Cook; fire protection level of service supporting the Makalei Fire Station in North Kona which has long been awaited, expansion of Captain Cook and establishment of a new one farther south that would serve the communities of Kealea and Hookena; the highway safety level of service and concurrencing connectivity standards of the transportation section are important; water and sewer priorities would be focused toward the Transit Oriented Development communities, so that they would have some incentives to evolve; wastewater treatment would be encouraged or would be required within a mile of the shoreline, and an effluent reuse zone has been established along the Mid-Level corridor; increased public facilities are included as well. And these are all in the official public facilities maps that have their individual layers; there are several more in the Plan as well. Energy is a focal point. Obviously, it got a lot more important as the Plan evolved, given our current energy situation. But Kona has an opportunity for sustainability in energy and using the focus around the Natural Energy Lab, building energy efficiency into the building codes of the TODs, and having the County lead by example in its projects like the Civic Center. Economic development goals focus on diversity to increase employment opportunities, with strategic public facilities including the Civic Center, University of West Hawaii and the pursuit of North Kona Hospital; strengthen and encourage our agricultural endeavors looking for agricultural water rates and allocation out of the County system; and redevelopment focused around Kailua Town and the rural towns. And so that this wouldn’t just sit on the shelf, the next is an action plan. I’m going to turn this over to Earl who is the consultant who has ably done a wonderful job in supporting us in developing this. Thank you. EXHIBIT B 6 E. MATSUKAWA: Thank you, Ken. Again, all this planning is for naught if the plan isn’t implemented; so I just want to cover some of the features of the Plan to insure its implementation. The CDP calls for programs such as the Design Center, the open space network, and the road, village redevelopment planning, also calls for capital improvement projects including infrastructure, public facility improvements – all of these are going to cost money. The financing plan, which is called for in the CDP will identify alternative funding sources for the programs and projects. Also, we should note here that with a help of contingency funds from Council Members Ford and Pilago, a contract has been prepared to engage a financing consultant to prepare a funding analysis of the CDP. And I think this will go a long way in terms of developing a financing plan; and it’s already being moving along. The Implementation Committee is a community-based organization; it is the official advocate of the Kona CDP. Its job is to make sure that the CDP is implemented in a timely and appropriate manner. It is composed of members from Kona, and will partner with the County and interface and involve the community. The implementation matrix – all of the actions that Ken went through, each of the sections that Ken went through, we have the objectives of policies, we have specific actions that are listed – this matrix just gathers all of these up, and identifies the agencies or entities responsible for implementing actions, and also puts the timeline on it. And it’ll also serve as a checklist for the Implementation Committee to see that these things are done. The performance indicators – it takes an annual pulse of where the community is at; it’s not like the implementation matrix that says what you have done, but it assesses some measurable changes that have occurred in the community to make sure if we are headed into the right direction or standing still or moving backwards. Okay, there are some things that the Plan just by its adoption will implement. It’ll adopt the official transportation network map, which identifies the transit routes and such that Ken mentioned. It also adopts the official land use map. It adopts the official concurrency map, which identifies which types of road improvements need to be put in with various developments in any of the 23 zones within the urban district. It also adopts the official public facilities map; and any public facility that’s going to be funded needs to be on this map in order to receive funding. There’re a number of amendments to the County Codes including the Zoning Code, and this will be necessary for the TODs and the TNDs that Ken mentioned. There are some automatic revisions of the Subdivision Code to put in the connectivity requirements as part of the Subdivision Code. And there will be changes in the park dedication code as well as the affordable housing Chapter 11. Again, these amendments are overlays on the existing County Code, and apply only to the North and South Kona Districts through the CDP. It also protects the current land owner entitlements. There is like an it-starts-here; so if you already have it, you’re not going to lose your entitlements. Next steps after Council adoption – it should set up the Kona CDP Implementation Committee, the Design Center, and develop the financing plan, as I just mentioned. It also mobilize community actions in partnership – these are things that Ken mentioned like the Cultural Resources Committee, the Kona Housing Non-Profit, the Kona Treasures Fund, and the Kona Housing Trust Fund. EXHIBIT B 7 Okay, I’m going to turn it over now to Michael, and he’s going to be discussing the relationship of the CDP to the General Plan. M. MATSUKAWA: Thank you, Mr. Chair and Members of the Commission. I don’t have a slide of my own on the Power Point, but I think my handout went to you. My purpose here is to try to bring you back to where it came from and why we are here this evening. The 2005 County Council had established a General Plan with certain goals and objectives for North and South Kona, and specifically charged the community with the task of translating those goals and objectives into more specific development plans for the community. And so the ideas that have been presented this evening, and are set forth in your booklet, are not new ideas; they are not new concepts that we as the Steering Committee just dreamed up on our own or the community had developed outside of the Council’s directives. So one of the Council’s directives includes some assumptions about the community, one of which was that there are sugar lands, not necessarily in Kona, but this was for the Island as a whole that sugar lands should be put into production to support certain kind of import replacement and value added products – this Plan does not propose to change that assumption, and it follows it; that the visitor industry and related industries will grow – that’s an assumption that this Plan also works on. Some of the goals and specific objectives in the County Council’s 2005 directive are quire specific – for example, follow the community noise standards. This is a brand new State concept regulatory system that is somewhat new to many people on this Island that there is a statewide community noise standard; for example, the Airport Advisory Committee just held their Kona Airport expansion and monitoring plans, and noise is a major factor. So this is how -, and we haven’t changed that assumption, either. And what this Plan does, it takes the more general statements and goals, and provides or translates, as the Council directed, into specific actions. I won’t go through a detail of my outline, but I’ll highlight some things. For example, in the economic element, the County Council had set as a goal that we recognize Kona’s natural beauty as a major economic asset; and this Plan purports to implement that strategy. It states to improve Kailua Village; and this Pan purports to do that. It states to encourage eco-tourism and to protect important agricultural lands; and this Plan purports to do that. In the area of energy, it talks about, like Ken mentioned, some options; and this Plan creates a strategy. One interesting note is that the Department of Water Supply is one of the largest consumers of electricity on this Island; and so there are recommendations for ways to reduce the consumption but still provide the service as a means to encourage the conservation of energy. In the area of environment and natural beauty, one of the important Council directives was to encourage watershed management projects and to review the grading ordinances for the County; and this Plan suggests a plan of action for that. In the area of historic or cultural resources, there was a listing of many sites and areas that the County Council wanted protection and preservation; and this Plan purports to do that and more, as outlined by Ken. On the area of natural resources and the shoreline, the County Council wanted to encourage the protection of watersheds, public access to the shoreline, trails; and this Plan does that with a healthy respect for the property rights of private landowners. And I might add in the area of natural resources, the Plan brings a different – I shouldn’t say different – introduces to the general public the notion that landowners, especially mauka landowners who own large tracts of land including the State of Hawaii, provide a service to the community. The Council recognizes EXHIBIT B 8 that open space is a valuable asset and that watershed protection is a high priority; and so this Plan recognizes that landowners who own lands with these resources are providing an ecological service to the community and that ought to be recognized in some way for incentives, participation in the watershed management and working to preserve our environment. I could go on and on. But in the land use element, the County Council made it very clear that its directives and objectives would be subject to existing zoning; and this Plan does that – it recognizes the rights of property owners and strikes a balance for integrating the community’s desires against the landowners’ rights. All in all when people look at the Plan, I think they can see a sense of excitement because this started in 2005, and even before that when the Council was wrestling with the 2005 General Plan ordinances, striking out some general goals and directions, asking the community for their participation. We are here tonight at the end of this long journey. So I urge you to favorably recommend this Plan. Thank you. RHO: Do we have questions? Commissioner Woodward. WOODWARD: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to congratulate you. It’s an excellent piece of work. But I have really three points, and two of them have to do with participation. Having looked through this voluminous document, I found that at your initial group of meetings, you had 800 people out of a population of 37,000 that attended those meetings; that’s 2.2 percent. The second round of meetings there were 350, which is less than 1 percent. So in the initial round you had 3 percent or less of the population actually participating in this process. My first question is what did you do beforehand to try to encourage participation in this process before it began. MELROSE: Before it began at the large group meeting basis -. First of all, those in relation to the total population look like small numbers, but in relation to the size of turnout at any public meeting that has ever occurred in a planning document in the County of Hawaii, it’s outstanding. I’ve had the opportunity to participate in a couple of General Plan update processes since I’ve lived on the Island; and the public participation in the early part of this Plan, I mean, scared me to death, quite honestly. But it was -, it is the underpinning here; actually, the cross- representation is really solid. What we did do during those large group meetings and during the small group meetings and the Working Group meetings, there was a constant benchmarking of those who participated against the demographics of the District; and whenever we found discrepancies or groups that were not represented, Nancy and the members of the facilitating crew out of the Research and Development Department actually went out to try to identify and get those – yes, youth are underrepresented in the discussion here. WOODWARD: Part of the reason I bring this up is I live in Kau and we are getting ready to do our Community Development Plan in the very near future, and I thought, 3 percent, well, we’ve got to be able to do better than that because I’m sure that you’re going to get retirees, you’re going to get the political activists, you’re going to get people with various interest groups to attend the meetings, you’re not going to get the mothers with little kids. And my thought was -, and I looked through Section 15.1 of the General Plan about sending out a questionnaire, and there is nothing that prohibits using that form of input in the Community Development Plan; so EXHIBIT B 9 that’s one of the things we are looking at. The problem I have -, and democracy is not perfect; you can’t force people to participate, if they don’t want to. No way. But all our talk of inclusion and diversity kind of rings hollow when you think that 97 percent of the people didn’t participate. Now, I think it’s a great document; but that is the problem I have. And I think that – and I’ve talked with the Planning Department – I think in the future we maybe need to do it a little bit differently. And one of the things we might want to do in the beginning – I think you’ve done a great job, I know you’ve all done a hell of lot of work – is to start out by sending out a questionnaire and use that information in addition to the traditional public meeting format. So that was part of my point. The other question and the only really – and I have looked over this voluminous document – the only thing that really got me is Policy LU-1.5: Enhanced Shoreline Setback; and that is “maintain a minimum 1,000-foot open space no-build setback for undeveloped lands adjacent to the shoreline, on parcels which currently exceed 1,000 feet in depth ….” Well, okay – and I’ve talked to Director Yuen about this – there aren’t many of those around, if there are any. But you know, this is going to become ordinance for the next ten years at least. What if somebody ends up with a lot that’s 1,010 feet deep? E. MATSUKAWA: Again, this policy is a priority that we the County will endeavor to try and establish this. Yes, there might be a property that has less, that’s why we’ve put it at 1,000. So but if it is just a little more than that, you know, it still negotiable; it’s not an absolute that the line is drawn at 1,000 and it has to be there. It’s a priority to try and get as much as possible. And the 1,000-foot, again, this goes back to the public; this was something that came up numerous times in revisions from the public. This did come from the community. WOODWARD: It seems to me that it would be more responsible, if we are going to enact this as ordinance, to say “properties that have over 1,500 feet depth have a 1,000-foot setback” as opposed to -, see, if you have the same numbers, a 1,000-foot setback for 1,000-foot depth, you’ve got nothing to work with, if you’ve got a 1,000-foot lot. So why don’t you set the depth of the lot at a higher number than the setback? You know, pick a number, but it would seem to me reasonable to say, okay, if you’ve got a 1,500-foot deep lot, then you have a 1,000-foot setback – not a 1,000-foot lot, you’ve got a 1,000-foot setback. E. MATSUKAWA: We incubated this a lot. And you know, this again is a draft Plan; if there is some sense of that, we can consider it definitely. RHO: Director Yuen. YUEN: Yeah, I’d like to just make one comment on that. It was – the members of the Steering Committee all chuckled at that – it was heavily debated as to how to handle this. And I don’t think we are set up to do this right now, but we could do it, set it up at a break to show -. Sometimes these things are more of a problem when you debate them than when you actually look at the map; it turns out that properties along the shoreline are either much narrower – and this wouldn’t apply to them at all – like a property on Alii Drive for example, or they are much deeper; they are three or four or five thousand feet deep typically from the highway to the sea. There are a few properties, the largest property that’s, say, between 1,000 and 2,000 feet EXHIBIT B 10 deep would be Kamehameha School’s property on the makai side of the road between Honaunau and Napoopoo. But that property is State Land Use Conservation District, County General Plan either Open or Conservation anyway. So this issue of the property that may be 1,100 feet deep or 1,200 feet deep is more, at least in the current configuration of lots, more theoretical than actual. RHO: Commissioner Domingo. DOMINGO: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would like to congratulate the Steering Committee and the people of Kona for participating in such an effort. I can remember about 30 years ago – I think that’s when I first served on the Planning Commission, and had the opportunity to do so – and they were talking about the Kona way of life. And from time to time I’ve often heard that same description for a plan for North and South Kona. As I read this Plan, you know, I’m impressed; it’s a work of art with regards to planning. And I like the work that’s been done and I can sense the varied participation of people from different backgrounds in this report. And I’d just like to congratulate you folks; you’ve taken the issue of planning to a higher level. You know, this in itself I could possibly or probably describe it as a General Plan for West Hawaii because it reflects what’s in the County General Plan today and it does not overstep the zoning designations of the properties; but planning has taken place considering the policy guidelines with regards to the different elements in the General Plan and with the zoning that has now been designated various parcels of land. And you know, I see that it’s very, very critical that you’ve done this because you know, you’ve shown respect for people who own property, and not arbitrarily say that you would take away entitlements. And I commend you folks for that approach to the planning process. And you’ve taken I think planning to a higher level by just making some broad statements; and I’d like to just mention that, you know, you state with respect to compatibilities, “The majority of future growth should be directed north of Kailua, with some future growth in the Kailua to Keauhou area ….;” this shows that you folks recognize the very problems that come with growth, and when you let growth happen in a compact area, then you have problems. And you want to get away from the problem. Therefore, you are saying, okay, let’s go to north of Kailua where there is a vast open area; then that can be developed, and that if needs to be, you can provide for improved infrastructure, as they are doing right now with regards to the highway. And it’s very important. And another statement that you folks make is the density in South Kona should be kept low; that’s very important for the people of Kona. And because of that, because there has not been a real strong control with growth, you know, we are facing the problems that we face today in South Kona. So from the perspective of being a Planning Commissioner, I would be held to make certain decisions in the future with regards to growth; this Community Development Plan would be a helpful tool for me to make a sound decision and then one that would address the concerns of the people in Kona. And another one single important thing with regards to the cultural committee that you are proposing in this Plan, I can sense the sensitivity of the people in Kona and the Steering Committee in establishing a committee such as that because you know, in Hawaii with all the varied ethnic backgrounds and of course the different culture and the heritage, there needs to be a way and vehicle in which we can address the concerns of all the people who live here. And you EXHIBIT B 11 know, you speak specifically of the Kanaka Maoli and I think that’s grand. Let us look at what’s happening in Honolulu today with regards to the Palace, you know; that’s a serious issue that they are dealing with. And hopefully with a cultural committee such as this and with a statement you make with regards to the support for – let’s see – “public and private entities that further the betterment of Kanaka Maoli ….” It’s so important because this then establishes a position with the County and a position in the community, a literature in the community to sit down together and address those concerns before things erupt and become elevated to a serious level, and that eventually you have to go to litigation and decide who is right and who is wrong. This will prevent that. And I’m glad that you are addressing this whole issue. And again, congratulations to the people of Kona for such a wonderful Plan. RHO: Other comments -, actually, other questions from Commissioners? Commissioner Bowman. BOWMAN: I have a question. I do commend you all. I won’t say anymore, but thank you for all your hard work. Your proposed amendments to the Subdivision Code, and I noticed – and I’m sorry I haven’t scrutinized this as deeply as I should have – you mentioned that it’s only for North and South Kona. I guess my concern as a Commissioner for the whole Island would be the difficulty of maybe doing this. So I ask you if you think that these changes would be pertinent to the other areas. Why just North and South Kona? Thank you. E. MATSUKAWA: Basically, I think one of the changes to the Subdivision Code is to put in standards for connectivity to connect subdivisions, so there will be more connectivity among the subdivisions or providing for future connectivity. And you know, it’s specifically done for Kona because this is an issue that was identified in this North and South Kona region, as new subdivisions that were coming up were not connected. So maybe for us this is how far we took, and maybe it should be looked at countywide; but then I can’t speak to that. BOWMAN: Thank you. RHO: Anybody else have any questions? If not, I have a couple of questions. One is in the slide, I think it mentions college and university. And one of the written comments that we received, one of the comments was that the Plan should address the college and university as four-year. And I didn’t get a chance since I read that to actually look into the Plan to see whether or not you folks are aiming towards or whether the Plan aims towards a four-year college. E. MATSUKAWA: We didn’t get into that kind of detail. We saw that opportunity of having a college or university as a potential center for a regional TOD; and in fact, we identified it as a University TOD. And so it becomes a center of a regional activity and so it becomes a nucleus for a TOD; and that’s the way we view it. So we didn’t get into whether it was a four-year college or not. It’s not something we went into that detail. RHO: Would the Steering Committee have objections to that being included specifically? EXHIBIT B 12 MELROSE: I think, quite honestly, this is a County plan, and we felt a bit presumptuous about directing the State. And we were trying to focus on what we could actually accomplish. And the university is clearly identified, one, it has an existing piece of property and a new community is directed to, and already zoned to evolve around it; so as that resource can develop, the community, I think, will continue to support as much education as the university system can bring to Kona. So I don’t think we would object to it; we just felt that it might be presumptuous to be much more detailed about it. RHO: Basically, because, well, my thinking is that if you have it in the Plan, then it just puts additional – what’s the word – pressure. The other thing that I didn’t -, well, it’s not like I read this cover to cover and I can actually say I’m an expert in the Plan; you folks are the experts in the Plan. But when, well, and during that presentation in one of the slides it talked about an X number of miles of reserved land – but that’s not the right word I’m using – it’s off the shoreline. MELROSE: Protected shoreline. RHO: Protected shoreline. So can you elaborate on that a little bit more? MELROSE: The protected shoreline would run, I mean, the waters along the North and South Kona coast are Class AA pristine waters.And so, to reinforce public access, public use and protection of those waters from the Old Airport Park to Kukio, the vast majority of that land is public land; there are a couple of private holdings along there with lots of public use on them already that those would be protected lands. And as a goal, from all of the Mid-Level Road and the communities that would evolve in the urban district, they would be looking down on the protected shoreline. And that was the goal that was brought forward by the public. RHO: And in your presentation you also, or one of you, mentioned connecting up to the sewage system, but not if you are an X number of feet from the shoreline. MELROSE: We are trying to require within a mile; so that you would be reinforcing the requirement to connect within a mile of the shoreline to improve near shore water quality. RHO: So like the university issue, would the Committee be opposed to extending that to further than a mile or -, you know what I mean, as a goal for sewage connection throughout Kona, for example? I guess what I’m looking at is the Plan in my view “limits” it to a mile, but we have trouble more than a mile away, right? I mean, it’s all going into the ground. Well, cesspools for instance, my cesspool is, I’m positive, more than a mile away, and I’m sure eventually it’s going to affect the groundwater; but that’s just my assumption. So I mean, just your thoughts? E. MATSUKAWA: Right now the Department of Health requires standards for the use of -, where cesspools can continue to be allowed or where they are going to require septic systems. You know, for the County to get involved, the policy says just for near shore water protection, not so much groundwater per se, because there is a lot of groundwater that goes under the ocean EXHIBIT B 13 and a lot of it does go in. But in Kona it’s not really well understood as to where all of this goes – and all the islands for sure. But within a mile there is a potential risk that some of that can get into the ocean. So what the policy does call for is either to hook up into an either County or private sewage treatment system or to provide an equivalent level of treatment. So it does take the County taking a stance pushing it further than what DOH may require to require that you either hook up or provide a comparable treatment before it’s discharged. RHO: And I’ll stop with the third or fourth question. One is this Kona Cultural Resources Committee. And you have a couple of committees, I guess; you have a Kona Design Center – maybe that’s not a committee. But in my reading I got this feeling that the committee would be exclusive instead of inclusive. So can you comment on that? And if my memory is correct, it’s like you have to be or you would be a kamaaina, a long-time resident of Kona, to be appointed, or on this committee, two would be selected or recommended by each Council person and one from the Mayor – I think that’s what it refers to, right, this Resources Committee? PISICCHIO: It would be a Cultural Resources Committee specifically to address cultural resources, and it would be residents of North and South Kona, and it would be under the Planning Department. And the concept is that you would be accepting applications, reviewing applications from people that would have that specific interest. So I think that is really, would be the direction we’re taking selecting the people. People that would demonstrate through their interest and becoming a member of this committee that preservation of cultural resources would be their primary concern in serving. RHO: Right, but I think that, when I read it anyway, I got the impression that it specifically sets out criteria for being on this committee, which excludes some people, not because they are not interested, not necessarily because they don’t reside presently in Kona; but I think the word “kamaaina” is used. But again, I mean you don’t have to -, I just wanted to know what your response was to that, and maybe we can all look at that again. Commissioner Domingo. DOMINGO: I think by definition kamaaina means people who have been living here long enough. Maybe we say manahini is somebody just got off the plane today or yesterday. But I think it’s meant to be overall inclusive – anybody. You know, I’m appalled by this letter that is directed to our Planning Director from the Department of Education – and I don’t know if you folks had a copy of that – it says that “Mr. Yuen: The Department of Education has reviewed the draft Kona Community Development Plan and offers the following comments:” – now listen to this – “The DOE would have been happy to share with the Plan’s developers our plans for future school facilities within the Kona districts. In many cases, our plans include future schools in the neighborhoods and regional centers identified in the Plan’s ‘Official Kona Land Use Map.’” You know, it was, as I try to understand this comment, if it was as critical as he tried to make it sound, why didn’t they come in to the planning meetings and express themselves? You know, I live in Hamakua along the Hamakua coast. We are faced a problem of some of the schools having a possibility of closing because of lack of enrollment; you know, the DOE is doing that. So in my opinion as I look at all this, I EXHIBIT B 14 think the Department of Education is in chaos and they don’t’ know what they want to do now. I don’t expect any comments from you guys. That’s how I feel. RHO: Okay, well, I don’t think the Commissioners have any other questions. So if you can step back and -. MELROSE: Thank you very much for this opportunity. Aloha. RHO: Thank you. PISICCHIO: Thank you very much. RHO: We have testimony from the public. And I have a list – we have more than this number of people – we have about nine.We have more than nine in the audience; so if you want to testify, you need to please sign up with the secretary here on my left. In the meantime, can I call up Steven Lim, Mikahala Roy and Lily Kong, and also Diane Gaylord and Eva – I’m not sure how to pronounce your last name; so I won’t massacre it. So again, Steve, Mikahala, Lily Kong, Dian Gaylord and Eva. And since I know you, Steve, you’ll have to start. You’ll be the first to start, and if you can just go ahead and give us your name and your mailing address, and then proceed with your testimony. LIM: Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I’m Steve Lim. My mailing address is 121 Waianuinui Avenue in Hilo, 96720. I’m here today personally and as a representative of one of my clients, Hualalai Partners of Kona. Well, I’ve submitted written testimony on that specific case. However, I wanted to testify in general. I’ve gone through the Kona Development Plan, just skimming through; and it is a very impressive document. As compared with some of the other Community Development Plans that I’ve been looking at, this one has a lot of more substance and a lot more meat to it, I think. We in general have a good feeling towards where they are going. I think it addresses a lot of the issues that have been arising in North and South Kona. For regulatory purposes, which is often why I’m here in front of you, I want to ask that the definition of the Transit Oriented Development areas be clearly laid out as to how those operate. Those are, under this version of the Plan, going to be very regulatory items; and I know that they appear on your map as big blue or big pink circles. And I guess I’ll ask the Director if he can answer – I’m not sure how regulatory that is and how is that measured, you know; are those going to be interpreted like the LUPAG maps have been interpreted as a policy guide versus like a zoning issue? But that’s my major comment for today. Generally, I’ll be submitting a pile of testimony on the Hualalai Partners’ particular parcel, which relates to how you interpret the urban area as designated on the Kona land use plan. So thank you very much. I appreciate your time. RHO: Thank you. Before I actually get to the Director – and I’m not sure if he, or I should even permit him to answer the question because basically we should be asking questions of you and you should be sharing your ideas with us. But before I move onto Lily Kong, I just want to say that we would like you to limit your testimony to three minutes. I didn’t ask that of Mr. Lim not because I knew he wouldn’t go over three minutes, but because I just forgot. So, Lily, if you will kindly proceed with your name and address. EXHIBIT B 15 KONG: First of all, I’d like to say mahalo for having me. I speak on behalf of Kupuna Ka Ohana O Na Kupuna O Kona. I’m the Chairman for that kupuna group. In a way the kupunas have had their say also on the Kona community planning. So I mahalo also the Committee for their wonderful work. My thing today is all of these born and raised here in Kona, the kupunas, are very frustrated with all these big developments coming up along the shoreline. As we all know that Kona has very few places that have sand beaches or any nice access to the beaches. So my thing is that I’d like to see that this Commission set -, 100 feet to me is not too much; I mean, it is not enough of a setback. You know very well that the shoreline is rising. So when you say 100 feet, do you -, for the high tide mark, do any of you go down and measure that or check that out? So that’s the kind of thing that -, see, a lot of things that have been happening that -, I know it happened with the State when I had made complaint with the things that happened along the shore of Keauhou, and no reply whatsoever has ever come back to me. So this is why I’m asking that question. And I’d like to see, have you people here, the Planning Commission, look into things like this when developers are planning to build. Another thing, too, is the golf course, sewage, away from the shoreline. You know very well that if there is a line break, it’s going to go down into the ocean. So there has to be set aside in a far away area where they can pump it up like they do in the golf course. So I’d like for this kind of setting to be a watchdog because I don’t like to see Kona get like Honolulu. I mean, we have enough -, look at Keauhou; once upon a time, you could see down the bay. Today you can see nothing; all you see is the water splashing up on a hill, on a pali. But we have to take our time. We need infrastructure before any buildings come up. I’m tired of paying tax. I’m retired already, you know. I thought I’d get away from paying taxes, but I’m still paying. So things like this, you know, the kupunas are frustrated because things like this happen. And taxes, taxes have been implemented on everyone. Our economy is bad now, and I think this is where you should slow down on your development. If they want to build in Kona, let them put infrastructure in. We didn’t ask for it. So I want to thank you very much. And this was my manao, my thoughts tonight that I wanted to share with you. And then please, so that we can keep our water clean -. And we have a lot of caves in our culture, why -, take like, look at Ooma; when you come from Kona going to the airport, it’s just a cliff. I used to camp with Josephine Kamoku, we raised our children down there – what you call, Pine Tree. We net down there, and at night we used to torch down there. And there were anchialine ponds in that area, too. And I wonder if those anchialine ponds are still there. Because we used to take our buckets and take the children up and wash them; not go in the pond, we used to dip water and pull it up. You know, these are the kind of things that everybody -, you folks should save this because your grandchildren may be the ones who are going to live in Kona, who knows. So it’s for the future-wise, for our children; it’s them we have to think of. We’ll be gone tomorrow, who knows. So anyway, mahalo for having me speak. Thank you. EXHIBIT B 16 RHO: Thank you, Lily. Questions from the Commissioners? None? Lily, I just want to let you know that I’m still paying taxes, too. You have a long time more to live; so you’ll have to pay more. Mikahala. ROY: Aloha, Members of the Planning Commission. Thank you for your time. And to my Kona people, aloha. My name is Mikahala Roy. My address is P. O. Box 596, Kailua-Kona. And I thank the Steering Committee and all of the people who have worked for this planning process. I thank the Commissioners for your comments early on right away also. I need to tell you this, all of you, because the comments I make must be made, but they are part of a process that calls for all input. The comments I make will reflect also the gathering of the people here; if you just look at the audience, you will get to see a picture of what kind of participation has happened to date. I have written something that I will kind of paraphrase from; I have given you all a copy: Three C’s & The Kona Community Development Plan – Capitalism, Colonization, Civil Disobedience. The Kona Community Development Plan has failed to seek input from not only all races in Kona but from Kona’s most troubled and encumbered – `Oiwi, native Hawaiians. Kona is the home of the first capital of the Kingdom of Hawaii. Kona comprises a coastline of chiefly residences that began the national identity of Hawaii in the world. Descendants of the chiefs, farmers, fishermen and the earliest descendants of this land know Hawaii’s long history. Therefore, I declare this plan detrimentally and seriously flawed for its omission of our voice. In affairs such as this community planning, Hawaiians remain voiceless in this land that we know best, we knew first, we love most. Capitalism drives tourism and colonization in Hawaii. Colonization can destroy the integrity of Hawaiian culture. This scenario creates abandonment of the land by her first people. Thankfully, good numbers of Hawaiian people are awakened to the maladies of colonization that act in stages – like grief. They have become alert to the dangers of loss of cultural identity and the futures facing their children. Colonization is to blame when desecration of sacred sites takes place. Colonization is to blame when western planning models applied on the continental U.S. are applied to Pacific islands and to Pacific islanders. Such is the case in the Kona Community Development Plan formulated by planners from Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. For generations Hawaiian people have resisted colonization, and continue to do so. This testimony is a part of that continued resistance. Take a survey of Hawaiian people, or not just only Hawaiian, people who are native to Kona between Anaehoomalu and Manuka and ask them if they are familiar with this Plan. My guess is that if you went to door to door, you’d find that a minimal number of families answer affirmatively. Why? Because many Kona residents can’t afford a lifestyle that we see in T.V. commercials. There is no peaceful sitting at a breakfast table to enjoy reading one’s paper. EXHIBIT B 17 There are problems in paradise. Have proponents of this CDP worked with an awareness of these problems? Have they made attempts to get to as many civic and community organizations that help issues facing native Hawaiians and others? I say the answer is no. These problems are not new to residents in Hawaii. Ask how many tourist vehicles are still being vandalized by frustrated residents – or worse. Statistics may be found in the Department of Health, State criminal records, Hawaii Visitor’s Bureau, to name a few. Hawaiians fight adversaries who arrogantly appear upon their ancestral lands and chase “undesirable” and “unconforming” natives and culture off those lands. Members of canoe clubs and their canoes are being forced out of places they practice. Well-known and respected canoe coaches who work tirelessly to benefit great numbers have been “pushed out” of their places. They are being sent out of Kawaihae, Kamakahonu, and Keauhou Bay. These incidences reflect a changing reality – changing Kona community values. Lands that held ancient gardens are being bulldozed unchecked everyday. An ill-equipped historical preservation department for the State of Hawaii mandated to uphold laws to protect vestiges of Hawaiian culture is as guilty as a negligent parent. Headlines carried in the Hilo Tribune Herald a few years ago read, “Hawaii’s cultural watchdog toothless.” This is desecration of sacred lands. This is annihilation of the spirit of the land and the spirit of people, not just Hawaii’s first people but all people who love Hawaii today. It’s not bad enough that Hawaiian people, unprotected by the State of Hawaii, face ruthless developers and other business owners blinded by greed; Hawaiian people now face colonized Hawaiian people who have been distracted from their own way of life by adoption of foreign ways. The way out is to remember who we are. Protect what we love and cherish. Keep practicing peace by exercise zero tolerance for wrong-doing. Here rises the third “C.” Peaceful civil disobedience is successful and life-affirming. This is what Jacques Cousteau’s son, Phillipe, actually said: What you love, you protect. The Kona Community Development Plan needs input from native Hawaiians. I spoke at the first meeting of the organizers of this Plan and said these same things at Konawaena cafeteria. My words drifted up to the clouds in the night air. Since then I’ve only seen a plan moving forward with the speed of a NASA rocket racing to a space station without making sure everyone is safely onboard. Did the whole community want this rocket? Is its launch premature? A financed, well-organized, systematic and thorough program where input is sought then followed from the traditional established families of the lands, ka mauliauhonua, is necessary before any part of this Plan can be credible and worthy of acceptance. The problem is, $500,000 can only go so far and it wasn’t enough for this effort. Hawaiians care about this land too much to accept something that is merely a best “shot at the mark.” When it comes to future planning, I for one desire to build my home for those who follow me, not move EXHIBIT B 18 into one that is built for me by someone who has no clue as to the meaning of my land, my house. I would not have my home built by someone who has no knowledge of the sources of water of my land, or why moolelo are to be trusted. To some, land is just a commodity; but to Hawaiians, our lands are alive. We know this. They are our kupuna, our very source of life. We are always taught to give back our very best. So I ask these people who have worked on this Plan, search your souls, is this the best you can do? If it is a matter of money, more money can be raised; true help can come from the people – if you invite them in, if you consciously seek the best for Hawaii. Thank you. RHO: Thank you. Questions from Commissioners? Commissioner Domingo. DOMINGO: Not any specific question to Mikahala, but a comment. In all my years with looking at studies and especially sensing whether or not the plight or the cares of the Hawaiian people have been met, I’ve never seen more effort put into this Plan than any other plans that I’d seen before. If I may, Mr. Chairman, I’d just like to go down through the points, so that those who are gathered here this evening know the degree of sensitivity the Committee have had and the people have had with regards to the formulation of this Plan. RHO: Commissioner Domingo, can you be brief? DOMINGO: It’s going to be hard, but I’ll try. RHO: Well, try to be brief -. DOMINGO: Okay. You know what, because I think -. RHO: As best you can. DOMINGO: You know, sincerely, Mikahala has done is expressing feeling that has been within her for a long time, you know, for a long time. And my own opinion, for the first time, I see a document that comes to the nearest towards reflecting or trying to address the concerns that she’s been expressing all these years and she has expressed tonight, okay? Okay. It says that in the policies here “Policy CR-3.1: Honor Kanaka Maoli culture and heritage,” okay, and then under CR-3.1a: “Ensure the existence of and support for public and private entities that further the betterment of Kanaka Maoli ….” “Action CR-3.1b: Increase fluency in Kanaka Maoli language ….” And then “3.1c: Sponsor cross-sector dialogue on Kanaka Maoli culture and island values ….” And “3.1d: Protect Kanaka Maoli intellectual property and related traditional knowledge ….” And then “3.1e: Provide Kanaka Maoli cultural education for residents, visitors and the general public ….” “Preserve and perpetuate our Hawaiian and island cultural values by celebrating our cultural diversity and island way of life.” You know, these are broad statements, but I think with the formulation of the cultural council, these issues can be more definitively broken down to finer detail and with established policies and guidelines, so that all these can be addressed and even be enforced because this document would then be a part EXHIBIT B 19 of an ordinance that has a force and effect of law. You know, I needed to make that comment and I hope that -, I’m sure that you are aware of what’s written here, but I just needed to -. ROY: No, I am not. You know why, Mr. Domingo? If it were sufficiently representing Hawaiian thoughts, I wouldn’t be testifying this way. DOMINGO: So -. ROY: But what Mr. Woodward brought up is exactly the point, right off the get- go. There are -, any teacher when you come to a classroom and you discover that you have participation just from three people out of 25, she or he is going to understand how to get to the whole group; there are other modes is what I’m saying. I attended these development meetings, not all, and the ones I went to, they were bustling along like they were in New York City, and the few Hawaiian people that were involved in the process were left to just (imitating pant) helter- skelter with the papers flying. Now, you know as well as I do that there is a way to make this all fine and well. But this was not endowed with enough money. $500,000 is not enough. And this is too big. I think I resist the way they call the treasures program. I am a president of a non- profit that’s worked for years here. Why don’t you acknowledge people of the land that are already working? And why don’t you invite people who work in our community – more Hawaiian representation? Well, I have just much respect for people who are on the Steering Committee; I respect them highly. But get people who are also very much involved with Hawaiian leadership. Show that you have guidance, guidance, people in the driver’s seat from this function. Thank you. RHO: Any other questions from Commissioners? If not, can we move onto Diane Gaylord or Eva? Are you Eva? Oh, Diane, then. GAYLORD: Hi. We have prepared a very short, three-minute skit to point out one of the problems of the Community Development Plan. RHO: Okay, we need your names and your address -. GAYLORD: Okay. Diane Gaylord, 75-5851 Kuakini Highway, Kailua-Kona. Is that sufficient? And Eva’s is the same. Is that okay if we do that? RHO: That’s fine, that’s fine. FILLEKES: Hi, I am Eva. What is your name? GAYLORD: Auntie. FILLEKES: Do you have a special reason for being here tonight? GAYLORD: I’m here because of my 25-year old granddaughter. I live with my daughter and her children in a very crowded place here in Kona. My granddaughter, Malia, is married and has two children. Seven people and two babies, we all share one very small house. EXHIBIT B 20 Malia has a good job at the resort and her husband builds rock walls. My daughter and I and a cousin take care of the babies while they work. But it is a big problem. Little Quenton has asthma. When one of my grown-up grandsons smokes in the house, little Quenton can’t breathe. We’ve told my grandson not to smoke. But you know how these kids are. Malia is desperate to find a home where she can afford and which would be safe for her son. But she can’t find anything. FILLEKES: I wish I could help you. GAYLORD: Do you know of anywhere we can live? FILLEKES: I am so sorry, but I don’t. Finding affordable housing is a big problem here in Kona. I went to several of the small groups that met in fall of 2005 and January 2006. Many people talked about the same problem you have. The Kona Community Development Plan is supposed to bring affordable housing to Kona. GAYLORD: But when is this going to happen? Malia is looking to find a home on the mainland soon. That will break my heart – taking the babies away from their big family here. FILLEKES: From what I know of the Kona Community Development Plan housing plan, it may take several years for it to have an effect. And it leaves building of rental housing for low- and middle-income folks to the government or non-profit organizations. GAYLORD: Isn’t there anything we can do now? FILLEKES: Well, yes, there is. I have a list of suggestions for affordable housing now. The Kona Community Development Plan Steering Committee didn’t seem to be that interested in these suggestions. GAYLORD: Why not? FILLEKES: I don’t know. These suggestions don’t oppose most of the housing plan; they are in addition to the plan. GAYLORD: Who will listen to these suggestions and who will want to bring affordable housing to Kona now? Can I have a few copies? FILLEKES: Of course you can. GAYLORD: If someone here wants more copies of these suggestions, can they have them? FILLEKES: Of course. GAYLORD: Thank you for listening to me. I am going to miss my great grandson terribly when he goes away. EXHIBIT B 21 That was just to highlight the problem of people needing affordable housing now. This is just to highlight the problem of people right now in Kona from all walks of life, needing affordable housing now. And my concern all along with the affordable housing in the Kona Community Development Plan is it isn’t for now. It’s good, it will bring about stuff in the future; but it’s not going to happen now, and a lot of people who have lived here for many generations are going to have to go to the mainland in the meantime. Thank you for listening to me. RHO: Thank you. Questions from Commissioners? Go ahead, Commissioner Ogata. OGATA: Since you’ve brought up that there are some suggestions that could be done now, can you just briefly give me like your top three suggestions? GAYLORD: Yes. Okay – and we can give you a copy of this, if you like – my top three are to eliminate in-lieu fees; in every proposal for housing, for resorts or any kind of living situation, builders and developers must develop affordable housing onsite or within a reasonable distance to what the Kona Community Development Plan calls as a town center. Right now the law allows them to build 15 miles away. So what good does that do for Kona that sends people to South Point or Puna, but not here? So we want to eliminate in-lieu fees all together. The law must be changed to reflect the real price of an affordable house for most of the middle- income people who live in Kona; that will be less than $200,000. There are houses that can be built for that price. As a result of Katrina, there are many designs available on the internet right now for good-looking houses for less than $200,000 that can be built here and be appropriate for the beauty of this place. Affordable housing must be made available to low- and moderate- income people. There are other things on this list, and I’ll be glad to give it to you. RHO: Other questions? BOWMAN: I just want to thank you because I think this problem obviously is not only in Kona. My daughter lives with 22 people – four generations. So I applaud you for doing this in a very creative way. And I hope that the other Development Plans and the County Council take this very seriously. So, thank you. RHO: Thank you very much. I’m going to call up the next testifiers. And right after I do that, we’re going to take a 10-minute break, and reconvene at 8:00 in about 15 minutes. But I wanted to call these people up first or at least give them warning that they are next: Jim Greenwell, Janice Palma-Glennie, Bill Brooks, Stephanie Nelson-Brooks and Kale Gumapac. Okay? Thank you. We’ll be reconvening again at 8:00. RECESSED The Chair called a recess at 7:46 p.m. RECONVENED The meeting reconvened at 8:00 p.m. EXHIBIT B 22 RHO: The Planning Commission is now back to order. We are supposed to have Jim Greenwell, Janice Palma-Glennie, Bill Brooks, Stephanie Nelson-Brooks and Kale Gumapac up at the table. I’m not sure if you are in order. You are in order? So you are Jim? Okay, so we’ll follow the same pattern; so you’ll state your name and your address, and then proceed into your testimony. And if you will limit your testimony to three minute, we should be out of here by 12:00. Okay? Thank you. GREENWELL: Thank you, Mr. Chair. I’m Jim Greenwell, P. O. Box 4220 Kailua-Kona. I just wanted to speak for my three minutes in support of the Plan. Like others, I do want to take time to thank and commend Roy and Nancy for their leadership in putting this Plan together, for Earl and his consultant team, Ken and Chrys and the entire Steering Committee; they had a really, really tough assignment. And good job. I’m hopeful the Community Development Plan becomes the unifying force that we really need in the community where most of us can get behind the vision and help make it happen. Because too often we’re fractured and that really hurts us; so hopefully, this kind of becomes the common vision. I am concerned about a couple of things. Steve Lim, I think, alluded to one of them. And that is when a document that is this complex with this many demographics becomes the law, I just hope that it is clear; when you look at the maps and you read the language, that it is to be applied with reason to the site, and that some of these plans such as those that show TODs and TNDs that have these very symmetric circles, if those are conceptual, that they be noted as being conceptual. Because I do think particularly in the middle of corridor where – and I own Lanihau properties, or we have some property and are very much affected by this – there is a need to apply the concept to how it fits on the land. I’d also just note that while I share the concern of many others in the Plan that urban sprawl is problematic, that the urban core is okay, and that’s what we’re going to end up with is really what we are really dealing with. I do have some concerns. We have had a few properties in Kailua Village for years that you might say Green space. I have a problem with green space in dry Kailua – it’s either really green and fluffy and hides, you know, transients and so forth, or it’s a fire hazard. I do think -, I understand the notion behind open space, but I think we have to be careful where we’re trying to cram that into areas that we know also are going to be expensive to develop; the land is going to have to be utilized fairly effectively because there is a lot of cost bringing in infrastructure and providing the purposes which are required. So just a word of caution. I want to acknowledge and express appreciation for the recognition that was given to the mauka lands and ecosystem service value of those lands, and how that was addressed in the Plan. So I’ll just close and say I am definitely supportive; I appreciate the process. I do hope, though, as good ideas surface through the Planning Commission review and the Council’s review, there is an opportunity to make some minor amendments, and it is considered as a draft but we do pass this Plan and learn to live with it and tweak it where we have to later. Thank you. RHO: Thank you. Questions? Yeah, Director. EXHIBIT B 23 YUEN: I did want to recognize that we have some other members of the Steering Committee in the audience today, and I wanted to mention their names. We had Ken Melrose and Mike Matsukawa come up earlier. The Steering Committee, they did put a tremendous amount of work, far more than anybody could have expected. We call them the Steering Committee – you also ended up doing a lot of paddling and heavy lifting, and not just steering. So, Janice Palma-Glennie is sitting at the testifying table; we also have Marni Herkes, Curtis Tyler, Chrys Yamasaki, and I think Ed Rapoza was here earlier – oh, I think he still is. Did I miss anybody of the Steering Committee? Anyway, I want to express a lot of thanks to all of them. And then since this question has come up a couple of times, and I don’t mind answering. The Transit Oriented Developments are shown as circles; certainly the circle is conceptual. We are not going to build these ideal communities that are in some kind of circular form. Every time you come in, there is going to be issues of terrain, landownership and alike. Most of them are on areas that are currently zoned Agricultural 5-acre; they are State Land Use Agricultural District. There are areas that the Plan supports becoming urban areas. When they come in for zoning and State Land Use boundary amendments, we would expect – and most of them are in large ownerships – we would expect that they come in with a master plan that conforms to the philosophy and the style of the development called for in the Community Development Plan – a central core around the transit stop with a walkable community surrounding that. And that’s the basic point of the Transit Oriented Developments, and this will be enforced through the zoning of it. But as I said, you know, they will -, when you get down -, they are not master planned in the Community Development Plan; they are laid out as concepts. But the concept would have to be fleshed out in the process of zoning the site. GREENWELL: Thank you. RHO: Okay. If we can move onto Bill Brooks. BROOKS: Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Fellow Commissioners. I also would like to echo the acknowledgement and gratitude that I have personally for all of those who made this happen, especially the leadership of Nancy, Roy, Ken and the assistants with Earl and especially the Steering Committee. Just going to the meetings that I went to – and I know how busy I am and how special my time is – and I know that those people put a lot of time into this, and I’m very grateful for it. I want to -, as a resident of Kona for 35 years now with two children that I cherish and care a lot about having here for the rest of my life – my primary motivation for going to the meetings and being involved – with that being said, I can’t tell you how much aloha and appreciation and respect I have for the Roy family, and Mikahala and her entire family have been very special to me over the years. And I share a lot of her concerns; however, I too made a very sincere effort to get more people out to the meetings. And I think Chairman (sic) Woodward summed it up very adequately when he said you can’t make people, you know, go and get involved and participate. I also would like to echo Jimmy’s concerns and what have you, and I’m really happy to hear Chris saying what he’s saying about the idea of being some flexibility and taking everything with EXHIBIT B 24 consideration of individual specifics when it comes up for application of this Plan. It could have been perfect in a perfect world; nothing is perfect. The bottom line is we have something that a lot of effort has gone into. And I was very personally moved and very happy to see the people that I saw at these meetings being sincerely concerned about the cultural concerns, especially those -, and I’m happy to see that that was picked up on by Commissioner Domingo because it was taken into consideration.And otherwise, I couldn’t have had anything to do with it. That being said, I’m in definitely in support of this. This is the place that we can start with. As time goes on, I’m sure other opportunities will come up for, you know, future plans and what have you; but we need to get something going now, so that we can change the course that has been taken in the past where things have been not as carefully planned out as this has been. And thank you all for your time and effort. RHO: Thank you. Questions from Commissioners? If not, we can move to Stephanie. NELSON-BROOKS: Good evening. I’m Stephanie Nelson-Brooks, and I’m at P. O. Box 308, Holualoa, 96725. I’m here this evening – and before I begin, I also would like to thank everybody who has participated and made this possible and brought this Plan to fruition – and I’m here as a person who actually worked on that Plan. I started out as a facilitator, and I was very privileged to lead many meetings of just small meetings, 13, 15 people max, and guided meditations about how do you envision Kona 20 years from now. And every single sentence anywhere that was uttered from anyone that attended that meeting was written down. And it was a colossal job to take – I think it was like over 8,000 statements – and make a plan from it; it was tremendous. And I want to thank everyone who did the meetings, participated in that, and also the people that we paid the $500,000 for getting this all together. I also worked in the mapping in the Work Groups with mapping, and that was a monumental task in getting people to sit down and take these maps and put on the maps physically the things that we envisioned happening here. And there were all kinds of committees to do that. And lastly I was part of the recreation committee, and Chrys Yamasaki devoted so much time to helping us work through this. And when we got back the Plan a couple of weeks ago, we actually saw it, I was thrilled to see that everything that we wanted was in there, the parks – even a pet park, a place where you can let your dogs run actually. And I don’t want to use up too much of the time, but I also have to say that I would have liked to see several other things in the Plan. And that doesn’t mean I don’t support the Plan; I fully do. But it’s like anything else in retrospect. I would have put more of my energy into somehow getting more local people involved. I did talk with people in Milolii, and they had a community meeting there. And I’d spoken with Wally Lau – I used to work with him at the Neighborhood Place. And it just kind of like fell through the cracks. Now that it’s done and finished, I do have, you know, regrets about not being more adamant about it. And the other thing is about long-term residential drug treatments here; I think that that is a necessary component to making this a successful community. Anybody who has a relative or a friend or a child, someone in their family, that they know it’s difficult to go and visit people who really are depending upon your support, if they are over on the other island, on Oahu. So that’s something that I didn’t see in the Plan. I didn’t even think about it that much, but in retrospect I would like to see that; if we could EXHIBIT B 25 tweak a little, so that we have room to include these people because they will become future citizens and they can be very constructive with a right help. The other part that I think I missed was a place for the homeless. I just see so many people wandering the streets here; and a lot of them seem to be mentally ill. And I read recently 23 percent of them have been veterans and they are suffering. And it just breaks my heart to see them. So I would like to, if I could work with other people, get together something or work with the people who are already doing this, I think that we need to put more attention into that. We are all brothers here – brothers and sisters. Let’s go for it. If we can do that, we can also help the underdogs in the society. Mahalo and thank everybody here for coming tonight. And I think it’s a wonderful thing, and I do support it. Mahalo. RHO: Questions from Commissioners? Okay, so we have Janice -. PALMA-GLENNIE: Palma-Glennie. It’s a long last name. Yes, P. O. Box 4849, Kailua-Kona. Aloha, Commissioners. Welcome to Kona. And thank you for letting us give our testimony, provide input on this what I consider a great plan. Okay, I admit it: the Kona Community Development Plan is my half-child.It was born partly of me, but it has another parent that’s just not from the same tribe as I am. My half-child has flaws – at least, in my eyes. She’s not as progressive and as interested in environmental protection as I would have liked. For example, my tribe wanted what’s left of undeveloped, open coastal space to be protected by a setback that reached up to Queen Kaahumanu Highway and at least 2,500 feet in South Kona. And we would have liked big box stores to be written out of Kona’s future, so that small local businesses would have had a better chance at survival. But, do I love this half-offspring even with the flaws? Yes, I admit that I do. Do I have hope that in her future she’ll mature and become a balanced, healthy adult? Will the combination of my tribe’s ways and her other parents’ upbringing and input end up contributing to the creation of a healthy mature being that we can watch grow together with honor and respect? The answer, at this early time in her life, seems to be “yes.” Will I and the rest of the tribe, as well as the “other side of the ohana” have to stay involved to make sure that our child does well throughout its hopefully long life? No doubt about it. As a member of the KCDP Steering Committee, I’ve learned a lot about potential strategies for positive growth for our community. And I’ve learned even more about how to get along with people who don’t necessarily want something different than I do, but often have a different way of getting there. And yes, some in “the other side of the ohana” do envision a much different future for Kona. That’s part of why this process had to exist and why I spent hours, days, weeks, and almost two years making sure their vision wasn’t the overriding one, as it has been in the past. Without sounding over dramatic, the KCDP in its current form represents the last, best hope for the future of Kona. And yes, to Mikahala Roy, with all deep respect, I’ve searched my heart EXHIBIT B 26 each day and night for over two years about the value of this Plan. If it fails, maybe 20, 30 years down the track some political leader would manage to get up the gumption and money to try to get another process like this one going; but by then the options would be less about protecting the cultural, social, and natural resources of the region and more about deciding what the height limit for parking garages should be and whether, when old houses are torn down, the new ones would have to conform to some kind of architectural design code. Yes, this is the last chance to protect what I see as Kona’s most inherently positive and vanishing qualities; plenty of open, natural space accessible to the public; a living native culture – not confined to museums and resorts; small town intimacy – plenty of friends and neighbors at the post office to make waiting in line less of a chore; connection of ohana and community – kids can’t get in as much trouble when auntie is around the corner or at the same beach; clean air and water – excluding Pele’s interruptions; and a feeling of hope that Hawaii Island will never become like the mainland or Honolulu and Waikiki. There is plenty of work to be done in helping this child become a success. Your job today, in that long process, is to give your wholehearted support of this Plan, as it is written, as law, so that the work of somehow keeping Kona Kona can continue. Mahalo, in advance, for your positive recommendation of this Plan to the Hawaii County Council. RHO: Thank you. Questions from Commissioners? I guess not. Okay, we have Kale Gumapac. GUMAPAC: I’m Kale Gumapac with the Kanaka Council and the Alakai, the spokesperson. To give you a background on the Kanaka Council, we have been involved in several Kona issues, one of which was Kona Blue Ocean Fish Farms that came out to apply through DLNR for an expansion to double and possibly triple the size of the fish farm right off of here in Keahole; we filed a contested case hearing with them, and they withdrew their application. Secondly, there were also some illegal buoys that went from Kona all the way down to Kau, illegal buoys that were placed in ko‘a, ancient fishing grounds, from Kona all the way down to Kau. We had to intervene with that. We had to go to the Army Corps of Engineers because West Hawaii Fisheries Council decided that it was okay to put these buoys in, so that they could have tour boat dive operations going on; that would impact dramatically all of the ko‘a. These are just some of the things that are taking place here. This Kona CDP is as a result of all of your predecessors not doing their job; this is a result of having to have the community come out to tell all of you what is supposed to be done, what should have been done 20 or 30 years ago to protect Kona. Kona now is in uncontrolled growth. All of the residents that are here, they try to stop that growth, and try to figure out how they’re going to be able to live. This Kona CDP is right on the money. And when it comes to the cultural resources, the Kanaka Council steps up, and again makes its issue that the Kanaka Council needs to be part of this resources committee. Not to be appointed, not to be appointed by Council members and so forth, because there’s always been suspect whenever you have these kinds of appointments as to who’s going to be the nice guy that’s going to get the appointment, EXHIBIT B 27 and not who’s got the manao to be able to make sure that the decisions that are made are proper. The Kanaka Council again makes its issue, as it did with the Puna CDP, that the Kanaka Council needs to be involved in all of this, because the two cases that I cited are just a tip of the iceberg; there are many cases that we are taking up in terms of protecting the resources. We are not just protecting the resources, we are not jut protecting the culture; we are protecting the Hawaiian people. The Hawaiian people needs to be put in this. The Hawaiian people needs to be made a part of this even though they were not a part of the CDP process. We are stepping up to the plate and say, we need to be part of this process now. It is important because – I will remind you – that the laws starting from Kumulipo all the way to Article 12 Section 7 in the State Constitution as well as all of the other laws that was won in Supreme Court cases and – I remind you, Commissioners – that you have the responsibility to make sure that this passes as an ordinance and that the Kanaka Council gets on this committee. Mahalo. RHO: Thank you. Questions from Commissioners? None? Thank you very much. We have three others: Curtis Tyler, Scarlett Bill and Jeffrey Cho. Before you begin with testimony from the three of you, I’d like to announce or say for the record that we had two others who wanted to testify but had to leave, but wanted to be on record as supporting the Kona CDP, and they are Tom Leonard and Gordana Leonard; so that can be placed in the record. Let’s see, Curtis Tyler, can we begin with you. Your name and address, and you can begin your testimony. TYLER: Good evening, Mr. Chairman, Members of the Hawaii County Planning Commission, Director Yuen and staff members. I understand you’ve had a long day. Thank you very much for being here to hear our comments. My mailing address is 73-1305 Hiolani Street, Kailua-Kona – actually it’s Kalaoa, but the Post Office calls it Kailua-Kona – Hawaii 96740- 9344. I come to you this evening, Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission, speaking for myself and my ohana. And I represent my ohana has been in this land for over 1,000 years. And I wanted to say to you, I, as a member of the Steering Committee, I do not come here in that capacity this evening. I became involved in this Steering Committee because my ohana and friends asked me to be involved as an oiwi, kamaaina and someone who is kupa to this land, and I guess over the time period I’ve become a kupuna in it as what I’ve heard based on the number of years it’s taking us to get here. I want to just talk to you briefly about -. And many thanks to all who have come here this evening. I especially am grateful for my Hawaiian brothers and sisters who have come this evening, and two were formerly you’ve heard from: Mikahala and Kale Gumapac. And I very much appreciate the perspective they brought to the table. And I want to tell them from the bottom of my heart, and all of you, that every waking and sleeping moment of my involvement in this Plan was because of what you’ve heard from them, because I’ve seen it, not only as a citizen, not only as a member of the Steering Committee, but as an elected official and a lifetime resident; and I mean that from the bottom of my heart. This is a community plan, ladies and gentlemen. And to me that means that we become unified. The word “community” comes from the two Latin words. And we become unified around those things which we share in common. And it is my impression after thousands of hours in being EXHIBIT B 28 involved in this that indeed this is a community plan. We voted unanimously on it. We were not unanimous in our views; we were diverse in our views. And we apparently were appointed based on that diversity. I also believe that each of us was on this Steering Committee – this is my personal belief now – because of our diversity and not because of our personal agenda, and that we were to represent the people and different views of this community. And Mr. Chairman, Members of the Planning Commission, I believe this Plan is pono because it does do that. It is certainly not perfect. But it is the best effort that this community has put forward in my lifetime, at least that I know about. There is something in this Plan for all different walks and conditions of men and women, etc. And I’m happy to say to you tonight that of the eight guiding principles the number one principle is about the cultural landscape; and it says, protect the cultural and natural resources of Kona. And we heard this, if there was one theme that we heard from every body, it was that theme. And so I’m very pleased that you heard from Kale and that you heard from Mikahala tonight because they clearly spoke from their heart about the pilikia. And you heard Kale say that this Plan is resulting from the pilikia that went before, and I was so pleased to hear him say that because indeed it is. And out of some of the hottest fire is born the strongest steel; and I think this is part of that. And again, it’s not a perfect plan; but to those of you who think we may not have had enough community input, it’s more input than I’ve ever seen from this community in my lifetime. And as our Chair, Ken Melrose, said, it was kind of scary at the times to see all these people come out; it was just like -, we went to the biggest place there was to go, and the place was packed, people were outside – it was unbelievable. You know, the 1,000-foot setback that some of you talked about and questioned and were inquiring some of the members previously about, this is sort of a microcosm of the way things went. We heard a lot from a lot of people about this 1,000-foot setback, and some of the members of the Committee were like, oh, this cannot be, how are we going to do this, how are we going to deal with property rights, etc.And you know, I want to tell you, that after all the gnashing of teeth, and there’s, you know, some of us leaving the room at various times over the time – that’s me – over some cultural issue, that this was a unanimous vote. Then I ought to tell you something about the heart and the feeling of the people that were appointed, nominated and appointed by elected officials – yeah, okay, so they are like -, I know they are not perfect, we all were there, Commissioner Domingo was there, I was there, a few other people in the room – you know, but they tried to do their best. And I think that’s what this Committee tried to do. And I think we have sought to follow the Hawaii State motto “Ua Mau Ke Ea O Ka Aina I Ka Pono – The Life of the Land is Perpetuated in Righteousness” and that which is pono. Pono is much more than righteousness – it’s about sustainability, it’s about cultural landscape, it’s about the very principles of a Hawaii Nei; you cannot separate culture and natural resources, you cannot separate watershed and Hawaiian values, okay. And they are here. And Commissioner Domingo, sir, you picked up on some of these things. And I just want to acknowledge you, thank you, you were the for many years – if I recall it correctly – you were the chairman of the Hawaii County Planning Committee; I was a vice chair I think for eight years or something, but you were I think you were longer than that. And you picked up on this, the value of the Kanaka Maoli culture in here, and I want to acknowledge you and thank you because you guys have a lot of things to read, and some of us work very hard. EXHIBIT B 29 I also want to say, Mr. Chairman, if I may just have a few more minutes, that there were questions about involvement by Kanaka Maoli. Whether you believe it or not, I am Kanaka Maoli. And I want to let you know that the Steering Committee asked me to go and be a liaison with the cultural resources working group. And for the most part, those people were kupuna, and one of whom you heard from earlier this evening, from Aunty Lily Kong; and it was unbelievable what these people told us. And so when you see the Kona cultural resources committee, this thing was born right from the kupuna. And let me tell you there were some serious cracks that came down from that group, telling us, hey, you’d better listen this time. You heard a little bit from Aunty Lily; she was very courteous tonight. But you know, behind closed doors we really went at it. And so I just want to let you know about that. And those of us who have been involved are going to stay involved, that I assure you, whether formally, informally whatever. I’m not going back to where I came from because I’m here already. You can guarantee that. And so, more important that the life of the land has been – I want to say – emo; it will be and it must be and it shall be, and this Plan it goes a long way towards that. Mahalo. RHO: Thank you. Questions from Commissioners? Seeing none, we can move onto Scarlett Bill. BILL: I’m speechless. This is the largest gathering I’ve ever seen at one of these meetings. I’ve driven all the way to Hilo, and I’ve driven to Waikoloa. And I’m impressed by a very wonderful plan that has a systematic overview that you can all see for yourself. You can see the red birds coming back and being in the neighborhood where the children can see the red birds, and the ones that have the fancy tuxedo, has like a gray coat and a little black spot. These birds can come back. And they can surround our children in the neighborhoods. And old friends can walk. They don’t have to live in retirement areas; they can live in the neighborhood nearby with maybe some railings, so they can walk along and see the skating children on those skateboards, and bring back the ohana to the local neighborhood. If we don’t have a plan, you can just say, well, if you don’t know where you are going, any road will get you there; and that’s where we’ve been for 35 years that we’ve lived in the Hawaiian Islands. It just seems like we went from dark to light approaching the Honolulu area, and now you get lost. If you ever been in Mililani Town and try to get through Waipahu and find your way back to the H-1 Freeway, it sometimes will take you a whole hour, hour and a half to get out of that maze. And we don’t want that here. I know you don’t want that here. I don’t think anyone in this room want that in Kona. It would be so destructive. We have the richest of all the Islands. We have the one that so large that all the other Islands can fit in, and there is plenty room leftover. We also have vog that was unbelievable, even put my husband on his back for 15 days. So if the trees are gone and there is no wind, we’d all have to be passed out gas masks in Kona. That’s how bad it would be. Because I was there when they were fighting the NASA launching pad. I was there. I remember, I remember the wonderful Kanaka Maolis banging their feet with just a thunderous noise. They were, you know, using a very foul word until Virginia Isbell stood up and said I think we all have to have, all of us, gas masks, because that really put people down. Fortunately, we’ve survived. And we can survive again because now that you have a plan, you’ll know where you are going. And it is a beautiful plan. It’s a plan where you can go above and look down and see areas of water and green and small housing areas where they have sort of a railing all the way around that protects them of grass and water and trees. Thank you very much. EXHIBIT B 30 I love this Kona, and I’ve been here 28 years. We have a shop here. We lived on Maui. We moved away from Maui, from the red dirt – you don’t have that here – where our mother kept getting pneumonia every winter. And they would pass four pass on a single-lane highway going to Waikapu; it was really horrible. We moved here. We moved also from Waikiki because we could not stand the bright lights all the way out to Makakilo. There is no excuse to build like that or to think like that. We can be the greatest. This can be the most beautiful Island where everyone wants to come here; and it’s safe. You have plenty room for the airport and for maybe some hotels out there where people want to spend the night. And it all can be done in such a beautiful systematic way. And I know you are capable of doing that. I know all of you can help and consult together; where there is unity, the strength. But wellbeing of mankind, its peace and security, are unattainable, unless and until its unity is firmly established. RHO: Thank you. Questions for the testifier? None. We can move to Jeffery Cho. CHO: I want to thank you for saving the best for last. Okay, I just want to be identified as a Hawaiian culture practitioner here in Kona, okay? I’m known as the new kid on the block with the rest of the guys. But I’m very active on Alii Drive. I worship on heiaus – Kuemanu, Hikiau, you know; and I’m doing a lot of cleaning. I started with Laaloa’s heiau; it’s a Hokulua, very controversial heiau, owned by the Parks and Rec.I’ve been active with Patricia Engelhard, talked to her directly last week, the new supervisor from Tennessee, Deac (Carl de Camp), cool guy. But I need help, okay? I’ve been trying to get the help from the State because State owns a lot of these preservations. And I feel funny because -, anyway. And we don’t have offices over here, you know that, hey, Mr. Archaeologist, I no got that here. I have to go like this and then wait for a couple of days to get a response or none at all.Okay? I call Honolulu and they don’t call back, most of them. OHA gave me t-shirts and bumper stickers – I’ll let you know that. That’s all I get from their office here. But anyway, I need help on this one. This one is Resolution 4406 – it’s twelve acres on Alii Drive, okay? It was already restored by this guy from Washington, Curtis Krellen (phonetic). I am very active on that right now. Three of my predecessors were buried on that heiau, and it’s been very overgrown, the wall is falling down again. And what a waste of preservation. There’s a lot of mounds in there and burials; a lot of children have been buried in there, I’ve been finding out. Okay? There is so much in there, and I’m learning, and I’d like to share this information with the public. But without you guys’ help, I’ll probably die with it. Because it’s in the bushes, yeah, all of our preservations are in the bushes. I guess that’s how it’s easy to hide it. But this one is a -, this guy, 1947, Mr. Krellen (phonetic), cool story, hardly anybody know about this, yeah, but it’s right on Alii Drive. Thank God this isn’t built, I mean this. But I want to bring this to you guys’ attention again. I need help on this one. They are trying to sell the land, I guess, okay? I want the -, I need the key to the gate; so I can drive down there legally. I didn’t get permission from the people yet. But I’m on the preservation. I worship there. And that’s my First Amendment right, and I hope I don’t get arrested. And I’d like to just let you know that that’s where I’m at. I get a lot of my help from BISAC, and I work with a BISAC. And I’m starting to work with the Intake Service Center over here, the prosecutors’ office. I like use them to pull weeds. I’m adopting all the bathrooms on Alii Drive, so we can slow down the graffiti; cause the County workers always go in there, painting the same graffiti everyday. And I told the guy, hey, go do EXHIBIT B 31 something else because you are wasting my tax dollars everyday doing this. So we are doing this to cut down on the graffiti. Because when we catch these guys, we are going to make them to paint the bathrooms in front of everybody, too, with BISAC – what a shame, yeah? We are adopting the bathrooms, thanks to the Mayor’s Office; she’s, Barbara, helping me. I want to let you guys know that. And also Patricia Engelhard, Pamela Mizuno and Deac. But I need help from the State, too, please. And this one right away, 4406 Resolution, okay? Aloha. RHO: Thank you. Unless there is somebody else who wants to testify, that concludes our public testimony for tonight. I want to let you know that the Kona Community th Development Plan will be discussed again on July 10 in East Hawaii, and for the third time on th July 18; and I believe that at that point the Commission would like to take action on the Kona th CDP. It’s again July 18, I’m not sure of the time, but I’m sure it’ll be coming out in the newspaper. With that, I’d like to thank the public, all of you, for attending. Have a safe drive home. I don’t think the traffic is too bad going north or south. Anyway, thank you very much. The discussion ended at 8:50 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Noriko Sauer, West Hawaii Secretary EXHIBIT B 32